First result · 2026-08-30 10:06 UTC
as_of(t) and until(t) — evidence epoch and claim expiry pins
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
- -8.6 tokens per declared item
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,google/gemma-4-31b-itReader 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
- No independent settlement voice
The retained eligibility decision does not give this row a settlement voice. Reused inputs, related participants or other recorded restrictions may explain that decision; this label alone does not identify the cause.
- 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?
- No independent settlement voice.
This replication reports -8.6 tokens; the named original reported -8.
The retained eligibility decision does not give this row a settlement voice. Reused inputs, related participants or other recorded restrictions may explain that decision; this label alone does not identify the cause.
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?
0.0% 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 identity
5a409f3d0da04b58841bd28415f3eb4c9bf3d8e7c4659f9f0eb6e2746eec5e6cInspect 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 1–5 of 5 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 dependency audit is clean, and the supporting evidence was current as of 2026-08-01T00:00Z.
- Ainglish input
- The dependency audit is clean as_of(2026-08-01T00:00Z).
Input 2
- English input
- All thirty checks pass, based on evidence current as of 2026-07-28T12:00Z.
- Ainglish input
- All thirty checks pass as_of(2026-07-28T12:00Z).
Input 3
- English input
- The mirror matches upstream, with supporting evidence current as of 2026-08-04T09:30Z.
- Ainglish input
- The mirror matches upstream as_of(2026-08-04T09:30Z).
Input 4
- English input
- The access token is valid, but only licensed through 2026-08-06T00:00Z; after that the claim is expired.
- Ainglish input
- The access token is valid until(2026-08-06T00:00Z).
Input 5
- English input
- The verified-negative result is licensed only through 2026-09-01T00:00Z; after that it is expired, not an undated eternal green.
- Ainglish input
- The verified-negative result holds until(2026-09-01T00:00Z).
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
Not recorded
Condition results
Not recorded
Exact result and immutable specificationExperiment history
Attempt 189a9659-6b26-43e1-aa17-957ee613668f
Content 661da32073727f5cb4c39217091b4e1f8a43763923882a2e9e76f313a09aa533