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.

Find experiments by proposal

Search for ordinary words from a proposal, then choose a match. Searching alone does not change the results below.

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

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
64 prospective authored outcome-compact pairs, equal marker weights; fixed reference variants are not independent semantic frames
Second result
64 prospective authored outcome-compact pairs, equal marker weights; fixed reference variants are not independent semantic frames
Unit tested · Same recorded value
First result
one complete claim sentence with exactly shared resolved references and units
Second result
one complete claim sentence with exactly shared resolved references and units
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 complete-pair mean within each tokenizer, then maximum tokenizer mean (least-favourable) across the three; retain each marker separately"
}
Second result
{
    "reducer": "least_favourable",
    "rule": "equal complete-pair mean within each tokenizer, then maximum tokenizer mean (least-favourable) across the three; retain each marker 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": "mean-outcome",
        "weight": 1
    },
    {
        "id": "likeliest-outcome",
        "weight": 1
    }
]
Second result
[
    {
        "id": "mean-outcome",
        "weight": 1
    },
    {
        "id": "likeliest-outcome",
        "weight": 1
    }
]

First result · 2026-09-07 20:44 UTC

mean-outcome / likeliest-outcome — an expected result need not be a possible result

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
2.5 tokens per declared item
Reported interval: 1.5 to 2.5.

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

mean-outcome, likeliest-outcome

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, with disagreement visible

A settlement majority confirms this original, while eligible disagreement remains part of the record.

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 6 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, with disagreement visible.

A settlement majority confirms this original, while eligible disagreement remains part of the record.

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.
ConditionReported differenceReported interval
mean-outcome3 Not recorded
likeliest-outcome2 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 · outcome-0-mean-outcome

English input
Mean under forecast-70: 3/2.
Ainglish input
3/2 is mean-outcome(forecast-70).
Condition
mean-outcome

Input 2 · outcome-0-likeliest-outcome

English input
A most probable outcome under forecast-70: 0.
Ainglish input
0 is likeliest-outcome(forecast-70).
Condition
likeliest-outcome

Input 3 · outcome-1-mean-outcome

English input
Mean under forecast-71: 3.
Ainglish input
3 is mean-outcome(forecast-71).
Condition
mean-outcome

Input 4 · outcome-1-likeliest-outcome

English input
A most probable outcome under forecast-71: 0.
Ainglish input
0 is likeliest-outcome(forecast-71).
Condition
likeliest-outcome

Input 5 · outcome-2-mean-outcome

English input
Mean under forecast-72: 9/2.
Ainglish input
9/2 is mean-outcome(forecast-72).
Condition
mean-outcome

Input 6 · outcome-2-likeliest-outcome

English input
A most probable outcome under forecast-72: 0.
Ainglish input
0 is likeliest-outcome(forecast-72).
Condition
likeliest-outcome

Recorded input digest: cae190954c0f0e102697732f35fd7526fcb976b25fcaf5f2506c43c3c61e014e

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 surface versus frozen compact technical English
Tested population
64 prospective authored outcome-compact pairs, equal marker weights; fixed reference variants are not independent semantic frames
Unit tested
one complete claim sentence with exactly shared resolved references and units
How results combine
equal complete-pair mean within each tokenizer, then maximum tokenizer mean (least-favourable) across the three; retain each marker 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": 1.5
    },
    {
        "model": "o200k_base",
        "value": 1.5
    },
    {
        "model": "p50k_base",
        "value": 2.5
    }
]

Condition results

[
    {
        "id": "mean-outcome",
        "weight": 1,
        "share": 0.5,
        "value": 3,
        "value_lo": null,
        "value_hi": null,
        "arms": null,
        "resolution_bound": "not_applicable"
    },
    {
        "id": "likeliest-outcome",
        "weight": 1,
        "share": 0.5,
        "value": 2,
        "value_lo": null,
        "value_hi": null,
        "arms": null,
        "resolution_bound": "not_applicable"
    }
]

Exact result and immutable specificationExperiment history

Attempt db7a9e05-d5f1-44c3-8574-9c54ed193b48
Content 35874bf6da0cafac20b868fe87d1741a7827a236b01b2d33598790dd4702bb3b

Second result · 2026-09-08 20:24 UTC

mean-outcome / likeliest-outcome — an expected result need not be a possible result

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
2.5 tokens per declared item
Reported interval: 1.5 to 2.5.

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

mean-outcome, likeliest-outcome

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?
This headline is within the allowance. The reported difference is 2.5 tokens; the current declaration allows at most 6 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?
Agrees with the named original. This replication reports 2.5 tokens; the named original reported 2.5.

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

Compare with the exact target attempt

Every declared condition must agree. Overlapping overall intervals alone do not confirm this original.

Declared target content identity35874bf6da0cafac20b868fe87d1741a7827a236b01b2d33598790dd4702bb3b

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.
ConditionReported differenceReported interval
mean-outcome3 Not recorded
likeliest-outcome2 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

English input
Mean under forecast-300: 0.
Ainglish input
0 is mean-outcome(forecast-300).
Condition
mean-outcome

Input 2

English input
A most probable outcome under forecast-300: 0.
Ainglish input
0 is likeliest-outcome(forecast-300).
Condition
likeliest-outcome

Input 3

English input
Mean under forecast-301: 1.
Ainglish input
1 is mean-outcome(forecast-301).
Condition
mean-outcome

Input 4

English input
A most probable outcome under forecast-301: 1.
Ainglish input
1 is likeliest-outcome(forecast-301).
Condition
likeliest-outcome

Input 5

English input
Mean under forecast-302: 2.
Ainglish input
2 is mean-outcome(forecast-302).
Condition
mean-outcome

Input 6

English input
A most probable outcome under forecast-302: 2.
Ainglish input
2 is likeliest-outcome(forecast-302).
Condition
likeliest-outcome

Recorded input digest: 064ccdd7c21230a739237a2f8158b807f173a2e39dffe53e0ebd9556295b937d

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 surface versus frozen compact technical English
Tested population
64 prospective authored outcome-compact pairs, equal marker weights; fixed reference variants are not independent semantic frames
Unit tested
one complete claim sentence with exactly shared resolved references and units
How results combine
equal complete-pair mean within each tokenizer, then maximum tokenizer mean (least-favourable) across the three; retain each marker 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": 1.5
    },
    {
        "model": "o200k_base",
        "value": 1.5
    },
    {
        "model": "p50k_base",
        "value": 2.5
    }
]

Condition results

[
    {
        "id": "mean-outcome",
        "weight": 1,
        "share": 0.5,
        "value": 3,
        "value_lo": null,
        "value_hi": null,
        "arms": null,
        "resolution_bound": "not_applicable"
    },
    {
        "id": "likeliest-outcome",
        "weight": 1,
        "share": 0.5,
        "value": 2,
        "value_lo": null,
        "value_hi": null,
        "arms": null,
        "resolution_bound": "not_applicable"
    }
]

Exact result and immutable specificationExperiment history

Attempt 0b6ce8d0-4fd3-40f6-8e4d-fbb7ab744988
Content 1e8222d512a2c0fda9cf4f483ef5e7be3f55e6f450fa13845147672c6f566f58

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.