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
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
-6.167 tokens per declared item Reported interval: -7.167 to -6.167.
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
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
Confirmed, with disagreement visible
A settlement majority confirms this original, while eligible disagreement remains part of the record.
Is this result within the cost allowance?
This headline is within the allowance.
The reported difference is -6.167 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?
Confirmed, with disagreement visible.
A settlement majority confirms this original, while eligible disagreement remains part of the record.
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.
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
Asha reviews X and Bram reviews Y: two assignments and no crossed links.
Ainglish input
Asha and Bram review patch X and patch Y, pair-by-order.
Input 2
English input
Nadia owns the frontend ticket and Omar owns the backend ticket, with each person assigned to exactly one and no swapping.
Ainglish input
Nadia and Omar own ticket F and ticket B, pair-by-order.
Input 3
English input
In this pipeline the first test runs against the first config and the second test against the second config, in matching order.
Ainglish input
Test 1 and test 2 run against config A and config B, pair-by-order.
Input 4
English input
Asha and Bram each review both X and Y, so every person reviews every item: four assignments in total.
Ainglish input
Asha and Bram review patch X and patch Y, every-combination.
Input 5
English input
Every reviewer is matched with every component, so each of the three reviewers checks each of the two modules.
Ainglish input
The reviewers and modules are matched, every-combination.
Input 6
English input
Each of the four environments is tested against each of the three datasets, so all twelve combinations are run.
Ainglish input
The environments and datasets are tested, every-combination.
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.
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
-6 tokens per declared item Reported interval: -7.333 to -6.
Fewer tokens on the named current tokenizers; this is the encoded-length difference, not the proposal decision.
English comparison
Other declared comparison; inspect the specification
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
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?
This headline is within the allowance.
The reported difference is -6 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?
Agrees with the named original.
This replication reports -6 tokens; the named original reported -6.167.
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.
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
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.
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
Priya signs release note A and Quinn signs release note B: two assignments in matching order and no crossed signatures.
Ainglish input
Priya and Quinn sign release note A and release note B, pair-by-order.
Input 2
English input
The north worker monitors the red queue and the south worker monitors the blue queue: two position-matched assignments and no crossed monitoring.
Ainglish input
Worker north and worker south monitor queue red and queue blue, pair-by-order.
Input 3
English input
The cedar sensor calibrates probe 7 and the birch sensor calibrates probe 9: exactly two position-matched calibrations and no crossed links.
Ainglish input
Sensor cedar and sensor birch calibrate probe 7 and probe 9, pair-by-order.
Input 4
English input
Lio and Mei each inspect both service alpha and service beta, so all four maintainer-service inspection assignments occur.
Ainglish input
Maintainer Lio and maintainer Mei inspect service alpha and service beta, every-combination.
Input 5
English input
Each of the two regions replicates both the amber dataset and the violet dataset, so all four region-dataset replication assignments occur.
Ainglish input
Region east and region west replicate dataset amber and dataset violet, every-combination.
Input 6
English input
Each of the three compilers checks both target R and target S, so all six compiler-target checking assignments occur.
Ainglish input
Compiler A, compiler B, and compiler C check target R and target S, every-combination.
Recorded input digest: 67f45b9531258bbaebf19f228b4191bd38f3d589e5507c3190f957f5a20ff22e
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.
