Evidence

Compare two experiments

Check what changed in the question, wording or readers before comparing the numbers.

This view keeps both results separate. It does not calculate a combined score or decide whether they reproduce each other.

Change the selected experimentsSearch by proposal, select a result or enter an exact identifier

Find experiments by proposal

Choose two experiments by title, measurement and date. The choices include up to 50 newest public completed results, plus your current selections. Historical results stay labelled. For older records, use the evidence explorer or exact entry below.

Use an exact experiment identifier instead

A full attempt UUID entered here replaces the corresponding choice above. Content hashes are not result identifiers.

Clear comparison

Compare the essentials

Read each question across both results. A matching description is not proof that the studies are scientifically comparable.

Question	First result	Second result
Which proposal?	pair-by-order / every-combination — match two lists in order, or match everyone with everything2026-08-27 12:29 UTC	pair-by-order / every-combination — match two lists in order, or match everyone with everything2026-08-30 16:45 UTC
What was measured?	token costHow does the wording change tokenizer units for the declared tokenizer population?	token costHow does the wording change tokenizer units for the declared tokenizer population?
What was the result?	1.59375 tokens per declared itemReported interval: 0.25 to 1.59375Retracted by submitter	0.625 tokens per declared itemNot yet counting in evidence decisions
Compared with what?	English comparison not recorded as a structured labelCurrent tokenizer cost, not comprehension	English comparison not recorded as a structured labelCurrent tokenizer cost, not comprehension
Independently settled?	Inactive historyThis row remains citable but has no current evidence effect.	No independent settlement voiceThe retained eligibility decision does not give this row a settlement voice. Reused inputs, related participants or other recorded restrictions may explain that decision; this label alone does not identify the cause.

Inspect first result Inspect second result

What differs in the declared methods?

These are literal recorded values, not a compatibility test. Matching declarations do not prove equivalent inputs or fair scoring. A missing structured field may be described elsewhere in the immutable specification.

What was measured · Same recorded value

First result

token_delta

Second result

token_delta

English comparison declarations · Not recorded on either side

First result

Not recorded in this structured field

Second result

Not recorded in this structured field

Tested population · Not recorded on either side

First result

Not recorded in this structured field

Second result

Not recorded in this structured field

Unit tested · Not recorded on either side

First result

Not recorded in this structured field

Second result

Not recorded in this structured field

Named instruments (including order) · Same recorded value

First result

[
    "tiktoken/cl100k_base",
    "tiktoken/o200k_base",
    "tiktoken/p50k_base"
]

Second result

[
    "tiktoken/cl100k_base",
    "tiktoken/o200k_base",
    "tiktoken/p50k_base"
]

Reader exposure · Not recorded on either side

First result

Not recorded in this structured field

Second result

Not recorded in this structured field

Exposure window · Not recorded on either side

First result

Not recorded in this structured field

Second result

Not recorded in this structured field

How results combine · Not recorded on either side

First result

Not recorded in this structured field

Second result

Not recorded in this structured field

Scoring declaration · Not recorded on either side

First result

Not recorded in this structured field

Second result

Not recorded in this structured field

Conditions (including order) · Not recorded on either side

First result

Not recorded in this structured field

Second result

Not recorded in this structured field

First result: full recordtoken cost · 1.59375 tokens per declared item

First result · 2026-08-27 12:29 UTC

pair-by-order / every-combination — match two lists in order, or match everyone with everything

Retracted by submitter. This is inactive history. Its reported value is preserved, but it cannot currently support or oppose inclusion.

What was measured: token cost · token_delta
How does the wording change tokenizer units for the declared tokenizer population?
Historical reported result: 1.59375 tokens per declared item
Reported interval: 0.25 to 1.59375.
This is inactive history. Its reported value is preserved, but it cannot currently support or oppose inclusion.
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: tiktoken/cl100k_base, tiktoken/o200k_base, tiktoken/p50k_base
Reader population not separately declared.
Conditions covered: No condition-by-condition settlement contract recorded
An 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: Inactive history
This row remains citable but has no current evidence effect.

Is this result within the cost allowance?

This headline is outside the allowance. The reported difference is 1.59375 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?

Inactive history.

This row remains citable but has no current evidence effect.

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. This historical row does not count.

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.

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 32 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

English input: Asha reviews patch X and Bram reviews patch Y; neither reviews the other listed patch.
Ainglish input: Asha and Bram review patches X and Y, pair-by-order.

Input 2

English input: Cora translates D1, Deepak translates D2, and Elin translates D3; none translates another listed document.
Ainglish input: Cora, Deepak, and Elin translate documents D1, D2, and D3, pair-by-order.

Input 3

English input: Fara inspects M1, Gus inspects M2, Hana inspects M3, and Ivo inspects M4; none inspects another listed machine.
Ainglish input: Fara, Gus, Hana, and Ivo inspect machines M1, M2, M3, and M4, pair-by-order.

Input 4

English input: Jia monitors North and Kofi monitors South; neither monitors the other listed region.
Ainglish input: Jia and Kofi monitor regions North and South, pair-by-order.

Input 5

English input: Lina tests B7, Marek tests B8, and Noor tests B9; none tests another listed build.
Ainglish input: Lina, Marek, and Noor test builds B7, B8, and B9, pair-by-order.

Input 6

English input: Omar audits Red and Pia audits Blue; neither audits the other listed ledger.
Ainglish input: Omar and Pia audit ledgers Red and Blue, pair-by-order.

Recorded input digest: ac40174355dbc390e381f6e1e6a4b4251a9c14aebc851d80b1bc3ce30a2908bc

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

No structured study scope is declared here. Inspect the immutable manifest; do not infer a comparator or population from the headline.

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": "tiktoken\/cl100k_base",
        "value": 0.625
    },
    {
        "model": "tiktoken\/o200k_base",
        "value": 0.25
    },
    {
        "model": "tiktoken\/p50k_base",
        "value": 1.59375
    }
]

Condition results

Not recorded

Exact result and immutable specification Experiment history

Attempt 27ce69e2-3f38-4851-8004-d0488960118a
Content bbeaa82ba7f40b365f8cf50c539112d504051e2b94487a42095c1ece91f40113

Second result: full recordtoken cost · 0.625 tokens per declared item

Second result · 2026-08-30 16:45 UTC

pair-by-order / every-combination — match two lists in order, or match everyone with everything

Not yet counting in evidence decisions. This row remains available for assessment, but does not currently carry a counting evidence result.

What was measured: token cost · token_delta
How does the wording change tokenizer units for the declared tokenizer population?
Reported result: 0.625 tokens per declared item
More 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: tiktoken/cl100k_base, tiktoken/o200k_base, tiktoken/p50k_base
Reader population not separately declared.
Conditions covered: No condition-by-condition settlement contract recorded
An 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: No independent settlement voice
The retained eligibility decision does not give this row a settlement voice. Reused inputs, related participants or other recorded restrictions may explain that decision; this label alone does not identify the cause.

Is this result within the cost allowance?

This headline is outside the allowance. The reported difference is 0.625 tokens; the current declaration allows at most 0 tokens.

Has the original estimate been independently reproduced?

No independent settlement voice. This replication reports 0.625 tokens; the named original reported 1.59375.

The retained eligibility decision does not give this row a settlement voice. Reused inputs, related participants or other recorded restrictions may explain that decision; this label alone does not identify the cause.

Reproduction asks whether fresh-input findings agree under the settlement rule. It does not ask whether either value satisfies the cost allowance.

How can one check pass while the other does not?

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

How much input text was reused?

0.0% 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

bbeaa82ba7f40b365f8cf50c539112d504051e2b94487a42095c1ece91f40113

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 32 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

English input: Asha reviews patch X and Bram reviews patch Y; neither reviews the other listed patch.
Ainglish input: Asha and Bram review patches X and Y, pair-by-order.

Input 2

English input: Cora translates D1, Deepak translates D2, and Elin translates D3; none translates another listed document.
Ainglish input: Cora, Deepak, and Elin translate documents D1, D2, and D3, pair-by-order.

Input 3

English input: Fara inspects M1, Gus inspects M2, Hana inspects M3, and Ivo inspects M4; none inspects another listed machine.
Ainglish input: Fara, Gus, Hana, and Ivo inspect machines M1, M2, M3, and M4, pair-by-order.

Input 4

English input: Jia monitors North and Kofi monitors South; neither monitors the other listed region.
Ainglish input: Jia and Kofi monitor regions North and South, pair-by-order.

Input 5

English input: Lina tests B7, Marek tests B8, and Noor tests B9; none tests another listed build.
Ainglish input: Lina, Marek, and Noor test builds B7, B8, and B9, pair-by-order.

Input 6

English input: Omar audits Red and Pia audits Blue; neither audits the other listed ledger.
Ainglish input: Omar and Pia audit ledgers Red and Blue, pair-by-order.

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

No structured study scope is declared here. Inspect the immutable manifest; do not infer a comparator or population from the headline.

Absolute arm results

Not recorded

Reader or tokenizer results

Not recorded

Condition results

Not recorded

Exact result and immutable specification Experiment history

Attempt 8609b215-01f5-4522-a8ba-69a943d8d1ba
Content 8cb331a955b801b183717400e7d6451dd86f0688323c3796d54feb5321bff416

Different wording, readers, exposure or populations can legitimately produce different results. A visible reference is not training the model’s weights. Current models and tokenizers have learned English; future Ainglish-trained performance remains a research question.