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?	same-instance-as / value-equal-to — did ‘the same book’ mean one physical copy, or a different copy with the same declared value?2026-09-06 15:51 UTC	same-instance-as / value-equal-to — did ‘the same book’ mean one physical copy, or a different copy with the same declared value?2026-09-09 22:22 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?	3.3125 tokens per declared itemReported interval: 0.5625 to 3.3125Not yet counting in evidence decisions	3.375 tokens per declared itemReported interval: 0.8125 to 3.375Counts 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 complete pairs over eight declared identity systems, equal relation weights, two identifier variants

Second result

32 complete pairs over eight declared identity systems, equal relation weights, two identifier variants

Unit tested · Same recorded value

First result

complete statement

Second result

complete statement

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 pair mean then maximum tokenizer mean; retain each relation separately"
}

Second result

{
    "reducer": "least_favourable",
    "rule": "equal pair mean then maximum tokenizer mean; retain each relation 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": "identity",
        "weight": 1
    },
    {
        "id": "value",
        "weight": 1
    }
]

Second result

[
    {
        "id": "identity",
        "weight": 1
    },
    {
        "id": "value",
        "weight": 1
    }
]

First result: full recordtoken cost · 3.3125 tokens per declared item

First result · 2026-09-06 15:51 UTC

same-instance-as / value-equal-to — did ‘the same book’ mean one physical copy, or a different copy with the same declared 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

3.3125 tokens per declared item
Reported interval: 0.5625 to 3.3125.

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

identity, value

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 outside the allowance. The reported difference is 3.3125 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
`identity`	1.125	Not recorded
`value`	5.5	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 the library identity system, at the stated comparison time, copy-north-0 and copy-south-0 refer to one entity.
Ainglish input: In the library identity system, at the stated comparison time, copy-north-0 same-instance-as(copy-south-0).
Condition: identity

Input 2

English input: In the library identity system, at the stated comparison time, copy-north-0 and copy-south-0 have equal ISBN values.
Ainglish input: In the library identity system, at the stated comparison time, copy-north-0 value-equal-to(copy-south-0, by=ISBN).
Condition: value

Input 3

English input: In the library identity system, at the stated comparison time, copy-north-1 and copy-south-1 refer to one entity.
Ainglish input: In the library identity system, at the stated comparison time, copy-north-1 same-instance-as(copy-south-1).
Condition: identity

Input 4

English input: In the library identity system, at the stated comparison time, copy-north-1 and copy-south-1 have equal ISBN values.
Ainglish input: In the library identity system, at the stated comparison time, copy-north-1 value-equal-to(copy-south-1, by=ISBN).
Condition: value

Input 5

English input: In the filesystem identity system, at the stated comparison time, file-north-0 and file-south-0 refer to one entity.
Ainglish input: In the filesystem identity system, at the stated comparison time, file-north-0 same-instance-as(file-south-0).
Condition: identity

Input 6

English input: In the filesystem identity system, at the stated comparison time, file-north-0 and file-south-0 have equal checksum values.
Ainglish input: In the filesystem identity system, at the stated comparison time, file-north-0 value-equal-to(file-south-0, by=checksum).
Condition: value

Recorded input digest: 589e36bec71f153542fd2de0caa0a44a4fe4c1ce7c176a70e8475a14fe92a2f9

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 identity or named-value statement versus concise complete careful English
Tested population: 32 complete pairs over eight declared identity systems, equal relation weights, two identifier variants
Unit tested: complete statement
How results combine: equal pair mean then maximum tokenizer mean; retain each relation 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": 0.5625
    },
    {
        "model": "o200k_base",
        "value": 0.5625
    },
    {
        "model": "p50k_base",
        "value": 3.3125
    }
]

Condition results

[
    {
        "id": "identity",
        "weight": 1,
        "share": 0.5,
        "value": 1.125,
        "value_lo": null,
        "value_hi": null,
        "arms": null,
        "resolution_bound": "not_applicable"
    },
    {
        "id": "value",
        "weight": 1,
        "share": 0.5,
        "value": 5.5,
        "value_lo": null,
        "value_hi": null,
        "arms": null,
        "resolution_bound": "not_applicable"
    }
]

Exact result and immutable specification Experiment history

Attempt debcb8ea-72cf-4064-9fe8-61ff5b70111f
Content 0079e4b471d850d87305e84b307581f1ad25691358009c8fcaea9c87344b9746

Second result: full recordtoken cost · 3.375 tokens per declared item

Second result · 2026-09-09 22:22 UTC

same-instance-as / value-equal-to — did ‘the same book’ mean one physical copy, or a different copy with the same declared 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

3.375 tokens per declared item
Reported interval: 0.8125 to 3.375.

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

identity, value

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 outside the allowance. The reported difference is 3.375 tokens; the current declaration allows at most 2 tokens.

Has the original estimate been independently reproduced?

Disagrees with the named original. This replication reports 3.375 tokens; the named original reported 3.3125.

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

0079e4b471d850d87305e84b307581f1ad25691358009c8fcaea9c87344b9746

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
`identity`	1.375	Not recorded
`value`	5.375	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 the archive identity system, at the stated comparison time, record-east-0 and record-west-0 refer to one entity.
Ainglish input: In the archive identity system, at the stated comparison time, record-east-0 same-instance-as(record-west-0).
Condition: identity

Input 2

English input: In the archive identity system, at the stated comparison time, record-east-0 and record-west-0 have equal revision values.
Ainglish input: In the archive identity system, at the stated comparison time, record-east-0 value-equal-to(record-west-0, by=revision).
Condition: value

Input 3

English input: In the archive identity system, at the stated comparison time, record-east-1 and record-west-1 refer to one entity.
Ainglish input: In the archive identity system, at the stated comparison time, record-east-1 same-instance-as(record-west-1).
Condition: identity

Input 4

English input: In the archive identity system, at the stated comparison time, record-east-1 and record-west-1 have equal revision values.
Ainglish input: In the archive identity system, at the stated comparison time, record-east-1 value-equal-to(record-west-1, by=revision).
Condition: value

Input 5

English input: In the mesh identity system, at the stated comparison time, node-east-0 and node-west-0 refer to one entity.
Ainglish input: In the mesh identity system, at the stated comparison time, node-east-0 same-instance-as(node-west-0).
Condition: identity

Input 6

English input: In the mesh identity system, at the stated comparison time, node-east-0 and node-west-0 have equal address values.
Ainglish input: In the mesh identity system, at the stated comparison time, node-east-0 value-equal-to(node-west-0, by=address).
Condition: value

Recorded input digest: 667680cb950df185176ed277a4cc49815c83b6fec28bbe4b3689fba09675de56

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 identity or named-value statement versus concise complete careful English
Tested population: 32 complete pairs over eight declared identity systems, equal relation weights, two identifier variants
Unit tested: complete statement
How results combine: equal pair mean then maximum tokenizer mean; retain each relation 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": 0.8125
    },
    {
        "model": "o200k_base",
        "value": 0.8125
    },
    {
        "model": "p50k_base",
        "value": 3.375
    }
]

Condition results

[
    {
        "id": "identity",
        "weight": 1,
        "share": 0.5,
        "value": 1.375,
        "value_lo": null,
        "value_hi": null,
        "arms": null,
        "resolution_bound": "not_applicable"
    },
    {
        "id": "value",
        "weight": 1,
        "share": 0.5,
        "value": 5.375,
        "value_lo": null,
        "value_hi": null,
        "arms": null,
        "resolution_bound": "not_applicable"
    }
]

Exact result and immutable specification Experiment history

Attempt 98dbd531-50a0-4ba2-81da-de80fe88958f
Content 48b0860eadd6bef423b31a809181ee27ce76790741e1655ecec945e54fb454e4

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.