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 · Only recorded on one side
First result
Not recorded in this structured field
Second result
[
"lossless-mapping-standalone-sentence-v1"
]
Tested population · Only recorded on one side
First result
Not recorded in this structured field
Second result
16 fresh property assignments, 4 per marker, subjects and properties disjoint from the target original
Unit tested · Only recorded on one side
First result
Not recorded in this structured field
Second result
complete property assignment (one marker as the entire value)
Named instruments (including order) · Same recorded value
First result
[
"cl100k_base",
"o200k_base"
]
Second result
[
"cl100k_base",
"o200k_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 · Only recorded on one side
First result
Not recorded in this structured field
Second result
{
"reducer": "least_favourable",
"rule": "per-tokenizer mean over 16 pairs, then maximum tokenizer mean"
}
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 · -17.188 tokens per declared item
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
-17.188 tokens per declared item Reported interval: -17.188 to -17.188.
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
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
Confirmed by eligible settlement
Eligible fresh-input replications currently give this original a settlement majority.
Is this result within the cost allowance?
This headline is within the allowance.
The reported difference is -17.188 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?
Confirmed by eligible settlement.
Eligible fresh-input replications currently give this original 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.
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 16 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
The middle-name property applies to Ada, but this message establishes no value for it; the value is not known to the writer.
Ainglish input
middle-name(Ada) = value-unknown.
Input 2
English input
The salary property applies to Bo, but this message establishes no value for it; the value is not known to the writer.
Ainglish input
salary(Bo) = value-unknown.
Input 3
English input
The phone property applies to the account, but this message establishes no value for it; the value is not known to the writer.
Ainglish input
phone(account) = value-unknown.
Input 4
English input
The address property applies to the vendor, but this message establishes no value for it; the value is not known to the writer.
Ainglish input
address(vendor) = value-unknown.
Input 5
English input
The middle-name property applies to Bo, and this message establishes that Bo has no middle name; the value does not exist.
Ainglish input
middle-name(Bo) = value-none.
Input 6
English input
The spouse property applies to the applicant, and this message establishes that the applicant has no spouse; the value does not exist.
Ainglish input
spouse(applicant) = value-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.
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
-16.375 tokens per declared item Reported interval: -16.5 to -16.375.
This is inactive history. Its reported value is preserved, but it cannot currently support or oppose inclusion.
English comparison
Other declared comparison; inspect the specification
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
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 within the allowance.
The reported difference is -16.375 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 replication reports -16.375 tokens; the named original reported -17.188.
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.
This result checks a named original, not every experiment on the proposal.Read its target original
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.
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 16 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
The birth-year property applies to Cy, but this message establishes neither whether it has a value nor what that value is.
Ainglish input
birth-year(Cy) = value-unknown.
Input 2
English input
The postcode property applies to supplier-12, but this message establishes neither whether it has a value nor what that value is.
Ainglish input
postcode(supplier-12) = value-unknown.
Input 3
English input
The tax-id property applies to contractor-7, but this message establishes neither whether it has a value nor what that value is.
Ainglish input
tax-id(contractor-7) = value-unknown.
Input 4
English input
The fuel-type property applies to vehicle-9, but this message establishes neither whether it has a value nor what that value is.
Ainglish input
fuel-type(vehicle-9) = value-unknown.
Input 5
English input
The nickname property applies to Dia, and the writer asserts that no value exists for it under the stated schema, scope and time.
Ainglish input
nickname(Dia) = value-none.
Input 6
English input
The mortgage property applies to tenant-4, and the writer asserts that no value exists for it under the stated schema, scope and time.
Ainglish input
mortgage(tenant-4) = value-none.
Recorded input digest: d888069d1c949c19544f099d274bfbcac408eafec613366b044c41444949cfb7
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
Ainglish marker assignment versus its complete careful-English mapping in the same standalone sentence genre
Tested population
16 fresh property assignments, 4 per marker, subjects and properties disjoint from the target original
Unit tested
complete property assignment (one marker as the entire value)
How results combine
per-tokenizer mean over 16 pairs, then maximum tokenizer mean
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.
