Encyclopedia Acoustics Acoustics Harmonic Distortion Rs Domain Cost
ARTICLE 4 claims 3 theorems 1 model
Acoustics Harmonic Distortion Rs Domain Cost
A machine-checked library proves three general facts about a cost function, but its acoustic meaning remains an unproven research note.
The domain cost declaration
Harmonic distortion measures how much a device, such as an amplifier or loudspeaker, adds unwanted frequencies to a pure input tone. The standard metric is total harmonic distortion (THD), usually expressed as a percentage of the output signal. A common audibility threshold is roughly 0.5 to 1 percent THD, below which most listeners cannot reliably perceive the added distortion.
In the Recognition Science framework, the declaration domainCost defines a specific cost function for this acoustic setting. The framework models recognition as a discrete record of events, and the cost of recognition is forced by five plain conditions. The declaration sets the cost as J(m/e), where J is the framework's canonical cost function, m is a measured quantity, and e is an expected or reference quantity. When the measured value equals the expected value, the cost is zero. When both are positive, the cost is never negative. These two properties are proved in the machine-checked library of formal theorems, along with a third fact: the golden-ratio constant phi minus 1.5 is positive.
The library proves nothing specific to acoustics. The declaration defines domainCost generically, without tying m and e to any particular acoustic quantities. The docstring records a research note suggesting that J(phi) squared, about 1.39 percent, might match the audibility threshold, but this is explicitly labeled as an idea for where the work was meant to go, not a result. The formal theorems hold for any positive real numbers m and e, not for sound pressure levels or distortion percentages in particular.
What the declaration does establish is a small, clean mathematical skeleton. The cost function vanishes at equality, stays nonnegative for positive inputs, and the canonical threshold constant is positive. These facts are proved with no acoustic assumptions. The acoustic interpretation, the mapping from m and e to physical measurements, and the match to the 1 percent audibility threshold all remain open targets, not derived results.
MODEL domainCost · IndisputableMonolith/Acoustics/Harmonic_Distortion_RS.lean
def domainCost (m e : ℝ) : ℝ := Jcost (m / e)
THEOREM domainCost_at_eq · IndisputableMonolith/Acoustics/Harmonic_Distortion_RS.lean
theorem domainCost_at_eq (r : ℝ) (h : r ≠ 0) : domainCost r r = 0 := by
unfold domainCost; rw [div_self h]; exact Jcost_unit0
THEOREM domainCost_nonneg · IndisputableMonolith/Acoustics/Harmonic_Distortion_RS.lean
theorem domainCost_nonneg (m e : ℝ) (hm : 0 < m) (he : 0 < e) : 0 ≤ domainCost m e := by
unfold domainCost; exact Jcost_nonneg (div_pos hm he)
THEOREM canonicalThreshold_pos · IndisputableMonolith/Acoustics/Harmonic_Distortion_RS.lean
theorem canonicalThreshold_pos : 0 < canonicalThreshold := by
unfold canonicalThreshold; linarith [phi_gt_onePointFive]
What this page does not claim
The declaration does not prove that J(phi) squared equals any audibility threshold. The declaration does not define m and e in acoustic terms. The declaration does not establish that harmonic distortion in real devices follows the framework's cost function.
Verify this page
Every tagged claim above names its theorem. To check one yourself rather than trust this page, elaborate the source module with Lean 4 and audit its axiom basis:
$ lake env lean IndisputableMonolith/Acoustics/Harmonic_Distortion_RS.lean
expected axiom basis: [propext, Classical.choice, Quot.sound] (the Lean kernel's standard three; no RS-specific axioms)
A page whose claims cannot be reproduced this way does not ship. In production, every anchor links to the exact declaration in the public source release, and this block carries the build receipt for the page itself.
Derived articles
This page is generated by a question-recursion engine: the questions its answers raise become the next pages. The current agenda, with open targets marked red:
- What physical quantities should m and e represent in an acoustic measurement?
- Does the framework's cost function J relate to harmonic distortion through a derived theorem or only through an identification?
- What would a definition of m and e in acoustic terms need to look like to make domainCost a theorem about its subject?
MACHINE LAYER · GROUNDED CLAIM TABLE · CLICK TO EXPAND
MODEL domainCost · IndisputableMonolith/Acoustics/Harmonic_Distortion_RS.lean
def domainCost (m e : ℝ) : ℝ := Jcost (m / e)The declaration sets the cost as J(m/e), where J is the framework's canonical cost function. domainCost · IndisputableMonolith/Acoustics/Harmonic_Distortion_RS.leanTHEOREM domainCost_at_eq · IndisputableMonolith/Acoustics/Harmonic_Distortion_RS.lean
theorem domainCost_at_eq (r : ℝ) (h : r ≠ 0) : domainCost r r = 0 := by unfold domainCost; rw [div_self h]; exact Jcost_unit0When the measured value equals the expected value, the cost is zero. domainCost_at_eq · IndisputableMonolith/Acoustics/Harmonic_Distortion_RS.leanTHEOREM domainCost_nonneg · IndisputableMonolith/Acoustics/Harmonic_Distortion_RS.lean
theorem domainCost_nonneg (m e : ℝ) (hm : 0 < m) (he : 0 < e) : 0 ≤ domainCost m e := by unfold domainCost; exact Jcost_nonneg (div_pos hm he)When both are positive, the cost is never negative. domainCost_nonneg · IndisputableMonolith/Acoustics/Harmonic_Distortion_RS.leanTHEOREM canonicalThreshold_pos · IndisputableMonolith/Acoustics/Harmonic_Distortion_RS.lean
theorem canonicalThreshold_pos : 0 < canonicalThreshold := by unfold canonicalThreshold; linarith [phi_gt_onePointFive]The golden-ratio constant phi minus 1.5 is positive. canonicalThreshold_pos · IndisputableMonolith/Acoustics/Harmonic_Distortion_RS.lean