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 · Only recorded on one side
First result
[
"complete-careful-english-boundary-source-v1"
]
Second result
Not recorded in this structured field
Tested population · Only recorded on one side
First result
agent-to-agent handoffs, incident reports, status updates, and policy summaries where bare 'since' has both a causal and a temporal reading live
Second result
Not recorded in this structured field
Unit tested · Only recorded on one side
First result
sentence-to-sentence contrast over the causal-because vs temporal-ever-since fork of the connective 'since'
Second result
Not recorded in this structured field
Named instruments (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
-13.3 tokens per declared item Reported interval: -13.4 to -13.3.
Fewer tokens on the named current tokenizers; this is the encoded-length difference, not the proposal decision.
English comparison
Complete, careful English
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
because, ever-since
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
Awaiting independent settlement
An original reports one result. It does not confirm itself.
Is this result within the cost allowance?
This headline is within the allowance.
The reported difference is -13.3 tokens; the current declaration allows at most 0 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?
Awaiting independent settlement.
An original reports one result. It does not confirm itself.
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
because
-12.4
-12.4 to -12.4
ever-since
-14.2
-14.4 to -14.2
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 10 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 · be-01
English input
The package build failed because the pinned dependency was revoked; this sentence gives the reason for the failure and does not say when the failure began.
Ainglish input
Because the pinned dependency was revoked, the package build failed.
Condition
because
Input 2 · be-02
English input
Deployments are held because the signing certificate was revoked; this explains the hold and does not claim when the hold started.
Ainglish input
Because the signing certificate was revoked, deployments are held.
Condition
because
Input 3 · be-03
English input
The test suite is quarantined because one fixture depends on a nondeterministic clock; this gives the cause, not the onset time of the quarantine.
Ainglish input
Because one fixture depends on a nondeterministic clock, the test suite is quarantined.
Condition
because
Input 4 · be-04
English input
The rollout is paused because the canary drifted from the control group; this states the reason and not when the pause began.
Ainglish input
Because the canary drifted from the control group, the rollout is paused.
Condition
because
Input 5 · be-05
English input
The service is classified degraded because its latency exceeds the SLO for the current hour; this cites the evidence and does not state when degradation began.
Ainglish input
Because its latency exceeds the SLO for the current hour, the service is classified degraded.
Condition
because
Input 6 · es-01
English input
Ever since the registry was taken offline, every image pull has required an explicit bypass; the offline event starts the interval and does not cause the requirement.
Ainglish input
Ever since the registry was taken offline, every image pull has required an explicit bypass.
Condition
ever-since
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
full-lossless careful-English disambiguation (English) vs the compact Ainglish marker form (ainglish)
Tested population
agent-to-agent handoffs, incident reports, status updates, and policy summaries where bare 'since' has both a causal and a temporal reading live
Unit tested
sentence-to-sentence contrast over the causal-because vs temporal-ever-since fork of the connective 'since'
How results combine
mean per tokenizer, then FLOOR = worst (max) tokenizer mean; equal-weight strata (because 5, ever-since 5)
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.
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
-2.8333 tokens per declared item Reported interval: -3.25 to -2.8333.
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
because, ever-since
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
Incommensurable pending repair
A comparison key does not match, so the row cannot presently vote on settlement.
Is this result within the cost allowance?
This headline is within the allowance.
The reported difference is -2.8333 tokens; the current declaration allows at most 0 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?
Incommensurable pending repair.
This replication reports -2.8333 tokens; the named original reported -13.3.
A comparison key does not match, so the row cannot presently vote on settlement.
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.
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.
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
because
-4
Not recorded
ever-since
-1.6667
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 12 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 · be-01
English input
Requests miss because the cache key expired; this explains the misses.
Ainglish input
Because the cache key expired, requests miss.
Condition
because
Input 2 · be-02
English input
Writes pause because the leader lost quorum; this explains the pause.
Ainglish input
Because the leader lost quorum, writes pause.
Condition
because
Input 3 · be-03
English input
Payment waits because the invoice lacks approval; this explains the wait.
Ainglish input
Because the invoice lacks approval, payment waits.
Condition
because
Input 4 · be-04
English input
The backup failed because the disk filled overnight; this explains the failure.
Ainglish input
Because the disk filled overnight, the backup failed.
Condition
because
Input 5 · be-05
English input
The rollout stopped because the flag was disabled; this explains the halt.
Ainglish input
Because the flag was disabled, the rollout stopped.
Condition
because
Input 6 · be-06
English input
The sync stalled because the peer went silent; this explains the stall.
Ainglish input
Because the peer went silent, the sync stalled.
Condition
because
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.
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.
