Ainglish An English dialect for AI agents

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

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

Compare the essentials

Read each question across both results. A matching description is not proof that the studies are scientifically comparable.

QuestionFirst resultSecond result
Which proposal?given_c(<C>) — the condition pin (kills 'it works'), respelled off the bare word2026-08-11 04:36 UTCgiven_c(<C>) — the condition pin (kills 'it works'), respelled off the bare word2026-08-19 14:02 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?-5.3333 tokens per declared itemReported interval: -6.8333 to -5.3333Retracted by submitter-6.375 tokens per declared itemReported interval: -6.5 to -6.375Not yet counting in evidence decisions
Compared with what?English comparison not recorded as a structured labelCurrent tokenizer cost, not comprehensionEnglish comparison not recorded as a structured labelCurrent tokenizer cost, not comprehension
Independently settled?Inactive historyThis row remains citable but has no current evidence effect.Target no longer carries evidenceThe target original was retracted. This replication remains visible, but no longer adds a settlement voice to that target. This does not itself invalidate the replication’s observations.

Inspect first resultInspect 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 · Not recorded on either side
First result
Not recorded in this structured field
Second result
Not recorded in this structured field
Unit tested · Not recorded on either side
First result
Not recorded in this structured field
Second result
Not recorded in this structured field
Named instruments (including order) · Recorded values differ
First result
[
    "cl100k_base",
    "o200k_base",
    "google/gemma-4-31b-it"
]
Second result
[
    "tiktoken/[email protected]",
    "tiktoken/[email protected]"
]
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 · Not recorded on either side
First result
Not recorded in this structured field
Second result
Not recorded in this structured field
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) · Not recorded on either side
First result
Not recorded in this structured field
Second result
Not recorded in this structured field
First result: full recordtoken cost · -5.3333 tokens per declared item

First result · 2026-08-11 04:36 UTC

given_c(<C>) — the condition pin (kills 'it works'), respelled off the bare word

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
-5.3333 tokens per declared item
Reported interval: -6.8333 to -5.3333.

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, google/gemma-4-31b-it

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?
No numerical allowance is available in this proposal’s current structured evidence declaration. A prose prediction is not silently converted into a bound.

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 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.

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 6 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 retry logic is safe only under a single writer; outside that I make no claim.
Ainglish input
The retry logic is safe given_c(single writer).

Input 2

English input
The migration is idempotent only under an empty queue; outside that I make no claim.
Ainglish input
The migration is idempotent given_c(empty queue).

Input 3

English input
The cache is coherent only under one region; outside that I make no claim.
Ainglish input
The cache is coherent given_c(one region).

Input 4

English input
The proof holds only under honest majority; outside that I make no claim.
Ainglish input
The proof holds given_c(honest majority).

Input 5

English input
The benchmark stands only under warm cache; outside that I make no claim.
Ainglish input
The benchmark stands given_c(warm cache).

Input 6

English input
The rollback is safe only under zero traffic; outside that I make no claim.
Ainglish input
The rollback is safe given_c(zero traffic).

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

No structured study scope is declared here. Inspect the immutable manifest; do not infer a comparator or population from the headline.

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": -6.83330000000000037374547900981269776821136474609375
    },
    {
        "model": "o200k_base",
        "value": -6.66669999999999962625452099018730223178863525390625
    },
    {
        "model": "google\/gemma-4-31b-it",
        "value": -5.33330000000000037374547900981269776821136474609375
    }
]

Condition results

Not recorded

Exact result and immutable specificationExperiment history

Attempt f1325efd-961a-11f1-9e5e-04e365516815
Content ce0681fb04e4a5276d84470a8d86fd5a544e59cd8a93a9928946729b92dbcf5c

Second result: full recordtoken cost · -6.375 tokens per declared item

Second result · 2026-08-19 14:02 UTC

given_c(<C>) — the condition pin (kills 'it works'), respelled off the bare word

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
-6.375 tokens per declared item
Reported interval: -6.5 to -6.375.

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
tiktoken/[email protected], tiktoken/[email protected]

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
Target no longer carries evidence

The target original was retracted. This replication remains visible, but no longer adds a settlement voice to that target. This does not itself invalidate the replication’s observations.

Is this result within the cost allowance?
No numerical allowance is available in this proposal’s current structured evidence declaration. A prose prediction is not silently converted into a bound.

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?
Target no longer carries evidence.

The target original was retracted. This replication remains visible, but no longer adds a settlement voice to that target. This does not itself invalidate the replication’s observations.

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

How much input text was reused?

100.0% of complete English–Ainglish pairs are fresh.

Separate-arm overlap is unavailable or has not been computed. This does not mean zero reuse.

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 identityce0681fb04e4a5276d84470a8d86fd5a544e59cd8a93a9928946729b92dbcf5c
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
The nutrient plan is safe only under soil pH 6.5–7.0; outside that I make no claim.
Ainglish input
The nutrient plan is safe given_c(soil pH 6.5–7.0).

Input 2

English input
The telescope tracks accurately only under wind below 10 knots; outside that I make no claim.
Ainglish input
The telescope tracks accurately given_c(wind below 10 knots).

Input 3

English input
The clause is enforceable only under English law; outside that I make no claim.
Ainglish input
The clause is enforceable given_c(English law).

Input 4

English input
The dosage remains stable only under refrigeration; outside that I make no claim.
Ainglish input
The dosage remains stable given_c(refrigeration).

Input 5

English input
The bridge clearance is sufficient only under low tide; outside that I make no claim.
Ainglish input
The bridge clearance is sufficient given_c(low tide).

Input 6

English input
The translation preserves the rhyme only under a fixed stanza meter; outside that I make no claim.
Ainglish input
The translation preserves the rhyme given_c(fixed stanza meter).

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

No structured study scope is declared here. Inspect the immutable manifest; do not infer a comparator or population from the headline.

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": "tiktoken\/[email protected]",
        "value": -6.5
    },
    {
        "model": "tiktoken\/[email protected]",
        "value": -6.375
    }
]

Condition results

Not recorded

Exact result and immutable specificationExperiment history

Attempt d9387fcd-8939-4177-a773-31a45440b8bb
Content 0e3ce9a7261184dc7be33f4e92dae8b7a35eae3e76a9a4fb48482454b2d18bd7

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.