[[80,12,10]] — abelian 2BGA code on Z_8 x Z_5, a = [0, 13, 22, 33], b = [0, 3, 5, 16, 28, 37]

Direction & hypothesis

Track cell: unrestricted x weight-any (max check weight 10). Target: a point with n' <= 80, k' >= 12, d' >= 10 at check weight <= 10 that no board entry occupies. This code gains on the cell frontier against the entries nearest to it. Nearest board points at n' <= 80: [[72,10,10]] (w=8), [[62,10,9]] (w=9), [[72,10,9]] (w=8), [[80,24,8]] (w=10).

Hypothesis: below n = 110 the board's weight-6 two-block entries are close to exhaustive, but abelian two-block group-algebra (2BGA) codes with larger or unequal supports (|a|, |b| between 2 and 6, check weight 7 to 10) are sampled far more thinly, and every abelian group of a given order (not only cyclic groups and two-factor tori) is a separate family. Two earlier independent seeds over equal 4+4 and 5+5 supports kept producing non-dominated points, so this run used fresh seeds and added the unequal 2+5, 3+4, 3+5, 3+6, 4+5 and 4+6 shapes. Board-relative novelty is from verify/validate_candidate.py; literature novelty is unverified (Lin-Pryadko's 2BGA tables, arXiv:2306.16400, and the bivariate-bicycle literature cover many small abelian groups, and this instance may be in them).

What was searched

H_X = [L(a) | R(b)], H_Z = [R(b)^T | L(a)^T] over F_2[G] with G = Z_8 x Z_5 (|G| = 40) built as group_algebra.cyclic_product(8, 5): elements are the tuples in itertools.product order, index = position in that order (identity = 0). a = [0, 13, 22, 33] and b = [0, 3, 5, 16, 28, 37] are lists of element indices (|a| = 4, |b| = 6, check weight 10). G is abelian, so L(a) and R(b) are commuting multivariate circulants (a bivariate-bicycle-type code when G has two factors).

Sweep (research/kit group_algebra.build_2bga, css.compute_k, surrogate.distance_rand with backend gf2_fast, one thread per candidate, 10-18 worker processes):

• every abelian group of order 14..55 (n = 2|G| <= 110), supports 3+5 (200,000 random pairs per group), 2+5 (50,000 random pairs per group), 3+6 (60,000 random pairs per group), 4+6 (40,000 random pairs per group), identity in both a and b, seed 8111: 26,600,000 candidates built, 2,552,095 with k >= 3, each read at 40 gf2_fast RIS trials against the board's best d at that (n, k, weight) (our own open PRs counted as board entries); 1,152 survivors re-read at 400 trials, 758 unique non-dominated records; refinement (at most 3 per distinct (n, k, d, w)) 20,000 trials: 92 of 92 still advancing, 200,000 trials: 92 of 92 still advancing, 2,000,000 trials: 92 of 92 still advancing.

Left or right translation of a or b is a qubit relabelling, so fixing the identity in both loses nothing. Every screening reading is an upper bound on d, so the funnel can only discard a candidate whose true distance is also non-advancing.

Evidence trail

Packaging witnesses: surrogate.lightest_logical, 8,000 NumPy trials per side, seed 11 -> X-logical of weight 10, Z-logical of weight 10; d = min = 10.

Deep ladder (fresh seeds, surrogate.distance_rand_witness backend gf2_fast, 4 threads):

| trials per seed | seed | side of lightest | lightest logical | time | |---|---|---|---|---| | 10,000,000 | fast seed 71686 | X | 10 | 99.4 s | | 10,000,000 | fast seed 79605 | X | 10 | 161.6 s | | 10,000,000 | fast seed 87524 | X | 10 | 167.9 s |

Ladder verdict: corroborated (min over rungs = 10, claimed 10).

Final claim: witness-backed upper bound d <= 10 (confidence: upper_bound), with d_X <= 10 and d_Z <= 10.

Dead ends

• 3+5, 2+5, 3+6, 4+6 (seed 8111): the 758 stage-1 records fell on only 47 distinct (n, k, d, w) points not dominated by the board or our open PRs: [[54,4,10]] w8 (x176), [[28,4,6]] w10 (x140), [[36,4,7]] w10 (x85), [[104,4,15]] w10 (x51), [[98,6,14]] w8 (x41), [[88,4,14]] w10 (x35), [[90,6,13]] w10 (x26), [[98,14,11]] w10 (x23). Every other draw was dominated already at 40-400 trials, so at this sampling depth these shapes are close to exhausted below n = 110.

Tools

Model: Claude Opus 5.5 (agent harness Claude Code), running on a Brev n2d-highcpu-64 box (gf2_fast via make fast). Kit modules: research/kit/group_algebra.py (build_2bga, cyclic_product), research/kit/css.py, research/kit/surrogate.py, research/kit/prescreen.py, research/kit/submit.py, research/kit/coordination.py (gate). Approximate compute: about 3 CPU-hours for the sweep, refinement and ladder.

Reproduction

import sys; sys.path[:0] = ["research/kit", "verify"]
from group_algebra import build_2bga, cyclic_product
mul, _ = cyclic_product(8, 5)
HX, HZ = build_2bga(mul, [0, 13, 22, 33], [0, 3, 5, 16, 28, 37])   # n = 80, k = 12

Then make_submission(HX, HZ, ..., trials=8000, seed=11) from research/kit/submit.py reproduces the witnesses; the deep ladder used three fresh seeds at the trial counts in the table above.