First result · 2026-09-09 19:57 UTC
consider-now / postpone — did ‘table the proposal’ put it before the meeting, or take it off the agenda?
Counts in current evidence decisions. This row currently contributes to evidence decisions. Its direction is separate from whether the proposal is ready for adoption.
- What was measured
- token cost ·
token_delta
How does the wording change tokenizer units for the declared tokenizer population? - Reported result
- -8.5 tokens per declared item
Reported interval: -8.5 to -8.5.Fewer tokens on the named current tokenizers; this is the encoded-length difference, not the proposal decision.
- English comparison
- English comparison not recorded as a structured label
Declared by the submitter; not a certification of equivalent information.
- Tokenizer conditions
- Literal encoding cost on the named current tokenizers; not comprehension.
- Named instruments
cl100k_base,o200k_baseReader population not separately declared.
- Conditions covered
- Separate outcomes retained for all 2 declared conditions
consider-now,postponeAn overall average can hide a weak condition. A condition list is not proof that every form or claim in the proposal was tested.
- Settlement role
- Agrees with the named original
This eligible row adds one agreement to the named original’s settlement tally.
- Is this result within the cost allowance?
- This headline is within the allowance.
The reported difference is -8.5 tokens; the current declaration allows at most 0 tokens.
This compares Ainglish minus English with the current declaration, which may differ from the declaration when the result was filed. It checks the headline only: inspect any required per-form and per-tokenizer results too.
- Has the original estimate been independently reproduced?
- Agrees with the named original.
This replication reports -8.5 tokens; the named original reported -8.5.
This eligible row adds one agreement to the named original’s settlement tally.
Reproduction asks whether fresh-input findings agree under the settlement rule. It does not ask whether either value satisfies the cost allowance.
Being within the cost allowance is not a completed prerequisite. Reproducing an original estimate is a separate check, not proof that the allowance is met. Current evidence status, settlement and every declared result still determine readiness.
How can one check pass while the other does not?
For example, an allowance of at most +3 tokens and an original estimate of +3 ask different questions. A replication of −0.5 is within that allowance but may disagree with the original. A replication of +3.25 may reproduce +3 within the settlement tolerance while exceeding the allowance.
These are illustrative numbers, not a new settlement rule. A cost saving is not a comprehension result, and a reproduced premium does not by itself mean a proposal should be adopted or rejected.
This result checks a named original, not every experiment on the proposal. Read its target original
Compare with the exact target attempt
Every declared condition must agree. Overlapping overall intervals alone do not confirm this original.
How much input text was reused?
100.0% of complete English–Ainglish pairs are fresh.
Separate-arm overlap is unavailable or has not been computed. This does not mean zero reuse.
Exact text comparisons only; repeated occurrences count separately. Shared text can deserve scrutiny even when each complete pair is new. These arm counts are descriptive and do not change settlement eligibility.
Declared target content identity
731894e988bbb6a473703d55ba259d137fe53ace009c7e792345edd2e036161aDoes the overall result hide differences between conditions?
| Condition | Reported difference | Reported interval |
|---|---|---|
consider-now | -5 | Not recorded |
postpone | -12 | Not recorded |
A missing condition interval is not zero uncertainty. An overall interval cannot substitute for agreement in every load-bearing condition.
Inspect actual inputs and recorded answers
The comparison label is the submitter’s declaration, not a semantic certification. Check that both versions preserve the information needed to answer the same question.
Numbers count only readable inputs attached to this receipt. They are not the experiment’s declared sample size or the number of reader calls.
Showing 1–6 of 64 readable, inline study items, in stored order—not a selection of successes. 0 control items are kept separate.
Each result has its own input pages. Positions across the two studies do not imply matched cases.
Input 1 · sat-public-governance-1-consider-now
- English input
- Put the flood-shelter protocol before this meeting for consideration now.
- Ainglish input
- consider-now(the flood-shelter protocol).
- Condition
- consider-now
Input 2 · sat-public-governance-1-postpone
- English input
- Do not take the flood-shelter protocol up in this meeting; keep it for possible later consideration.
- Ainglish input
- postpone(the flood-shelter protocol).
- Condition
- postpone
Input 3 · sat-public-governance-2-consider-now
- English input
- Put the tree-preservation appeal before this meeting for consideration now.
- Ainglish input
- consider-now(the tree-preservation appeal).
- Condition
- consider-now
Input 4 · sat-public-governance-2-postpone
- English input
- Do not take the tree-preservation appeal up in this meeting; keep it for possible later consideration.
- Ainglish input
- postpone(the tree-preservation appeal).
- Condition
- postpone
Input 5 · sat-public-governance-3-consider-now
- English input
- Put the night-bus timetable before this meeting for consideration now.
- Ainglish input
- consider-now(the night-bus timetable).
- Condition
- consider-now
Input 6 · sat-public-governance-3-postpone
- English input
- Do not take the night-bus timetable up in this meeting; keep it for possible later consideration.
- Ainglish input
- postpone(the night-bus timetable).
- Condition
- postpone
Recorded input digest: a59e4a761b27ff816472245120a1385d595201be88fb2829d41bb58d3739d45b
Prompts, reference material and other context can live elsewhere in the specification. Inputs and keys alone do not reconstruct every reader call or establish a fair comparison.
Declared population, method and retained outcomes
- Compared with
- Ainglish minus complete careful English in current tokenizer units; negative is fewer tokens, positive is a premium
- Tested population
- Prospectively authored complete procedural mappings: 8 declared domains, 4 new matter references per domain, each in consider-now and postpone. Natural-language matter labels are identical in both arms; same English templates and equal form/domain weights.
- Unit tested
- one complete meaning-matched utterance pair including all shared contextual text
- How results combine
- Equal-weight form/force strata, equal domain/reference cells within each stratum; maximum tokenizer mean is the least-favourable headline. No rounding.
These are the study author’s declarations. A finding applies to this tested scope; this summary does not establish that another study is comparable.
Absolute arm results, reader-specific results and condition results below are retained values, not a newly pooled analysis. Accuracy arms use fractions from 0 to 1; their difference uses percentage points.
Absolute arm results
Not recorded
Reader or tokenizer results
[
{
"model": "cl100k_base",
"value": -8.5
},
{
"model": "o200k_base",
"value": -8.5
}
]
Condition results
[
{
"id": "consider-now",
"weight": 1,
"share": 0.5,
"value": -5,
"value_lo": null,
"value_hi": null,
"arms": null,
"resolution_bound": "not_applicable"
},
{
"id": "postpone",
"weight": 1,
"share": 0.5,
"value": -12,
"value_lo": null,
"value_hi": null,
"arms": null,
"resolution_bound": "not_applicable"
}
]
Exact result and immutable specificationExperiment history
Attempt 25c10c03-d82b-4ebd-84e0-365aec7a01f9
Content b30e88926bdcd28d8e8b0765e5735501ff4ff4302c64f07f5ad26e5856ed3563