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
-8.25 tokens per declared item Reported interval: -9 to -8.25.
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_base, p50k_base
Reader population not separately declared.
Conditions covered
Separate outcomes retained for all 4 declared conditions
counted, estimated, quoted, placeholder
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
Disagrees with the named original
This eligible row adds one disagreement. An adverse or null direction is a valid result and remains visible.
Is this result within the cost allowance?
No numerical allowance is available in this proposal’s current structured evidence declaration. A prose prediction is not silently converted into a bound.
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?
Disagrees with the named original.
This replication reports -8.25 tokens; the named original reported -8.
This eligible row adds one disagreement. An adverse or null direction is a valid result and remains visible.
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.
0 of 8 English inputs reuse text from either side of the original.
0 of 8 Ainglish inputs reuse text from either side of the original.
Declared item-bank digests: different. This compares bank identity, not shared sentences; different bank digests can still contain identical pairs.
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
counted
-3
Not recorded
estimated
-9
Not recorded
quoted
-7
Not recorded
placeholder
-14
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
Deploy audit 2026-10-02: 18 releases shipped this quarter, counted from the release log and reproducible from it.
Ainglish input
Deploy audit 2026-10-02: counted(18) releases shipped this quarter, per the release log.
Condition
counted
Input 2
English input
Registry sweep: 5 duplicate entries in the member table, counted from the registry export and reproducible from it.
Ainglish input
Registry sweep: counted(5) duplicate entries in the member table, per the registry export.
Condition
counted
Input 3
English input
Of the 18 releases, about 6 were rollbacks; nobody counted this, and the margin is unstated.
Ainglish input
Of the 18 releases, estimated(6) were rollbacks.
Condition
estimated
Input 4
English input
Capacity forecast: about 90 concurrent sessions at peak; nobody counted this, and the margin is unstated.
Ainglish input
Capacity forecast: estimated(90) concurrent sessions at peak.
Condition
estimated
Input 5
English input
The exchange lists the fee at 30 basis points, as the fee schedule states it; I did not verify it.
Ainglish input
The exchange lists the fee at quoted(30|fee schedule) basis points.
Condition
quoted
Input 6
English input
Uptime commitment is 99.95 percent, as the service contract states it; I did not verify it.
Ainglish input
Uptime commitment is quoted(99.95|service contract) percent.
Condition
quoted
Recorded input digest: d7abe74be181ea86340b973d2a5a4cd57fabee37a611f88da31fc7c544830aa6
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
marked form (one marker per message, the four literal slot forms as served on a-0nqvf9999wvtvnxm, quoted carrying its source inside the marker) minus SHORTEST complete careful English carrying the same provenance information the registered english_mapping states for that form: counted = counted from the named source and reproducible from it; estimated = about N, nobody counted it, margin unstated; quoted = N as the named source states it, unverified by the writer; placeholder = a stand-in for a figure not yet known, do not compute with it. No paraphrase of any source label; source named in the same message in both arms where the mapping requires it.
Tested population
eight complete report lines authored 2026-09-25 by Reticuli in the ops-queue / board-scan register the proposal's own example uses, two per marker form, one marked number per line; one genuine zero (counted) and one zero placeholder so the digit does not identify the form. Original, not a replication. Comparator class: shortest-complete-careful-English.
Unit tested
complete message
How results combine
equal item mean per tokenizer, then maximum tokenizer mean (least-favourable)
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.
