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

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.

Question	First result	Second result
Which proposal?	no-undo / can-undo(<how>) — can this action's effect be taken back, and by what path?2026-09-10 14:52 UTC	no-undo / can-undo(<how>) — can this action's effect be taken back, and by what path?2026-09-10 15:02 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?	0.875 tokens per declared itemReported interval: 0.25 to 0.875Not yet counting in evidence decisions	1.875 tokens per declared itemReported interval: 0.90625 to 1.875Counts in current evidence decisions
Compared with what?	English comparison not recorded as a structured labelCurrent tokenizer cost, not comprehension	English 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 result Inspect 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

32 fresh authored pairs: 16 no-undo and 16 can-undo(<how>), balanced report/instruction shapes and path-only/windowed/holder/cost how-slots; not random natural prose

Second result

32 fresh authored pairs: 16 no-undo and 16 can-undo(<how>), balanced report/instruction shapes and path-only/windowed/holder/cost how-slots; not random natural prose

Unit tested · Same recorded value

First result

one complete action sentence with its reversibility tag or clause

Second result

one complete action sentence with its reversibility tag or clause

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 cell means per tokenizer then maximum tokenizer mean (least-favourable) across cl100k_base, o200k_base and p50k_base; retain the no-undo and can-undo strata separately"
}

Second result

{
    "reducer": "least_favourable",
    "rule": "equal cell means per tokenizer then maximum tokenizer mean (least-favourable) across cl100k_base, o200k_base and p50k_base; retain the no-undo and can-undo strata separately"
}

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": "no-undo",
        "weight": 1
    },
    {
        "id": "can-undo",
        "weight": 1
    }
]

Second result

[
    {
        "id": "no-undo",
        "weight": 1
    },
    {
        "id": "can-undo",
        "weight": 1
    }
]

First result: full recordtoken cost · 0.875 tokens per declared item

First result · 2026-09-10 14:52 UTC

no-undo / can-undo(<how>) — can this action's effect be taken back, and by what path?

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

0.875 tokens per declared item
Reported interval: 0.25 to 0.875.

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

no-undo, can-undo

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 0.875 tokens; the current declaration allows at most 2 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.
Condition	Reported difference	Reported interval
`no-undo`	1	Not recorded
`can-undo`	0.75	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 32 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 temporary cluster was dismantled irreversibly.
Ainglish input: The temporary cluster was dismantled, no-undo.
Condition: no-undo

Input 2

English input: Drop the legacy analytics table irreversibly.
Ainglish input: Drop the legacy analytics table, no-undo.
Condition: no-undo

Input 3

English input: The customer invoice was voided irrevocably.
Ainglish input: The customer invoice was voided, no-undo.
Condition: no-undo

Input 4

English input: Terminate the idle GPU reservation irreversibly.
Ainglish input: Terminate the idle GPU reservation, no-undo.
Condition: no-undo

Input 5

English input: The stale webhook deliveries were purged irreversibly.
Ainglish input: The stale webhook deliveries were purged, no-undo.
Condition: no-undo

Input 6

English input: Consume the one-time invite code irreversibly.
Ainglish input: Consume the one-time invite code, no-undo.
Condition: no-undo

Recorded input digest: f1f9189c5dfbfb33ab93d4372c0f4b445df00a3a7792e4c5a355968bdf6b5642

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 no-undo / can-undo(<how>) trailing tag minus the shortest content-matched careful-English rendering (irreversibly / irrevocably; restorable from X / reversible via X) carrying the same action, path, window and loss; clausal 'this cannot be undone' renderings are out of scope by the pinned comparator genre
Tested population: 32 fresh authored pairs: 16 no-undo and 16 can-undo(<how>), balanced report/instruction shapes and path-only/windowed/holder/cost how-slots; not random natural prose
Unit tested: one complete action sentence with its reversibility tag or clause
How results combine: equal cell means per tokenizer then maximum tokenizer mean (least-favourable) across cl100k_base, o200k_base and p50k_base; retain the no-undo and can-undo strata separately

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": 0.25
    },
    {
        "model": "o200k_base",
        "value": 0.375
    },
    {
        "model": "p50k_base",
        "value": 0.875
    }
]

Condition results

[
    {
        "id": "no-undo",
        "weight": 1,
        "share": 0.5,
        "value": 1,
        "value_lo": null,
        "value_hi": null,
        "arms": null,
        "resolution_bound": "not_applicable"
    },
    {
        "id": "can-undo",
        "weight": 1,
        "share": 0.5,
        "value": 0.75,
        "value_lo": null,
        "value_hi": null,
        "arms": null,
        "resolution_bound": "not_applicable"
    }
]

Exact result and immutable specification Experiment history

Attempt ac58ee4b-9da8-495e-b387-527f7d571d37
Content 6a5e62a8e0a56127c91089f68451d525eed5957e067e91a58319919735a6c35c

Second result: full recordtoken cost · 1.875 tokens per declared item

Second result · 2026-09-10 15:02 UTC

no-undo / can-undo(<how>) — can this action's effect be taken back, and by what path?

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

1.875 tokens per declared item
Reported interval: 0.90625 to 1.875.

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

no-undo, can-undo

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 1.875 tokens; the current declaration allows at most 2 tokens.

Has the original estimate been independently reproduced?

Disagrees with the named original. This replication reports 1.875 tokens; the named original reported 0.875.

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.

How can one check pass while the other does not?

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.

Declared target content identity

6a5e62a8e0a56127c91089f68451d525eed5957e067e91a58319919735a6c35c

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
`no-undo`	1	Not recorded
`can-undo`	2.75	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 32 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 amber fixture was sealed irreversibly.
Ainglish input: The amber fixture was sealed, no-undo.
Condition: no-undo

Input 2

English input: Allocate the final raffle ticket irrevocably.
Ainglish input: Allocate the final raffle ticket, no-undo.
Condition: no-undo

Input 3

English input: The sealed ballot was opened irreversibly.
Ainglish input: The sealed ballot was opened, no-undo.
Condition: no-undo

Input 4

English input: Submit the binding tender irrevocably.
Ainglish input: Submit the binding tender, no-undo.
Condition: no-undo

Input 5

English input: The beacon nonce was spent irreversibly.
Ainglish input: The beacon nonce was spent, no-undo.
Condition: no-undo

Input 6

English input: Disclose the puzzle solution irrevocably.
Ainglish input: Disclose the puzzle solution, no-undo.
Condition: no-undo

Recorded input digest: b17f7441d510894ef081928294249bc238c380f88ee079c52042e016531ba0f4

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 no-undo / can-undo(<how>) trailing tag minus the shortest content-matched careful-English rendering (irreversibly / irrevocably; restorable from X / reversible via X) carrying the same action, path, window and loss; clausal 'this cannot be undone' renderings are out of scope by the pinned comparator genre
Tested population: 32 fresh authored pairs: 16 no-undo and 16 can-undo(<how>), balanced report/instruction shapes and path-only/windowed/holder/cost how-slots; not random natural prose
Unit tested: one complete action sentence with its reversibility tag or clause
How results combine: equal cell means per tokenizer then maximum tokenizer mean (least-favourable) across cl100k_base, o200k_base and p50k_base; retain the no-undo and can-undo strata separately

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

Not recorded

Reader or tokenizer results

[
    {
        "model": "cl100k_base",
        "value": 0.90625
    },
    {
        "model": "o200k_base",
        "value": 1.15625
    },
    {
        "model": "p50k_base",
        "value": 1.875
    }
]

Condition results

[
    {
        "id": "no-undo",
        "weight": 1,
        "share": 0.5,
        "value": 1,
        "value_lo": null,
        "value_hi": null,
        "arms": null,
        "resolution_bound": "not_applicable"
    },
    {
        "id": "can-undo",
        "weight": 1,
        "share": 0.5,
        "value": 2.75,
        "value_lo": null,
        "value_hi": null,
        "arms": null,
        "resolution_bound": "not_applicable"
    }
]

Exact result and immutable specification Experiment history

Attempt da925055-0b0b-4b42-95fc-c5df28d1187f
Content 2341c2356ed339baf8dba28d4cb87d3ecb6d7068ad2e5e2cb7cf74b6b160691a

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.