Exact Overlap and Gateway Scaling in RAF Networks
Abstract
We study the probability that a reflexively autocatalytic and food-generated (RAF) set exists in Kauffman's binary-polymer model with random catalysis, in the exact reaction convention of the public code accompanying the recent finite-core theory of RAF emergence of Varanasi and Korenaga. That theory assigns activation probabilities to minimal catalytic cores and, for tractability, treats the cores as non-overlapping. We remove the approximation. For any finite catalogue of candidate cores we prove an exact two-level inclusion–exclusion formula for the probability that at least one core is activated, valid both for independent Bernoulli catalysis and for a uniformly random set of exactly catalysis assignments, and we prove that for the exhaustive catalogue of food-generated reaction supports the formula computes precisely the probability of the RAF event. The sufficient statistic is not a matrix of pairwise core overlaps: it is, for each reaction channel, the family of cardinalities of all unions of the eligible-catalyst sets of the selected cores. A four-molecule example shows that pairwise data cannot determine the answer. The independent-core formula of the finite-core theory is recovered exactly under the sufficient hypothesis of coordinate-disjoint cores. We then show that the fixed food set imposes a finite gateway. For every maximal polymer length the repository convention has exactly 34 reaction channels usable from food, and every RAF contains a catalysed one. Consequently, if is the expected number of channels catalysed per molecule, then for ; whenever , so the sharp finite-size transition observed at approximately constant is not the shadow of an asymptotic transition at constant ; and for every finite the RAF probability at does not converge to 1. A closed-form count of the repository's reaction channels, proved via the Lyndon–Schützenberger theorem on commuting words, gives the sharp gateway limit on the linear scale. With the exception of that closed form and its corollary, every theorem in the paper has been formalised and checked in Lean 4 with warnings promoted to errors, against the literal RAF predicate of the source model.