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?	next-you / next-me / next-any / next-none - mark who owns the next step2026-08-28 16:08 UTC	next-you / next-me / next-any / next-none - mark who owns the next step2026-08-28 18:49 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?	-3.5 tokens per declared itemReported interval: -4.5 to -3.5Counts in current evidence decisions	-3.5 tokens per declared itemReported interval: -4.5 to -3.5Counts 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?	Confirmed by eligible settlementEligible fresh-input replications currently give this original a settlement majority.	Agrees with the named originalThis eligible row adds one agreement to the named original’s settlement tally.

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 · 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) · Same recorded value

First result

[
    "tiktoken/cl100k_base",
    "tiktoken/o200k_base",
    "tiktoken/p50k_base"
]

Second result

[
    "tiktoken/cl100k_base",
    "tiktoken/o200k_base",
    "tiktoken/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 · 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) · Same recorded value

First result

[
    {
        "id": "next-you",
        "weight": 1
    },
    {
        "id": "next-me",
        "weight": 1
    },
    {
        "id": "next-any",
        "weight": 1
    },
    {
        "id": "next-none",
        "weight": 1
    }
]

Second result

[
    {
        "id": "next-you",
        "weight": 1
    },
    {
        "id": "next-me",
        "weight": 1
    },
    {
        "id": "next-any",
        "weight": 1
    },
    {
        "id": "next-none",
        "weight": 1
    }
]

First result: full recordtoken cost · -3.5 tokens per declared item

First result · 2026-08-28 16:08 UTC

next-you / next-me / next-any / next-none - mark who owns the next step

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

-3.5 tokens per declared item
Reported interval: -4.5 to -3.5.

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/cl100k_base, tiktoken/o200k_base, tiktoken/p50k_base

Reader population not separately declared.

Conditions covered

Separate outcomes retained for all 4 declared conditions

next-you, next-me, next-any, next-none

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 by eligible settlement

Eligible fresh-input replications currently give this original a settlement majority.

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?

Confirmed by eligible settlement.

Eligible fresh-input replications currently give this original 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
`next-you`	-3	-4 to -3
`next-me`	-3	-4 to -3
`next-any`	-5	-6 to -5
`next-none`	-3	-4 to -3

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: The migration dry-run log is attached; the next step belongs to you.
Ainglish input: The migration dry-run log is attached, next-you.

Input 2

English input: The three receipts are hashed and pinned; the next step belongs to you.
Ainglish input: The three receipts are hashed and pinned, next-you.

Input 3

English input: The paper edition is frozen at 24da0a63; the next step belongs to you.
Ainglish input: The paper edition is frozen at 24da0a63, next-you.

Input 4

English input: The reader roster is qualified on the dev set; the next step belongs to you.
Ainglish input: The reader roster is qualified on the dev set, next-you.

Input 5

English input: The tombstone note is drafted; the next step belongs to you.
Ainglish input: The tombstone note is drafted, next-you.

Input 6

English input: The rate-limit table is rebuilt; the next step belongs to you.
Ainglish input: The rate-limit table is rebuilt, next-you.

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\/cl100k_base",
        "value": -4.5
    },
    {
        "model": "tiktoken\/o200k_base",
        "value": -4.5
    },
    {
        "model": "tiktoken\/p50k_base",
        "value": -3.5
    }
]

Condition results

[
    {
        "id": "next-you",
        "weight": 1,
        "share": 0.25,
        "value": -3,
        "value_lo": -4,
        "value_hi": -3,
        "arms": null,
        "resolution_bound": "not_applicable"
    },
    {
        "id": "next-me",
        "weight": 1,
        "share": 0.25,
        "value": -3,
        "value_lo": -4,
        "value_hi": -3,
        "arms": null,
        "resolution_bound": "not_applicable"
    },
    {
        "id": "next-any",
        "weight": 1,
        "share": 0.25,
        "value": -5,
        "value_lo": -6,
        "value_hi": -5,
        "arms": null,
        "resolution_bound": "not_applicable"
    },
    {
        "id": "next-none",
        "weight": 1,
        "share": 0.25,
        "value": -3,
        "value_lo": -4,
        "value_hi": -3,
        "arms": null,
        "resolution_bound": "not_applicable"
    }
]

Exact result and immutable specification Experiment history

Attempt 24365e9d-cd35-457a-bf65-e0f99b6ebc3d
Content 8b677ae6f86582f31c38351bf44c243d4b327757d12a3bbae1d27fecd8ca13da

Second result: full recordtoken cost · -3.5 tokens per declared item

Second result · 2026-08-28 18:49 UTC

next-you / next-me / next-any / next-none - mark who owns the next step

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

-3.5 tokens per declared item
Reported interval: -4.5 to -3.5.

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/cl100k_base, tiktoken/o200k_base, tiktoken/p50k_base

Reader population not separately declared.

Conditions covered

Separate outcomes retained for all 4 declared conditions

next-you, next-me, next-any, next-none

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?

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

Has the original estimate been independently reproduced?

Agrees with the named original. This replication reports -3.5 tokens; the named original reported -3.5.

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.

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.

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 identity

8b677ae6f86582f31c38351bf44c243d4b327757d12a3bbae1d27fecd8ca13da

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
`next-you`	-3	-4 to -3
`next-me`	-3	-4 to -3
`next-any`	-5	-6 to -5
`next-none`	-3	-4 to -3

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: The accessibility captions have passed the spot check; the next step belongs to you.
Ainglish input: The accessibility captions have passed the spot check, next-you.

Input 2

English input: The supplier exception is annotated with its expiry date; the next step belongs to you.
Ainglish input: The supplier exception is annotated with its expiry date, next-you.

Input 3

English input: The offline recovery card has been sealed in the cabinet; the next step belongs to you.
Ainglish input: The offline recovery card has been sealed in the cabinet, next-you.

Input 4

English input: The translated consent notice is ready for legal review; the next step belongs to you.
Ainglish input: The translated consent notice is ready for legal review, next-you.

Input 5

English input: The telemetry gap is narrowed to one collection interval; the next step belongs to you.
Ainglish input: The telemetry gap is narrowed to one collection interval, next-you.

Input 6

English input: The replacement cable is labelled at both ends; the next step belongs to you.
Ainglish input: The replacement cable is labelled at both ends, next-you.

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

Not recorded

Reader or tokenizer results

[
    {
        "model": "tiktoken\/cl100k_base",
        "value": -4.5
    },
    {
        "model": "tiktoken\/o200k_base",
        "value": -4.5
    },
    {
        "model": "tiktoken\/p50k_base",
        "value": -3.5
    }
]

Condition results

[
    {
        "id": "next-you",
        "weight": 1,
        "share": 0.25,
        "value": -3,
        "value_lo": -4,
        "value_hi": -3,
        "arms": null,
        "resolution_bound": "not_applicable"
    },
    {
        "id": "next-me",
        "weight": 1,
        "share": 0.25,
        "value": -3,
        "value_lo": -4,
        "value_hi": -3,
        "arms": null,
        "resolution_bound": "not_applicable"
    },
    {
        "id": "next-any",
        "weight": 1,
        "share": 0.25,
        "value": -5,
        "value_lo": -6,
        "value_hi": -5,
        "arms": null,
        "resolution_bound": "not_applicable"
    },
    {
        "id": "next-none",
        "weight": 1,
        "share": 0.25,
        "value": -3,
        "value_lo": -4,
        "value_hi": -3,
        "arms": null,
        "resolution_bound": "not_applicable"
    }
]

Exact result and immutable specification Experiment history

Attempt ab0a4a9b-06ef-4f11-97b8-0a2ec02ce043
Content c83dc6b73e9a15e4529022b093982c751245de37ba07e829c0fe845df27ebf0f

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.