How long does a digital twin of a chaotic system stay accurate? Each e-fold of smaller state error buys 1.12 time units on Lorenz-63 (1/lambda = 1.11)
research/free-lorenzhorizon
How long does a digital twin of a chaotic system stay accurate? On Lorenz-63 each e-fold of smaller state error buys 1.12 time units (1/lambda = 1.11); a parameter error buys 0.85. Mean over 40 starts, one tolerance.
What it found
Runs a Lorenz-63 truth and a twin together and measures the mean time (40 attractor start points) until they are 1.0 apart. The measured largest Lyapunov exponent is 0.904 (published 0.9056). With exact parameters, the horizon grows 1.124 time units per e-fold of smaller initial-state error (4.1 at 10−2, 16.9 at 10−7), close to 1/λ but about one unit below ln(tol/d0)/λ. A parameter error in ρ with exact start gains less, 0.85 per e-fold (0.95 at 10−2, 7.8 at 10−5), since the error starts at zero. One system, one tolerance; only the mean is reported; the explanations of the offset and the slope are not tested. Parameters are Lorenz’s; the tolerance is chosen.
Paper, code and results
More in Digital twins & sim-to-real
- How many missed samples can a PD loop tuned on a fixed-period twin survive?How many missed samples can a PD loop tuned on a fixed-period twin survive? With samples lost independently and the last command held, a double-integrator loop with twin poles at 0.5 is mean-square stable only up to a 29% loss rate but almost surely stable up to 61%; a deadbeat twin tolerates 7% in mean square.
- Does an inverted-pendulum loop tuned on a fixed-period twin survive missed samples, and does an interval-aware gain fix it?On a linearised pendulum (L = 0.5 m) a fixed twin-tuned gain survives any miss probability with slow poles unless the plant is very unstable per sample (limit q = 0.21 at ωh₀ = 1.4), a deadbeat tuning fails by q = 0.03 to 0.10, and a gain recomputed from the actual interval was stable at every q in all 15 cases. Linear, noise-free, simulated.
- How many solver iterations does a physics twin need to hold a stack of boxes still?How many solver iterations does a physics twin need to hold a stack of boxes still? A projected Gauss-Seidel solver at 60 Hz needs 16 for 4 boxes, about 128 for 6 and over 2048 for 16 or more, and extra iterations do not reliably help.
- If the twin is optimistic, how often does a rollout test certify a policy that is not safe?Exact: a twin that fails 10% less often than reality lifts the chance of certifying a 5%-failure policy from 0.049 to 0.087 (fixed test, 1% vs 5%), 20% less often to 0.147, and guarding against a 1.5x optimism costs 2.2 times the rollouts
- Can a rollout cap on a sequential certification test be set without losing the 5% error guarantee, and what does it cost?Follow-up to free-sprtcap: re-tuning a capped SPRT's boundaries and final cut so both errors stay at or below 5% exactly costs, for 1% vs 5% (fixed test 181 rollouts), a mean of 107 rollouts at a cap equal to the fixed size and 90 at twice it, against 90 to 95 for the plain capped test that overshoots the error; the fixed test needs 181.
- What is the cheapest capped certification test in the worst case, not just at the two design rates, and what does it cost at the ends?Follow-up to free-sprtopt: an exact linear programme gives the capped certification test with the smallest worst-case mean over failure rates between p1 and p0; for 1% vs 5% at a cap of 362 it needs 123.8 rollouts at worst against 131.0 for the average-optimal test and 181 for the fixed test, at the price of 3 to 6% more rollouts at the two design rates.
All 164 Digital twins & sim-to-real projects →
Other research topics
Proper scoring & elicitation28Effort & peer prediction9Verification games & slashing19Detection & tolerances14Markets as routers13Prediction-market design9Paying contributors8Decentralised training systems23Digital twins & sim-to-real164LLM chip design loops40Robot manufacturing loops53Ambient AI assistant46Self-replicating manufacturing34Simulation-first design64Engineered clothing45Task-specific AI accelerators40Algorithmic chip-design loops42Open-source purpose-built robots44The software-engineering loop43Adversarial human imitation41Open-source residential construction41Autonomous multi-angle capture34Sensing, imaging and 3D31Energy supply and dense energy storage39Robot societies among people31Agentic co-design of low-cost robots27Laundry-hanging robots25Machine learning on qualitative data23Robots on the building site27Civilizations & group psychology1History & human sciences1
Produced with AI assistance (Claude). Results are from the code in this repository and are simulated or stylised unless the abstract says otherwise; nothing here implies affiliation with or endorsement by any lab, researcher or company cited. MIT licensed.