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
64 prospectively authored scheduling instructions: 32 per form, four per form in each of eight domains (audits, reports, backups, reviews, polls, maintenance, meetings, jobs). Fixed imperative renderer and reference schedule conventions; template-expanded comparison, not a random natural-use corpus.
Second result
64 prospectively authored scheduling instructions: 32 per form, four per form in each of eight domains (audits, reports, backups, reviews, polls, maintenance, meetings, jobs). Fixed imperative renderer and reference schedule conventions; template-expanded comparison, not a random natural-use corpus.
Unit tested · Same recorded value
First result
One complete scheduling instruction with the same action and explicit schedule-week definition or recurrence anchor in both arms.
Second result
One complete scheduling instruction with the same action and explicit schedule-week definition or recurrence anchor in both arms.
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 mean in each equally weighted form stratum, then maximum tokenizer mean. Report every form/tokenizer mean separately; pooled value alone does not establish both forms are economical."
}
Second result
{
"reducer": "least_favourable",
"rule": "Equal item mean in each equally weighted form stratum, then maximum tokenizer mean. Report every form/tokenizer mean separately; pooled value alone does not establish both forms are economical."
}
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
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
1.5 tokens per declared item Reported interval: 0.5 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, p50k_base
Reader population not separately declared.
Conditions covered
Separate outcomes retained for all 2 declared conditions
twice-weekly, every-two-weeks
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?
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?
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.
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
twice-weekly
0
Not recorded
every-two-weeks
3
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 64 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 · audits-1-twice-weekly
English input
Schedule the permission inventory twice per week. Each week runs from Monday 00:00Z to the next Monday 00:00Z.
Ainglish input
Schedule the permission inventory twice-weekly. Each week runs from Monday 00:00Z to the next Monday 00:00Z.
Condition
twice-weekly
Input 2 · audits-1-every-two-weeks
English input
Schedule the permission inventory every two weeks. The recurrence anchor is 2026-10-05T09:00Z.
Ainglish input
Schedule the permission inventory every-two-weeks. The recurrence anchor is 2026-10-05T09:00Z.
Condition
every-two-weeks
Input 3 · audits-2-twice-weekly
English input
Schedule the dependency ledger twice per week. Each week runs from Monday 00:00Z to the next Monday 00:00Z.
Ainglish input
Schedule the dependency ledger twice-weekly. Each week runs from Monday 00:00Z to the next Monday 00:00Z.
Condition
twice-weekly
Input 4 · audits-2-every-two-weeks
English input
Schedule the dependency ledger every two weeks. The recurrence anchor is 2026-10-12T11:00Z.
Ainglish input
Schedule the dependency ledger every-two-weeks. The recurrence anchor is 2026-10-12T11:00Z.
Condition
every-two-weeks
Input 5 · audits-3-twice-weekly
English input
Schedule the change archive twice per week. Each week runs from Monday 00:00Z to the next Monday 00:00Z.
Ainglish input
Schedule the change archive twice-weekly. Each week runs from Monday 00:00Z to the next Monday 00:00Z.
Condition
twice-weekly
Input 6 · audits-3-every-two-weeks
English input
Schedule the change archive every two weeks. The recurrence anchor is 2026-10-19T13:00Z.
Ainglish input
Schedule the change archive every-two-weeks. The recurrence anchor is 2026-10-19T13:00Z.
Condition
every-two-weeks
Recorded input digest: 7fc014b189147a34185964b344bad5c78ec05bc0878f8ca5cb7a776c63e7c5cd
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
Registered twice-weekly/every-two-weeks minus concise complete careful English twice per week/every two weeks. No bare biweekly arm and no padded explanatory comparator.
Tested population
64 prospectively authored scheduling instructions: 32 per form, four per form in each of eight domains (audits, reports, backups, reviews, polls, maintenance, meetings, jobs). Fixed imperative renderer and reference schedule conventions; template-expanded comparison, not a random natural-use corpus.
Unit tested
One complete scheduling instruction with the same action and explicit schedule-week definition or recurrence anchor in both arms.
How results combine
Equal item mean in each equally weighted form stratum, then maximum tokenizer mean. Report every form/tokenizer mean separately; pooled value alone does not establish both forms are economical.
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.
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
1.5 tokens per declared item Reported interval: 0.5 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, p50k_base
Reader population not separately declared.
Conditions covered
Separate outcomes retained for all 2 declared conditions
twice-weekly, every-two-weeks
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
Agrees with the named original
This eligible row adds one agreement to the named original’s settlement tally.
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?
Agrees with the named original.
This replication reports 1.5 tokens; the named original reported 1.5.
This eligible row adds one agreement to the named original’s settlement tally.
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 64 English inputs reuse text from either side of the original.
0 of 64 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
twice-weekly
0
Not recorded
every-two-weeks
3
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 64 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 · sat-20261007-audits-1-twice-weekly
English input
Schedule the signing key audit twice per week. Each week runs from Monday 00:00Z to the next Monday 00:00Z.
Ainglish input
Schedule the signing key audit twice-weekly. Each week runs from Monday 00:00Z to the next Monday 00:00Z.
Condition
twice-weekly
Input 2 · sat-20261007-audits-1-every-two-weeks
English input
Schedule the signing key audit every two weeks. The recurrence anchor is 2026-11-02T09:00Z.
Ainglish input
Schedule the signing key audit every-two-weeks. The recurrence anchor is 2026-11-02T09:00Z.
Condition
every-two-weeks
Input 3 · sat-20261007-audits-2-twice-weekly
English input
Schedule the service account audit twice per week. Each week runs from Monday 00:00Z to the next Monday 00:00Z.
Ainglish input
Schedule the service account audit twice-weekly. Each week runs from Monday 00:00Z to the next Monday 00:00Z.
Condition
twice-weekly
Input 4 · sat-20261007-audits-2-every-two-weeks
English input
Schedule the service account audit every two weeks. The recurrence anchor is 2026-11-09T11:00Z.
Ainglish input
Schedule the service account audit every-two-weeks. The recurrence anchor is 2026-11-09T11:00Z.
Condition
every-two-weeks
Input 5 · sat-20261007-audits-3-twice-weekly
English input
Schedule the network route audit twice per week. Each week runs from Monday 00:00Z to the next Monday 00:00Z.
Ainglish input
Schedule the network route audit twice-weekly. Each week runs from Monday 00:00Z to the next Monday 00:00Z.
Condition
twice-weekly
Input 6 · sat-20261007-audits-3-every-two-weeks
English input
Schedule the network route audit every two weeks. The recurrence anchor is 2026-11-16T13:00Z.
Ainglish input
Schedule the network route audit every-two-weeks. The recurrence anchor is 2026-11-16T13:00Z.
Condition
every-two-weeks
Recorded input digest: 49ca68180adc3332d256dcb08a441f0ef195efda063e6600f0f520b604093674
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
Registered twice-weekly/every-two-weeks minus concise complete careful English twice per week/every two weeks. No bare biweekly arm and no padded explanatory comparator.
Tested population
64 prospectively authored scheduling instructions: 32 per form, four per form in each of eight domains (audits, reports, backups, reviews, polls, maintenance, meetings, jobs). Fixed imperative renderer and reference schedule conventions; template-expanded comparison, not a random natural-use corpus.
Unit tested
One complete scheduling instruction with the same action and explicit schedule-week definition or recurrence anchor in both arms.
How results combine
Equal item mean in each equally weighted form stratum, then maximum tokenizer mean. Report every form/tokenizer mean separately; pooled value alone does not establish both forms are economical.
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.
