Orbital Error Dynamics: Self-Organized Criticality, Ephemeral Parameter Resonance, and Non-Linear Biological Ontologies in Zero-Storage Neural Synthesis
Organizations: Anadolu University, Eski¸sehir, Turkey · ITouch Systems, Mersin, Turkey · Mersin University, Mersin, Turkey · Toros Science College, Mersin, Turkey
Abstract
Modern deep neural networks treat parameters as static floating-point matrices stored in physical memory, incurring Von Neumann memory bottlenecks and representation collapse. We formulate Orbital Error Dynamics (OED), an analytical framework wherein synaptic weights are not stored masses (O(W)), but transient topological resonances (O(1)) derived procedurally from the complex quadratic polynomial map z_{n+1} = z_n^2 + c. We introduce the Bent Sine Wave Hypothesis, demonstrating that non-equilibrium living systems emerge when harmonic waves curl inward through environmental drag toward the cardioid cusp (c = 1/4). We define the Observer Horizon Geometry in parameter space, identifying interior resonance shoulder loci X_upper = (0.25, +0.18) and X_lower = (0.25, -0.18) between the fixed-point basin and the true boundary at c = 0.25 +/- 0.50i. To escape non-convex stagnation without loss zeroing, we introduce a heavy-tailed Biomimetic Perturbed Jump Operator (Omega_tunneling) inspired by mammalian fertilization zinc sparks. We further couple an enteric-cranial Dual-Brain architecture shielded by adaptive CD4+ regulatory immune gating (M_CD4), and project the 4-nucleotide genetic basis (A, T, C, G) across quadrants in C. Multi-seed empirical validation on the Two-Moons manifold (5 seeds, 80/20 train/test split, 32x32 grid, zero test-time updates, zero label leakage) demonstrates that procedural parameterization from a 24-byte coordinate seed achieves 77.67% +/- 5.35% clean test accuracy (within an 8.00-point paired difference of an unconstrained gradient baseline at 85.67% +/- 5.35%, 95% CI: [-1.07%, 17.07%]) and 71.33% +/- 3.80% under distribution shift (N(1.2, 0.4)), alongside conceptual equivalence with an analog optical co-processor.
Figures & tables
| Architecture / Model | Clean Test Accuracy | Distribution Shift ( ) | Memory Footprint | Optimization Scheme |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Standard Logistic Regression (GLM) | 85.67% 5.35% [79.03%, 92.31%] | 80.33% 7.21% [71.38%, 89.28%] | 16 B (Float32) / 32 B (Float64) [ ] | Direct unconstrained gradient descent |
| OED (Zero-Storage Synthesis) | 77.67% 5.35% [71.03%, 84.31%] | 71.33% 3.80% [66.61%, 76.05%] | 24 Bytes (3 Float64 coords) [ ] | Boundary coordinate surfing ( ) |
| Paired Difference (GLM OED): Clean = 8.00% 7.30% [95% CI: -1.07%, 17.07%] — Noisy = 9.00% 6.52% [95% CI: 0.91%, 17.09%] | ||||
| Hyperparameter | Symbol | Value / Setting |
|---|---|---|
| Coordinate Learning Rate | 0.06 | |
| Finite Difference Step | 0.02 ( pixel grid) | |
| Initial Coordinate Seed | ||
| Total Training Epochs | 50 | |
| Sampling Resolution | (Train & Test) | |
| Zinc Spark Jump Scale | 0.10 |
| Natural & Physical Phenomenon | Ontological Significance | Cybernetic & Mathematical Formalism |
|---|---|---|
| Multi-Agent Boundary Exploration | Decentralized non-linear phase exploration | Multi-polar parameter search with dynamic coordinate shifts |
| Homogeneous Enforcers | Rigid compliance forcing equilibrium | Isotropic gradient descent causing over-smoothing ( ) |
| Edge of Chaos Balance | Equilibrium between flexibility and structure | Critical state balancing exploration/exploitation ( ) |
| Scale-Free Neural Hubs | Hierarchical network coordination | Central coordinate routing hub governing parameter projection |
| Protective Damping / Sacrifice | Boundary preservation under stress | Early-stopping dissipative regularization absorbing divergence |
| Spurious Signal Rejection | Disregarding secondary harmonic reflections | Filter isolating primary non-linear attractors from high-frequency noise |