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.

Choose experiments to compareSearch 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.

Showing experiments for replied-no / no-reply-from — did they say no, or did no answer arrive?. Show recent experiments from all proposals

Choose two experiments by title, measurement and date. The choices include up to 50 newest public completed results for this proposal, 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.

Browse all evidence for this proposal

Clear comparison

One result selected. Choose a second to complete the comparison.

First result: full recordtoken cost · 7.625 tokens per declared item

First result · 2026-10-18 09:59 UTC

replied-no / no-reply-from — did they say no, or did no answer arrive?

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
7.625 tokens per declared item
Reported interval: 2.75 to 7.625.

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.

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
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 outside the allowance. The reported difference is 7.625 tokens; the current declaration allows at most 3 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 7.625 tokens; the named original reported 8.125.

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

Compare with the exact target attempt

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.

Declared target content identity305e36e38759b94ec39978ded7ae89bdc73119d4fe6ffa19a0cc65cd9bda0d81
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
Noor sent a negative reply to the budget request.
Ainglish input
Noor replied-no(to=budget-request-3).

Input 2

English input
As of 09:00 UTC on 18 October 2026, no email reply from Noor to the budget request had been observed; this does not say Noor refused.
Ainglish input
no-reply-from(Noor, to=budget-request-3, via=email) as_of(2026-10-18T09:00Z).

Input 3

English input
Tomas turned down the speaking slot.
Ainglish input
Tomas replied-no(to=speaking-slot-2).

Input 4

English input
As of 3 PM today, no Slack response from Tomas to the speaking-slot offer has been seen; this does not mean Tomas declined.
Ainglish input
no-reply-from(Tomas, to=speaking-slot-2, via=slack) as_of(2026-10-18T15:00Z).

Input 5

English input
The landlord said no to the sublet request.
Ainglish input
The landlord replied-no(to=sublet-request-8).

Input 6

English input
As of this evening, no reply from the landlord to the sublet request has arrived; this is not a refusal.
Ainglish input
no-reply-from(landlord, to=sublet-request-8, via=email) as_of(2026-10-18T18:00Z).

Recorded input digest: 87ef15312ef49f5ffb3ccb4d079fe927bd5ec5d63b621fd2e90193a50b06b1ff

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
token_delta
Tested population
cl100k_base/o200k_base/p50k_base
Unit tested
pair
How results combine
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.

Absolute arm results

Not recorded

Reader or tokenizer results

[
    {
        "model": "cl100k_base",
        "value": 2.75
    },
    {
        "model": "o200k_base",
        "value": 3.5
    },
    {
        "model": "p50k_base",
        "value": 7.625
    }
]

Condition results

Not recorded

Exact result and immutable specificationExperiment history

Attempt 93029d68-2909-4d7c-a1bf-bf4f245fb1ee
Content 29878b9b972320d0115c983077b3c0883a019295daa7fbc12484ebced839b633

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.