Concept

Symmetry — where it appears

An operation that leaves a draft exactly as it was, of which there are seventeen kinds available to a plane pattern. Which a weave has is decidable from its matrix, and it is what a census must quotient by to count cloths rather than drawings.

Named by 14 essays across 3 fields — each of them below, with the objects they name alongside it.

A draft is a two-coloured pattern. For each weave, the symmetries that leave warp-up as warp-up and those that exchange the two. Only a balanced weave has any of the second kind, because exchanging warp and weft is only a symmetry when there is as much of one on the face as the other.

Weaves as plane patterns

A draft is a periodic pattern with two states, so its symmetry is two-coloured. Some operations leave warp-up as warp-up and others exchange the two, and only a balanced weave has any of the second kind.

pattern · Pattern
The twelve groups a draft can have. Every four-by-four draft in which each thread interlaces, classified by its plane symmetry group. Twelve of the seventeen groups occur; the five that do not are the ones needing a three-fold rotation, which no grid of warp and weft admits at any size.

The seventeen groups a draft can have

Twelve of them, in fact. The five missing ones all need a three-fold rotation, and no grid of warp and weft admits one at any size — which makes it a theorem rather than an artefact of the census.

pattern · Pattern
How many four-by-four weaves there are. The same census counted four ways. A draft is a notation; shifting the repeat's origin, turning the cloth over and turning it end for end all change the matrix and not the fabric. Each bar is the number of distinct objects left once those identifications are made, counted by canonical form and checked against Burnside's lemma.

How many cloths are there

Twenty-two thousand eight hundred and seventy-four four-by-four drafts. Four hundred and twenty-six four-by-four cloths. And the site's own separation rate — the fraction of drafts that look like fabric and are not — more than doubles when fabrics are counted instead of notations, which is the opposite of what was expected.

pattern · Pattern
2/2 twill: written at 4×4, repeating on 4. On the left the draft as written, with the smallest rectangle that tiles it outlined. On the right the same draft with every translation that leaves it unchanged marked from the top left corner: there are 4 of them, so a fundamental domain holds 4 intersections rather than the 16 the rectangle claims and the 16 the point paper carries. Nothing in the drawing on the left says so.

What a repeat repeats

Point paper is ruled in squares, and the rectangle a draft is written on is a decision by whoever drew it. The unit a cloth actually has is smaller — two intersections for a plain weave, four for a 2/2 twill — and it is not a rectangle at all.

cloth · Repeat
The 6-end satin. The 6-end satin on point paper, drawn over 2 repeats with its marks joined in reading order inside the first. The joining segments are not parallel and not equal, because there is no number of picks the mark advances by at every end. That is what irregular means, and it is not visible in the squares alone. At this order there is one distinct satin and none is regular. The longest float is 1 in the warp and 5 in the weft, and the cloth is one cloth. What the drawing cannot show is that this is the only one: that is a statement about 36 arrangements and is made by the enumeration.

The six-end satin that does exist

There is no six-end satin, and this collection proved it in its founding essays. The proof is about satins with a move number. Drop that word — keep one mark per end and no two marks touching — and six ends has exactly one satin, unique up to where the repeat is started, and four ends still has none at all.

weaves · Satin
The lattice under 8/3 and 10/3. Satin marks drawn as points over two repeats, the 8-end satin on a move of 3, whose closest marks are √8 apart and next √10, so its marks line up 45° off the weft; and the 10-end satin on a move of 3, whose closest marks are √10 apart and next √10, two equal directions at right angles and so no single diagonal. For a regular satin the blue arrow is the shortest lattice vector and the red the next, and the faint lines run along the shortest through every mark — the diagonal the marks make. What the drawing cannot show is whether an eye finds that diagonal in woven cloth, where the marks are not points but short interruptions of a float, and where the yarn's own twist lies across them at an angle of its own.

Most satins still have a diagonal

A satin is chosen so that no diagonal forms, and its move is ranked by how far apart its interlacings sit. But the interlacings of a regular satin lie on a lattice, every lattice has a shortest step, and the marks line up along it. Only when two shortest steps tie is there no row to follow — and between five and forty ends the best move manages that at twelve of the thirty-five orders.

weaves · Satin
What an irregular satin buys, order by order. For each order, the best regular satin's and the best irregular satin's scatter at the order's own best spread — the largest share of the closest pairs that point in one direction, where one is a line and less is a scatter. 5 ends: regular 0.50, irregular none at the best spread; 6 ends: regular none exists, irregular 0.25; 7 ends: regular 1.00, irregular 0.33; 8 ends: regular 1.00, irregular none at the best spread; 9 ends: regular 1.00, irregular 0.25; 10 ends: regular 0.50, irregular none at the best spread; 11 ends: regular 1.00, irregular none at the best spread. Irregularity buys something at 6, 7, 9 and nothing at the rest, and where it buys it scatters over four directions with no more than a third in any one. What the bars cannot show is whether a reader sees the difference, which is a question about a visual system.

An irregular satin scatters where a regular one lines up

A regular satin's marks lie on a lattice, so its closest pairs all run along one vector and make a row. An irregular satin has no lattice at all, so its closest pairs may point several ways at once — and at seven and nine ends, where every regular satin at the best spread has a row, an irregular one reaches the same spread with its closest pairs scattered over four directions and no more than a third in any one. At eight and eleven ends there is no such satin: the best spread is reached by regular satins alone, and irregularity has nothing to offer.

weaves · Satin
8/3 at 1.00 and 8/3 at 1.29, drawn in cloth. Satin marks drawn over two repeats at the spacings of a cloth, with the pick direction stretched by the sett ratio — ends per centimetre over picks per centimetre — and every closest pair of marks joined. 8-end satin, move 3 at a sett ratio of 1.000: closest pairs point one way: a row; 8-end satin, move 3 at a sett ratio of 1.291: closest pairs point 2 ways: no row. What the drawing cannot show is the float each mark interrupts, which is what a reader of the cloth actually sees.

A satin's row belongs to its sett

Point paper draws an end and a pick as equal squares, and every result about which satins have a row was taken there. A cloth is not square: it is set at so many ends and so many picks a centimetre, and in cloth the ties that made twelve satin orders row-free are ties between steps of different shape, which break at the first per cent of unequal sett. The reverse happens too. An eight-end satin, rowed on paper, has no row at exactly 1.291 ends per pick; an eleven-end at 1.265 and 1.528. And the only scatter that survives a range of setts is an irregular satin whose closest steps are mirror images — which nine ends has from the first per cent and ten only by 1.3.

weaves · Satin
8×2 and 2×8 over every origin. Two grids of the 16 relative origins of 2/2 twill under 8-end satin, the row being how many picks the ground is started along and the column how many ends. The left grid is the census at a block 8×2, the right at 2×8; a square is filled where some of the 65,536 profiles separate. 8×2 fails at 8 origins and 2×8 at 8; both fail at 0 and neither at 0. Turning the cloth over and through a right angle sends each origin to another, and the letters mark where: every letter lands on a square with the same answer, so the two shapes are one census read at relabelled origins.

A turned block is a moved origin

An eight-end satin figured on a 2/2 twill fails on 55,536 profiles at a block eight picks by two ends and on none at two by eight, and that was read as a property of the block's shape. Sweep the relative origin as well and the two shapes trade places: at every one of the sixteen origins exactly one of them fails, and over the sixteen they fail equally often. A shape asymmetry that no origin removes exists, and it needs a satin whose move squared is not one.

pattern · Blocks
How many derivation orbits each measure separates. For the 426 four-by-four cloths in 157 derivation orbits, the number of classes each invariant measure cuts the orbits into: marks, up to exchanging face and back, 5; interlacings, 8; layers, 2; plane group, 12; floats of both faces, both systems, 60; changes of face per end and per pick, 12; distinct ends and distinct picks, 4; all seven familiar measures, 120; census of two-by-two patches, 127; all seven, and the two-by-two patches, 153; census of three-by-three patches, 157. Only the census of three-by-three patches reaches 157. What the bars cannot show is which orbits a measure confuses, which the pair figure draws for the seven measures together.

A cloth's derivation class is its census of small patches

The manuals' derivations cut the 426 four-by-four cloths into 157 orbits, and an orbit is found by searching a group of 256 operations. The question left was whether a short list of numbers read off a draft could do the same job. The familiar ones cannot. Marks, interlacings, layers, plane group, float lengths, crossings per thread and distinct ends and picks are all invariant, and all seven together tell 120 of the orbits apart. A census of the two-by-two patches a draft contains tells 127 apart. A census of its three-by-three patches tells all 157 apart — a complete invariant of derivation, computed by counting windows rather than by searching operations.

weaves · Derivation
Silent threading errors under three lifting plans. For every four-shaft threading of eight ends, under three lifting plans: 2/2 twill, 36,320 of 40,824 threadings can be mis-threaded silently by two digits, 0.97% of double errors and 0.20% of single errors are silent; 1/3 twill, 29,728 of 40,824 threadings can be mis-threaded silently by two digits, 0.55% of double errors and 0.20% of single errors are silent; unrelated rows, 864 of 40,824 threadings can be mis-threaded silently by two digits, 0.0084% of double errors and 0.0000% of single errors are silent. A twill's plan slides one row a pick at a time, so its shafts are interchangeable by a slide along the picks, which is a writing of the same cloth. What the chart cannot show is a plan with more shafts.

Silence lives in the lifting plan

Two wrong threading digits leave a four-end cloth exactly as it was 1.3 times in a hundred, and the question left was whether a longer repeat makes that rarer or commoner. At eight ends the answer depends on something the question did not name. With a lifting plan of unrelated rows, silence all but vanishes; with a twill's plan — one row slid a pick at a time — nine four-shaft threadings in ten can be silently mis-threaded, and even single errors are silent one time in five hundred. The repeat hardly matters. The plan's symmetry does.

cloth · Notation
Which lifting plan exposes a threading error another plan hides. For every four-shaft threading of eight ends and every double threading error silent under the row's lifting plan, the share that the column's plan exposes — weaving a cloth that is caught or visibly different — when the same threading is re-pegged. Silent under the 2/2 twill (99,872 pairs): 2/2 other way 0%, 1/3 twill 44%, 3/1 twill 44%, broken 70%, point 34%, plain 0%, hopsack 34%, unrelated 99%. Silent under the 1/3 twill (56,352 pairs): 2/2 twill 0%, 2/2 other way 0%, 3/1 twill 0%, broken 76%, point 50%, plain 0%, hopsack 47%, unrelated 98%. Silent under the broken twill (29,888 pairs): 2/2 twill 0%, 2/2 other way 0%, 1/3 twill 55%, 3/1 twill 55%, point 0%, plain 0%, hopsack 53%, unrelated 97%. Silent under the point twill (66,208 pairs): 2/2 twill 0%, 2/2 other way 0%, 1/3 twill 57%, 3/1 twill 57%, broken 55%, plain 0%, hopsack 47%, unrelated 99%. A zero means the column's plan hides every error the row's does; the plan of unrelated rows exposes all but the 864 pairs that are the threading itself started elsewhere. What the table cannot show is which plans a given mill pegs one warp with.

A proof plan has no slide in it

A threading error that a 2/2 twill hides is invisible in the cloth and still wrong on the loom, and it shows only when the loom is re-pegged. Re-weaving every silent error under eight other plans says which do the showing. The twill run the other way and plain weave never expose one. A 1/3 twill exposes 44 per cent, a broken twill 70, and a plan of eight unrelated rows all but 864 — and those 864 are not errors at all, because each is the right threading started at another end. So the plans nest: whatever a broken or a point twill hides, the 2/2 hides too, and a threading proved under a 2/2 twill has passed the weakest test there is.

cloth · Notation
Twelve eight-shaft lifting plans' silent errors, nested. The double threading errors silent under twelve eight-shaft lifting plans, over every threading that puts one end on each of eight shafts: 1/7 twill, 2/6 twill, 3/5 twill, 1/2/3/2 twill, satin, move 3, satin, move 5: 1,536; 4/4 twill: 1,888; 3/1/1/3 twill: 448; 2/1/1/4 twill: 256; broken 4/4 twill: 384; point 4/4 twill: 576; unrelated rows: 0. Plans in one box hide exactly the same errors. An arrow means every error silent under the first is silent under the second: 1/7 twill into 4/4 twill, 3/1/1/3 twill into 4/4 twill, 2/1/1/4 twill into 1/7 twill, 2/1/1/4 twill into 3/1/1/3 twill, broken 4/4 twill into point 4/4 twill, point 4/4 twill into 4/4 twill. The order is not total — the 3/1/1/3 twill and the satins each hide errors the other does not — but it has a top, the 4/4 twill, which hides every error any of the others hides. The plan of unrelated rows hides none.

An eight-shaft error hides in the row's mirror

At four shafts the lifting plans nest, with the 2/2 twill hiding every threading error the others hide. An eight-shaft loom has satins as well as twills, and their slides are different slides, so the order was expected to break. It does not. Over every threading that puts one end on each of eight shafts, the 4/4 twill hides every double error any of eleven other plans hides, and a satin hides exactly what a 1/7 twill hides, error for error. What decides it is not the slide. Every silent error is an exchange that turns the threading into a copy of itself, the slide accounts for one in six of them, and the rest hide in the row's mirror.

cloth · Notation
Which window sizes name every derivation orbit, on every repeat small enough to walk. Every draft of eleven repeat shapes from three picks by three ends to five by five, every thread interlacing, cut into the orbits the derivations that keep a shape can reach — slides, reversals, the counterchange and, on a square repeat, the quarter turn — and tested with censuses of two-, three- and four-thread-square windows. 3 × 3: 3 orbits; window 2 names all, window 3 names all. 3 × 4: 19 orbits; window 2 confuses 2, window 3 names all. 3 × 5: 66 orbits; window 2 confuses 43, window 3 names all. 3 × 6: 365 orbits; window 2 confuses 328, window 3 confuses 12. 3 × 7: 1,680 orbits; window 2 confuses 1,649, window 3 confuses 211. 3 × 8: 8,988 orbits; window 2 confuses 8,949, window 3 confuses 2,324. 4 × 4: 157 orbits; window 2 confuses 49, window 3 names all, window 4 names all. 4 × 5: 2,875 orbits; window 2 confuses 2,153, window 3 names all, window 4 names all. 4 × 6: 36,380 orbits; window 2 confuses 34,439, window 3 confuses 204, window 4 names all. 4 × 7: 447,756 orbits; window 2 confuses 444,174, window 3 confuses 6,503, window 4 confuses 2. 5 × 5: 45,077 orbits; window 2 confuses 42,480, window 3 names all, window 4 names all. On every shape a window no wider than half the ends confuses some orbits, and a window wider than half names all of them but for one pair at four picks by seven ends. What the grid cannot show is a shape too large to walk, six by six among them.

The window that names a cloth is half its repeat

At four by four a census of three-by-three windows tells every derivation family from every other, and the question it left was whether three stays enough as the repeat grows. Walked whole over eleven repeat shapes, three is still enough at five ends — all 45,077 families of the five-by-five cloths apart — and fails as soon as the repeat reaches six. On every shape a window no wider than half the repeat confuses some cloths, and a window wider than half names them all, but for one pair of seven-end cloths that differ in a single end.

weaves · Derivation

Named alongside it

The objects these essays reach for when they reach for this one.

CensusSatinPlane groupRepeatMove numberOrbitLifting planRegular satinScatterThreadingBurnsideCloth integrity

All concepts