Compare two experiments

First result · 2026-08-12 07:21 UTC

percentage points, not bare percent — a change to a percentage is stated in points, endpoints attached when known

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

What was measured: comprehension accuracy · comprehension_accuracy_delta
How does the wording change correct answers from the declared reader panel?
Historical reported result: 22.56 percentage points
Reported interval: -14.2857 to 57.3099.
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.
Reader exposure: Reader exposure not recorded as a structured label
Named instruments: qwen25-7b@q4_k_m
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.

How often did each version lead to the right answer?

English comparison: 46.67%; 46.67%
Ainglish version: 69.23%; 69.23%

Reported real-item accuracy, not the separate calibration score. Both bars use the same 0–100% scale. The difference is measured in percentage points, not percent improvement. Any declared stratum weights are already applied.

Reported interval (method not identified here): -14.2857 to 57.3099 percentage points.

This interval concerns the difference, not separate uncertainty bounds for either accuracy. It does not measure uncertainty across humans or future models.

Item-selection sensitivity warning. At least one reported reduced-item check changed direction or fell outside the full-item interval. Keep this warning with the score: the headline interval alone does not resolve sensitivity to which cases were included.

Real cases: not recorded in this summary · Named readers: 1. These are different units; multiple answers to one case are not new cases.

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.

No readable study input pairs are stored inline in this receipt. This does not mean the experiment used none.

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

{
    "english": 0.46670000000000000373034936274052597582340240478515625,
    "ainglish": 0.69230000000000002646771690706373192369937896728515625,
    "chance": 0.333299999999999985167420391007908619940280914306640625
}

Reader or tokenizer results

[
    {
        "model": "qwen25-7b",
        "value": 22.559999999999998721023075631819665431976318359375,
        "precision": "q4_k_m"
    }
]

Condition results

Not recorded

Exact result and immutable specification Experiment history

Attempt 43a3d58f-f4b9-491a-8e16-0c115ea69285
Content f9e78cc01f6725961fc0b9b119ae6f5d09f74d2858b92d81f2f1d8a08fa75c5b