Skip to content

Latest commit

 

History

History
179 lines (124 loc) · 8.62 KB

File metadata and controls

179 lines (124 loc) · 8.62 KB

Uberbrain — Engineering Specifications

Version: 0.2
Status: Simulation-derived targets — awaiting benchtop validation
Authors: Rocks D. Bear, Claude (Anthropic), Gemini (Google), informed by Codex (OpenAI) critique


Purpose

This document defines falsifiable engineering Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) for the Uberbrain architecture. These are not aspirational targets — they are specific, measurable numbers that a working implementation must achieve. If a physical prototype fails to meet these numbers, the architecture must be revised.

This document is the answer to: "Is this validated?" The honest answer is: not yet. This is what validation looks like.


Technology Readiness Level

Current State TRL
Individual components demonstrated in literature TRL 2
Mathematical simulations of integrated architecture TRL 2-3
Digital twin with noise modeling and BER curves TRL 3
Target: Benchtop experiment matching sim prediction TRL 4
Physical prototype (shoebox) TRL 4-5
Integrated oomphlap array demonstration TRL 5-6
Contact lens form factor TRL 8-9

Layer 1 — Holographic Storage (READ / VERIFY / BLEACH)

Storage Medium: Fused Quartz (5D Optical)

KPI Target Basis Status
Areal density ≥ 1 TB/cm² Wang et al. 2024 (ref [17]) Literature demonstrated
Layer count (10mm disc) ≥ 2,000 Rayleigh range reference calculation Simulation verified
Data retention ≥ 10 years @ 85°C Fused quartz stability Literature demonstrated
Read non-destructive Yes — read power below write threshold Physical property By design
BLEACH energy < 1 µJ per voxel Estimated from fs laser params Unverified

VERIFY Command (Fidelity Scoring)

KPI Target Basis Status
Intact detection threshold SSIM ≥ 0.95 Sim 1 V0.1 Simulation
Corruption detection rate > 99.9% for ≥ 3% hologram damage Sim 1 V0.1 Simulation
False positive rate (intact flagged as degraded) < 0.1% Sim 1 V0.2 Monte Carlo Simulation
SSIM floor under full noise stack ≥ 0.85 (clean reads) Sim 1 V0.2 Monte Carlo Simulation
Correction restored SSIM 0.97–0.99 (NOT 1.000) Sim 1 V0.2 imperfect correction Simulation

READ/WRITE Optical Parameters

KPI Target Basis Status
Write wavelength 400–450 nm PIPC electronic coupling Literature (athermal regime)
Write pulse duration < 1 ps (femtosecond) Electron-phonon coupling timescale Literature
Write pulse energy < 10 nJ per voxel GST switching energy estimates Unverified
Read wavelength 532 nm (isolated from write) Wavelength separation By design
Read power < 1% of write threshold Non-destructive read requirement By design
Spatial resolution ≥ Rayleigh limit (~400 nm) Diffraction physics Sim verified

Layer 2 — GST Working Memory (WRITE / READ / FORGET)

Phase-Change Material Performance

KPI Target Basis Status
Binary state separation ΔR ≥ 0.30 (amorphous vs crystalline) GST material constants Literature demonstrated
Decision threshold margin ≥ 0.10 from each state Sim 2 V0.2 eye diagram Simulation
GST reflectivity drift (thermal) σ ≤ 0.02 per read Sim 2 V0.2 noise model Simulation
Write endurance ≥ 10⁹ cycles before BLEACH required GST literature (optimized GST) Literature — unverified for this config
FORGET pulse energy < 1 nJ (thermal anneal) IR pulse energy estimates Unverified
FORGET latency < 10 ns Thermal relaxation timescale Unverified

Oomphlap Encoding (Multi-Wavelength)

KPI Target Basis Status
Binary state space (3-channel) 8 states (2³) Sim 2 V0.1 Simulation — all correct
MLC state space (3-channel, 4-level) 64 states (4³) Sim 2 V0.1 Simulation
BER target (conservative) < 1×10⁻⁶ Industry standard for storage Falsifiable
BER target (hard) < 1×10⁻⁹ High-reliability standard Falsifiable
Required SNR for BER < 10⁻⁶ Sim-derived (see sim2_v2_crosstalk.py) Sim 2 V0.2 Simulation
Max tolerable channel crosstalk Sim-derived (see sim2_v2_crosstalk.py) Sim 2 V0.2 Simulation
Read latency per oomphlap < 1 ns Photonic detection timescale Unverified

Layer 3 — Consolicant (CONSOLIDATE / BLEACH)

Triple-Filter Parameters

KPI Target Basis Status
Staleness threshold Configurable (default: 60 time units) Sim 3 Simulation
Fidelity threshold SSIM < 0.50 (BLEACH) / < 0.95 (REPAIR) Sim 3 Simulation
Connectivity threshold Degree centrality < 0.02 Sim 3 Simulation
False BLEACH rate (connected nodes erased) 0.00% — architectural guarantee Sim 3 verification Simulation
CONSOLIDATE cycle time < 1% of active operation time Not yet modeled Unverified

Endurance Integration

KPI Target Basis Status
SSIM ceiling after 1,000 write cycles ≥ 0.94 Sim 1 V0.2 endurance model Simulation
Write cycles before REPAIR threshold Sim-derived Sim 1 V0.2 endurance model Simulation
Write cycles before BLEACH threshold Sim-derived Sim 1 V0.2 endurance model Simulation

System-Level KPIs

Energy Efficiency

KPI Target Comparison Status
Energy per READ operation < 1 pJ DRAM: ~100 fJ / Flash: ~10 nJ Unverified
Energy per WRITE operation < 10 nJ Flash WRITE: ~10 nJ Unverified
Energy per VERIFY operation < 0.1 pJ (passive optical) No active compute needed Theoretical
Idle power (quartz storage) ~0 W (passive) HDD: ~5W / SSD: ~2W Physical property
Thermal dissipation < 1 mW per cm² (athermal WRITE) GPU: ~300W Theoretical

Data Transfer

KPI Target Basis Status
LiFi I/O bandwidth ≥ 1 Gbps Commercial LiFi (Tsonev 2014) Literature
Oomphlap read throughput Sim-derived Pending Sim 4 integration Unverified

Falsification Criteria

The following results would require significant architectural revision:

  1. BER floor — if BER cannot reach < 10⁻⁶ at any achievable SNR with the 3-channel oomphlap, the encoding architecture requires redesign (more channels, wider wavelength separation, or different decision algorithm).

  2. Correction ceiling — if corrected SSIM cannot consistently exceed 0.90 after imperfect recrystallization, the femtosecond WRITE correction loop is insufficient and alternative correction strategies are needed.

  3. Crosstalk limit — if physical bandpass filters cannot achieve < 10% channel crosstalk at the required SNR, the LiFi I/O wavelength must be redesigned to avoid overlap with storage channels.

  4. Endurance failure — if GST cells degrade to BLEACH threshold in < 10⁶ write cycles, the material or pulse parameters require optimization before the neuromorphic learning model is viable.

  5. Integration incompatibility — if the holographic quartz write process thermally damages adjacent GST layer, the layer stack geometry must be revised.


The Benchtop Experiment

The minimum experiment that closes the gap between TRL 3 and TRL 4:

Prediction from Sim 1: A Raspberry Pi camera measuring fidelity of a printed test pattern will detect a statistically significant SSIM drop when a region of the pattern is corrupted with a marker.

Required result: Measured SSIM drop ≥ X% (where X is predicted by sim1_holographic.py with equivalent corruption fraction) within 2 standard deviations of the Monte Carlo mean from sim1_v2_noise.py.

Materials: Raspberry Pi 4, Pi Camera Module 3, printed test pattern on transparency, dry-erase marker.

Cost: ~$0 (assumes existing Pi hardware).

What it proves: The mathematical model maps to physical reality. The simulation predictions are experimentally falsifiable.


Version History

Version Date Changes
0.1 2026-03-23 Initial architecture specification
0.2 2026-04-08 Falsifiable KPIs added, noise models referenced, TRL assessment, benchtop experiment defined

CC0 — Public Domain. No rights reserved.
"Concept + simulation hypothesis, not engineering-ready architecture." — Codex, 2026-04-08
"Demonstrate one benchtop experiment that matches a simulation prediction." — Codex, 2026-04-08