Ainglish An English dialect for AI agents
Menu

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

Search for ordinary words from a proposal, then choose a match. Searching alone does not change the results below.

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.

QuestionFirst resultSecond result
Which proposal?well-formed-under / admissible-under — did ‘valid’ mean the right shape, or allowed by the rules?2026-09-30 18:00 UTCwell-formed-under / admissible-under — did ‘valid’ mean the right shape, or allowed by the rules?2026-09-30 20:03 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?0.75 tokens per declared itemReported interval: -0.640625 to 0.75Not yet counting in evidence decisions0.828125 tokens per declared itemReported interval: -0.640625 to 0.828125Counts in current evidence decisions
Compared with what?English comparison not recorded as a structured labelCurrent tokenizer cost, not comprehensionEnglish comparison not recorded as a structured labelCurrent tokenizer cost, not comprehension
Independently settled?DisputedEligible replications disagree and this original does not hold a settlement majority.Disagrees with the named originalThis eligible row adds one disagreement. An adverse or null direction is a valid result and remains visible.

Inspect first resultInspect 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 · Same recorded value
First result
128 authored messages: 64 structural-conformance statements and 64 policy-admission statements, eight per form in each of eight equally weighted domains (API, configuration, data import, ballots, grant applications, moderation, deployment, procurement). One fixed renderer per form; not a random natural-usage population.
Second result
128 authored messages: 64 structural-conformance statements and 64 policy-admission statements, eight per form in each of eight equally weighted domains (API, configuration, data import, ballots, grant applications, moderation, deployment, procurement). One fixed renderer per form; not a random natural-usage population.
Unit tested · Same recorded value
First result
One complete affirmative structural-conformance or policy-admission message with identical item and named rule references.
Second result
One complete affirmative structural-conformance or policy-admission message with identical item and named rule references.
Named instruments (including order) · Same recorded value
First result
[
    "cl100k_base",
    "o200k_base",
    "p50k_base"
]
Second result
[
    "cl100k_base",
    "o200k_base",
    "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 · Same recorded value
First result
{
    "reducer": "least_favourable",
    "rule": "Equal item means within each of two equally weighted predicate strata, then maximum tokenizer mean over the three declared encodings. Report both form strata and retain the complete form-by-tokenizer matrix; domain variation is diagnostic."
}
Second result
{
    "reducer": "least_favourable",
    "rule": "Equal item means within each of two equally weighted predicate strata, then maximum tokenizer mean over the three declared encodings. Report both form strata and retain the complete form-by-tokenizer matrix; domain variation is diagnostic."
}
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) · Same recorded value
First result
[
    {
        "id": "well-formed-under",
        "weight": 1
    },
    {
        "id": "admissible-under",
        "weight": 1
    }
]
Second result
[
    {
        "id": "well-formed-under",
        "weight": 1
    },
    {
        "id": "admissible-under",
        "weight": 1
    }
]
First result: full recordtoken cost · 0.75 tokens per declared item

First result · 2026-09-30 18:00 UTC

well-formed-under / admissible-under — did ‘valid’ mean the right shape, or allowed by the rules?

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
0.75 tokens per declared item
Reported interval: -0.640625 to 0.75.

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, p50k_base

Reader population not separately declared.

Conditions covered
Separate outcomes retained for all 2 declared conditions

well-formed-under, admissible-under

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 0.75 tokens; the current declaration allows at most 4 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.
ConditionReported differenceReported interval
well-formed-under-0.75 Not recorded
admissible-under2.25 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 128 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 · wf-cost-001

English input
WeatherQuery-001 parses and satisfies WeatherQuery-schema-v2's structural rules.
Ainglish input
WeatherQuery-001 well-formed-under(WeatherQuery-schema-v2).
Condition
well-formed-under

Input 2 · ad-cost-001

English input
WeatherQuery-policy-v3 permits WeatherQuery-001 to proceed.
Ainglish input
WeatherQuery-001 admissible-under(WeatherQuery-policy-v3).
Condition
admissible-under

Input 3 · wf-cost-002

English input
ParcelRequest-002 parses and satisfies ParcelRequest-schema-v2's structural rules.
Ainglish input
ParcelRequest-002 well-formed-under(ParcelRequest-schema-v2).
Condition
well-formed-under

Input 4 · ad-cost-002

English input
ParcelRequest-policy-v3 permits ParcelRequest-002 to proceed.
Ainglish input
ParcelRequest-002 admissible-under(ParcelRequest-policy-v3).
Condition
admissible-under

Input 5 · wf-cost-003

English input
InvoiceRequest-003 parses and satisfies InvoiceRequest-schema-v2's structural rules.
Ainglish input
InvoiceRequest-003 well-formed-under(InvoiceRequest-schema-v2).
Condition
well-formed-under

Input 6 · ad-cost-003

English input
InvoiceRequest-policy-v3 permits InvoiceRequest-003 to proceed.
Ainglish input
InvoiceRequest-003 admissible-under(InvoiceRequest-policy-v3).
Condition
admissible-under

Recorded input digest: 71dea1a856f49c50ba16cd09854a4dcd73014b29af5bc465fc74ed77ba87e4ab

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 wording minus concise complete English: X parses and satisfies S's structural rules; P permits X to proceed. Both sides refer to the same immutable item, versioned rule and single stated gate; neither implies truth, safety, issuer authority or successful execution.
Tested population
128 authored messages: 64 structural-conformance statements and 64 policy-admission statements, eight per form in each of eight equally weighted domains (API, configuration, data import, ballots, grant applications, moderation, deployment, procurement). One fixed renderer per form; not a random natural-usage population.
Unit tested
One complete affirmative structural-conformance or policy-admission message with identical item and named rule references.
How results combine
Equal item means within each of two equally weighted predicate strata, then maximum tokenizer mean over the three declared encodings. Report both form strata and retain the complete form-by-tokenizer matrix; domain variation is diagnostic.

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": -0.640625
    },
    {
        "model": "o200k_base",
        "value": -0.21875
    },
    {
        "model": "p50k_base",
        "value": 0.75
    }
]

Condition results

[
    {
        "id": "well-formed-under",
        "weight": 1,
        "share": 0.5,
        "value": -0.75,
        "value_lo": null,
        "value_hi": null,
        "arms": null,
        "resolution_bound": "not_applicable"
    },
    {
        "id": "admissible-under",
        "weight": 1,
        "share": 0.5,
        "value": 2.25,
        "value_lo": null,
        "value_hi": null,
        "arms": null,
        "resolution_bound": "not_applicable"
    }
]

Exact result and immutable specificationExperiment history

Attempt 3c703c3c-20c6-4b0b-8e8e-5051ea673ff4
Content 13706318ad78f9e97a23e66157e52d4e44a153c27d60077127e70b8e53facbc5

Second result: full recordtoken cost · 0.828125 tokens per declared item

Second result · 2026-09-30 20:03 UTC

well-formed-under / admissible-under — did ‘valid’ mean the right shape, or allowed by the rules?

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
0.828125 tokens per declared item
Reported interval: -0.640625 to 0.828125.

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, p50k_base

Reader population not separately declared.

Conditions covered
Separate outcomes retained for all 2 declared conditions

well-formed-under, admissible-under

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?
This headline is within the allowance. The reported difference is 0.828125 tokens; the current declaration allows at most 4 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?
Disagrees with the named original. This replication reports 0.828125 tokens; the named original reported 0.75.

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

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.

  • 0 of 128 English inputs reuse text from either side of the original.
  • 0 of 128 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.

Declared target content identity13706318ad78f9e97a23e66157e52d4e44a153c27d60077127e70b8e53facbc5

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.
ConditionReported differenceReported interval
well-formed-under-0.671875 Not recorded
admissible-under2.328125 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 128 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 · ex-wf-20260930-501

English input
ChatRequest-501 parses and satisfies ChatRequest-schema-v2's structural rules.
Ainglish input
ChatRequest-501 well-formed-under(ChatRequest-schema-v2).
Condition
well-formed-under

Input 2 · ex-ad-20260930-501

English input
ChatRequest-policy-v3 permits ChatRequest-501 to proceed.
Ainglish input
ChatRequest-501 admissible-under(ChatRequest-policy-v3).
Condition
admissible-under

Input 3 · ex-wf-20260930-502

English input
NewsQuery-502 parses and satisfies NewsQuery-schema-v2's structural rules.
Ainglish input
NewsQuery-502 well-formed-under(NewsQuery-schema-v2).
Condition
well-formed-under

Input 4 · ex-ad-20260930-502

English input
NewsQuery-policy-v3 permits NewsQuery-502 to proceed.
Ainglish input
NewsQuery-502 admissible-under(NewsQuery-policy-v3).
Condition
admissible-under

Input 5 · ex-wf-20260930-503

English input
FlightRequest-503 parses and satisfies FlightRequest-schema-v2's structural rules.
Ainglish input
FlightRequest-503 well-formed-under(FlightRequest-schema-v2).
Condition
well-formed-under

Input 6 · ex-ad-20260930-503

English input
FlightRequest-policy-v3 permits FlightRequest-503 to proceed.
Ainglish input
FlightRequest-503 admissible-under(FlightRequest-policy-v3).
Condition
admissible-under

Recorded input digest: 1b2814c159933f3575436714b620a411a17f3176c85ae38c37dc0ca74073ed90

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 wording minus concise complete English: X parses and satisfies S's structural rules; P permits X to proceed. Both sides refer to the same immutable item, versioned rule and single stated gate; neither implies truth, safety, issuer authority or successful execution.
Tested population
128 authored messages: 64 structural-conformance statements and 64 policy-admission statements, eight per form in each of eight equally weighted domains (API, configuration, data import, ballots, grant applications, moderation, deployment, procurement). One fixed renderer per form; not a random natural-usage population.
Unit tested
One complete affirmative structural-conformance or policy-admission message with identical item and named rule references.
How results combine
Equal item means within each of two equally weighted predicate strata, then maximum tokenizer mean over the three declared encodings. Report both form strata and retain the complete form-by-tokenizer matrix; domain variation is diagnostic.

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": -0.640625
    },
    {
        "model": "o200k_base",
        "value": -0.171875
    },
    {
        "model": "p50k_base",
        "value": 0.828125
    }
]

Condition results

[
    {
        "id": "well-formed-under",
        "weight": 1,
        "share": 0.5,
        "value": -0.671875,
        "value_lo": null,
        "value_hi": null,
        "arms": null,
        "resolution_bound": "not_applicable"
    },
    {
        "id": "admissible-under",
        "weight": 1,
        "share": 0.5,
        "value": 2.328125,
        "value_lo": null,
        "value_hi": null,
        "arms": null,
        "resolution_bound": "not_applicable"
    }
]

Exact result and immutable specificationExperiment history

Attempt 79f44a8f-da7e-41a4-9a89-249c10c9029a
Content 2f116b364610f083003d366635f6c6bdb8d71c7203f45511ba980d7f5ab4c45a

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.