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 complete pairs: 16 impact-recovered and 16 cause-resolved, spread over six low-stakes domains (retail software, warehouse mechanical, plant mechanical, warehouse operations, freight logistics, document workflow, public event); authored, not sampled from natural prose
Second result
32 fresh authored complete pairs: 16 impact-recovered and 16 cause-resolved, spread over six low-stakes domains (retail software, warehouse mechanical, plant mechanical, warehouse operations, freight logistics, document workflow, public event); authored, not sampled from natural prose
Unit tested · Same recorded value
First result
one complete incident-handoff claim naming its incident and either its impact check with observation time or its causal mechanism with post-change test
Second result
one complete incident-handoff claim naming its incident and either its impact check with observation time or its causal mechanism with post-change test
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; the two marker strata are reported separately and both are load-bearing"
}
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; the two marker strata are reported separately and both are load-bearing"
}
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
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
-2.5 tokens per declared item Reported interval: -5.40625 to -2.5.
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, p50k_base
Reader population not separately declared.
Conditions covered
Separate outcomes retained for all 2 declared conditions
impact-recovered, cause-resolved
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 -2.5 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
impact-recovered
-5.125
Not recorded
cause-resolved
0.125
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
In checkout-outage, the declared impact was absent under the resolved order-flow-probe check at 14:20.
Recorded input digest: 1cdccf36e709f40f931a21dde9b5249d83ad4eb6d935f168733a465c92e9f039
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 impact-recovered(<check>@<t>) / cause-resolved(<cause>, checked-by=<test>) marker form minus the shortest adequate careful-English claim carrying the SAME incident, check/time (or cause, post-change test); the careful rendering is template-regular and is published verbatim in the test set
Tested population
32 fresh authored complete pairs: 16 impact-recovered and 16 cause-resolved, spread over six low-stakes domains (retail software, warehouse mechanical, plant mechanical, warehouse operations, freight logistics, document workflow, public event); authored, not sampled from natural prose
Unit tested
one complete incident-handoff claim naming its incident and either its impact check with observation time or its causal mechanism with post-change test
How results combine
equal cell means per tokenizer then maximum tokenizer mean (least-favourable) across cl100k_base, o200k_base and p50k_base; the two marker strata are reported separately and both are load-bearing
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
-1.78125 tokens per declared item Reported interval: -5.21875 to -1.78125.
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, p50k_base
Reader population not separately declared.
Conditions covered
Separate outcomes retained for all 2 declared conditions
impact-recovered, cause-resolved
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 -1.78125 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?
Disagrees with the named original.
This replication reports -1.78125 tokens; the named original reported -2.5.
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.
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 32 English inputs reuse text from either side of the original.
0 of 32 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
impact-recovered
-5
Not recorded
cause-resolved
1.4375
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 · ex-impact-20260919-00-impact-recovered
English input
In shopping-total-jump, the declared impact was absent under the resolved price-total-probe check at 17:32.
Recorded input digest: 1b98794adbbff77c16176adce7aae515ba185a30c913cdab59037c58539a86d6
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 impact-recovered(<check>@<t>) / cause-resolved(<cause>, checked-by=<test>) marker form minus the shortest adequate careful-English claim carrying the SAME incident, check/time (or cause, post-change test); the careful rendering is template-regular and is published verbatim in the test set
Tested population
32 fresh authored complete pairs: 16 impact-recovered and 16 cause-resolved, spread over six low-stakes domains (retail software, warehouse mechanical, plant mechanical, warehouse operations, freight logistics, document workflow, public event); authored, not sampled from natural prose
Unit tested
one complete incident-handoff claim naming its incident and either its impact check with observation time or its causal mechanism with post-change test
How results combine
equal cell means per tokenizer then maximum tokenizer mean (least-favourable) across cl100k_base, o200k_base and p50k_base; the two marker strata are reported separately and both are load-bearing
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.
