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
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
1.1666666666667 tokens per declared item Reported interval: 1.0833333333333 to 1.1666666666667.
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
cl100k_base, o200k_base
Reader population not separately declared.
Conditions covered
Separate outcomes retained for all 4 declared conditions
subject, verb, object-nominal, adjunct
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
Disputed
Eligible replications disagree and this original does not hold a settlement majority.
Is this result within the cost allowance?
This headline is within the allowance.
The reported difference is 1.1666666666667 tokens; the current declaration allows at most 3 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?
Disputed.
Eligible replications disagree and this original does not hold a settlement majority.
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.
Does the overall result hide differences between conditions?
Every stored condition, without new pooling. Differences and intervals use tokens. Condition names come from the frozen experiment.
Condition
Reported difference
Reported interval
subject
1.3333333333333
Not recorded
verb
0.83333333333333
Not recorded
object-nominal
1.1666666666667
Not recorded
adjunct
1.3333333333333
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 24 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
only Dexagon approved the release.
Ainglish input
only-Dexagon approved the release.
Condition
subject
Input 2
English input
only Rosetta reopened the review.
Ainglish input
only-Rosetta reopened the review.
Condition
subject
Input 3
English input
only the safety lead entered the chamber.
Ainglish input
only-the-safety-lead entered the chamber.
Condition
subject
Input 4
English input
only two reviewers challenged the tally.
Ainglish input
only-two-reviewers challenged the tally.
Condition
subject
Input 5
English input
only our night operator acknowledged the alarm.
Ainglish input
only-our-night-operator acknowledged the alarm.
Condition
subject
Input 6
English input
only the audit chair signed the exception.
Ainglish input
only-the-audit-chair signed the exception.
Condition
subject
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.
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
1.5 tokens per declared item Reported interval: 1.375 to 1.5.
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
cl100k_base, o200k_base
Reader population not separately declared.
Conditions covered
Separate outcomes retained for all 4 declared conditions
subject, verb, object-nominal, adjunct
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
Incommensurable pending repair
A comparison key does not match, so the row cannot presently vote on settlement.
Is this result within the cost allowance?
This headline is within the allowance.
The reported difference is 1.5 tokens; the current declaration allows at most 3 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?
Incommensurable pending repair.
This replication reports 1.5 tokens; the named original reported 1.1666666666667.
A comparison key does not match, so the row cannot presently vote on settlement.
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
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.
Does the overall result hide differences between conditions?
Every stored condition, without new pooling. Differences and intervals use tokens. Condition names come from the frozen experiment.
Condition
Reported difference
Reported interval
subject
1.5
Not recorded
verb
1
Not recorded
object-nominal
1.5
Not recorded
adjunct
2
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 8 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
only Harbor signed the manifest.
Ainglish input
only-Harbor signed the manifest.
Condition
subject
Input 2
English input
only quartermaster opened the vault.
Ainglish input
only-quartermaster opened the vault.
Condition
subject
Input 3
English input
only three clerks tallied the votes.
Ainglish input
only-three-clerks tallied the votes.
Condition
verb
Input 4
English input
only brass key turns the lock.
Ainglish input
only-brass-key turns the lock.
Condition
verb
Input 5
English input
only Lyra answered the hail.
Ainglish input
only-Lyra answered the hail.
Condition
object-nominal
Input 6
English input
only night auditor stays late.
Ainglish input
only-night-auditor stays late.
Condition
object-nominal
Recorded input digest: 15e30957411f0e69caa2da5cc13d27c793f6eb3e475508db9cf4e2155332b523
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.
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.
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.
