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 · Same recorded value
First result
64 prospective authored duration pairs, equal marker weights; fixed reference variants are not independent semantic frames
Second result
64 prospective authored duration pairs, equal marker weights; fixed reference variants are not independent semantic frames
Unit tested · Same recorded value
First result
one complete claim sentence with exactly shared resolved references and units
Second result
one complete claim sentence with exactly shared resolved references and units
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 · Same recorded value
First result
{
"reducer": "least_favourable",
"rule": "equal complete-pair mean within each tokenizer, then maximum tokenizer mean (least-favourable) across the three; retain each marker separately"
}
Second result
{
"reducer": "least_favourable",
"rule": "equal complete-pair mean within each tokenizer, then maximum tokenizer mean (least-favourable) across the three; retain each marker separately"
}
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
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 tokens per declared item Reported interval: 1 to 3.
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
Separate outcomes retained for all 2 declared conditions
time-total, longest-stretch
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 3 tokens; the current declaration allows at most 3 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.
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
time-total
3
Not recorded
longest-stretch
3
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 64 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 · duration-0-time-total
English input
Total state-40 time in window-90: 16min.
Ainglish input
time-total(state-40,window-90) = 16min.
Condition
time-total
Input 2 · duration-0-longest-stretch
English input
Longest uninterrupted state-40 stretch in window-90: 11min.
Ainglish input
longest-stretch(state-40,window-90) = 11min.
Condition
longest-stretch
Input 3 · duration-1-time-total
English input
Total state-41 time in window-91: 18min.
Ainglish input
time-total(state-41,window-91) = 18min.
Condition
time-total
Input 4 · duration-1-longest-stretch
English input
Longest uninterrupted state-41 stretch in window-91: 12min.
Ainglish input
longest-stretch(state-41,window-91) = 12min.
Condition
longest-stretch
Input 5 · duration-2-time-total
English input
Total state-42 time in window-92: 20min.
Ainglish input
time-total(state-42,window-92) = 20min.
Condition
time-total
Input 6 · duration-2-longest-stretch
English input
Longest uninterrupted state-42 stretch in window-92: 13min.
Ainglish input
longest-stretch(state-42,window-92) = 13min.
Condition
longest-stretch
Recorded input digest: 3b8e7b037851eb9ba2aca1c6b48c89ca317150e673894bca26d0f476a161ac7a
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
registered surface versus concise meaning-complete careful English
Tested population
64 prospective authored duration pairs, equal marker weights; fixed reference variants are not independent semantic frames
Unit tested
one complete claim sentence with exactly shared resolved references and units
How results combine
equal complete-pair mean within each tokenizer, then maximum tokenizer mean (least-favourable) across the three; retain each marker separately
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.
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
-0.5 tokens per declared item Reported interval: -1.5 to -0.5.
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
cl100k_base, o200k_base, p50k_base
Reader population not separately declared.
Conditions covered
Separate outcomes retained for all 2 declared conditions
time-total, longest-stretch
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
Disagrees with the named original
This eligible row adds one disagreement. An adverse or null direction is a valid result and remains visible.
Is this result within the cost allowance?
This headline is within the allowance.
The reported difference is -0.5 tokens; the current declaration allows at most 3 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?
Disagrees with the named original.
This replication reports -0.5 tokens; the named original reported 3.
This eligible row adds one disagreement. An adverse or null direction is a valid result and remains visible.
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
time-total
0
Not recorded
longest-stretch
-1
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 64 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 · sat-c2-duration-00-time-total
English input
The signed ledger records that, within sat-c2-window-2031-02-11-utc, sat-c2-network-00-state held for 50min altogether.
Ainglish input
The signed ledger records time-total(sat-c2-network-00-state,sat-c2-window-2031-02-11-utc) = 50min.
Condition
time-total
Input 2 · sat-c2-duration-00-longest-stretch
English input
The signed ledger records that the longest uninterrupted period when sat-c2-network-00-state held within sat-c2-window-2031-02-11-utc was 20min.
Ainglish input
The signed ledger records longest-stretch(sat-c2-network-00-state,sat-c2-window-2031-02-11-utc) = 20min.
Condition
longest-stretch
Input 3 · sat-c2-duration-01-time-total
English input
The incident summary reports that, within sat-c2-window-2031-02-12-utc, sat-c2-network-01-state held for 50min altogether.
Ainglish input
The incident summary reports time-total(sat-c2-network-01-state,sat-c2-window-2031-02-12-utc) = 50min.
Condition
time-total
Input 4 · sat-c2-duration-01-longest-stretch
English input
The incident summary reports that the longest uninterrupted period when sat-c2-network-01-state held within sat-c2-window-2031-02-12-utc was 35min.
Ainglish input
The incident summary reports longest-stretch(sat-c2-network-01-state,sat-c2-window-2031-02-12-utc) = 35min.
Condition
longest-stretch
Input 5 · sat-c2-duration-02-time-total
English input
For capacity review, the audit states that, within sat-c2-window-2031-02-13-utc, sat-c2-network-02-state held for 46min altogether.
Ainglish input
For capacity review, the audit states time-total(sat-c2-network-02-state,sat-c2-window-2031-02-13-utc) = 46min.
Condition
time-total
Input 6 · sat-c2-duration-02-longest-stretch
English input
For capacity review, the audit states that the longest uninterrupted period when sat-c2-network-02-state held within sat-c2-window-2031-02-13-utc was 31min.
Ainglish input
For capacity review, the audit states longest-stretch(sat-c2-network-02-state,sat-c2-window-2031-02-13-utc) = 31min.
Condition
longest-stretch
Recorded input digest: 7902b0963bc35538f444a8bc8591f7dc3e77831eaa3d0bf6611feab2dea55d00
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
registered surface versus concise meaning-complete careful English
Tested population
64 prospective authored duration pairs, equal marker weights; fixed reference variants are not independent semantic frames
Unit tested
one complete claim sentence with exactly shared resolved references and units
How results combine
equal complete-pair mean within each tokenizer, then maximum tokenizer mean (least-favourable) across the three; retain each marker separately
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.
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.
