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?	verdict-fail / no-verdict — did 'the check failed' judge the target, or fail to judge it?2026-09-03 09:42 UTC	verdict-fail / no-verdict — did 'the check failed' judge the target, or fail to judge it?2026-09-03 09:46 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?	2 tokens per declared itemReported interval: 2 to 2Result invalid	13.625 tokens per declared itemReported interval: 12.25 to 13.625Not yet counting in 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?	Inactive historyThis is inactive history. Its reported value is preserved, but it cannot currently support or oppose inclusion.	Incommensurable pending repairA comparison key does not match, so the row cannot presently vote on settlement.

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 · Only recorded on one side

First result

Not recorded in this structured field

Second result

8 frozen disjoint verdict-fail/no-verdict pairs, Spark replication

Unit tested · Only recorded on one side

First result

Not recorded in this structured field

Second result

complete message

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 · Only recorded on one side

First result

Not recorded in this structured field

Second result

{
    "reducer": "least_favourable",
    "rule": "equal item mean, then maximum tokenizer mean"
}

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 · 2 tokens per declared item

First result · 2026-09-03 09:42 UTC

verdict-fail / no-verdict — did 'the check failed' judge the target, or fail to judge it?

Result invalid. 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: 2 tokens per declared item
Reported interval: 2 to 2.
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, p50k_base
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 is inactive history. Its reported value is preserved, but it cannot currently support or oppose inclusion.

Is this result within the cost allowance?

This headline is within the allowance. The reported difference is 2 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?

Inactive history.

This is inactive history. Its reported value is preserved, but it cannot currently support or oppose inclusion.

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 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

English input: The smoke test failed.
Ainglish input: smoke suite: verdict-fail — three assertions; rolling back.

Input 2

English input: The smoke test failed.
Ainglish input: smoke suite: no-verdict — runner timed out at 600s; not rolling back, re-running.

Input 3

English input: The nightly integrity check failed.
Ainglish input: nightly integrity check: no-verdict — runner lost its database connection; row state unchanged from yesterday pass.

Input 4

English input: The replication run failed.
Ainglish input: replication run: no-verdict — tokenizer roster failed to download; original stands unconfirmed, not refuted.

Input 5

English input: The sanity check failed.
Ainglish input: sanity check: verdict-fail — two assertions; holding release.

Input 6

English input: The build check failed.
Ainglish input: build check: no-verdict — runner lost network connection; build state unchanged.

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": 2
    },
    {
        "model": "o200k_base",
        "value": 2
    },
    {
        "model": "p50k_base",
        "value": 2
    }
]

Condition results

Not recorded

Exact result and immutable specification Experiment history

Attempt 64fc2c7e-f854-45df-bb15-1cac3d3d94a0
Content c60e889aeed88f665a8ed99bed2906998550af5d4a7ca8b3a210b5d9144a742b

Second result: full recordtoken cost · 13.625 tokens per declared item

Second result · 2026-09-03 09:46 UTC

verdict-fail / no-verdict — did 'the check failed' judge the target, or fail to judge it?

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: 13.625 tokens per declared item
Reported interval: 12.25 to 13.625.
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: 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: 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 outside the allowance. The reported difference is 13.625 tokens; the current declaration allows at most 2 tokens.

Has the original estimate been independently reproduced?

Incommensurable pending repair. This replication reports 13.625 tokens; the named original reported 2.

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.

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

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

c60e889aeed88f665a8ed99bed2906998550af5d4a7ca8b3a210b5d9144a742b

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 latency probe failed.
Ainglish input: latency probe: verdict-fail — p99 over budget; paging.

Input 2

English input: The latency probe failed.
Ainglish input: latency probe: no-verdict — agent timed out at 60s; target state unknown, re-running.

Input 3

English input: The disk audit failed.
Ainglish input: disk audit: verdict-fail — two volumes over 90%; holding cleanup.

Input 4

English input: The disk audit failed.
Ainglish input: disk audit: no-verdict — runner lost its mount; row state unchanged, re-running.

Input 5

English input: The schema lint failed.
Ainglish input: schema lint: verdict-fail — three violations; blocking merge.

Input 6

English input: The schema lint failed.
Ainglish input: schema lint: no-verdict — roster failed to download; original stands, re-running.

Recorded input digest: b543ad79c967ea9f4fecff4055f233dae91d53b6584840cf534238f196e99dee

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: Ainglish tagged check outcome versus bare failed gloss
Tested population: 8 frozen disjoint verdict-fail/no-verdict pairs, Spark replication
Unit tested: complete message
How results combine: equal item mean, then maximum tokenizer mean

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": 12.25
    },
    {
        "model": "o200k_base",
        "value": 12.25
    },
    {
        "model": "p50k_base",
        "value": 13.625
    }
]

Condition results

Not recorded

Exact result and immutable specification Experiment history

Attempt 8cdff8ee-3cfd-448f-a198-202bff5b82c6
Content eca78f689714fc710a9800bf42bd8b5b514141d64ba65f36309a3425042665f2

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.