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?
-20.125 tokens per declared itemReported interval: -23.8125 to -20.125Retracted by submitter
-2.125 tokens per declared itemReported interval: -6.5 to -2.125Not 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 row remains citable but has no current evidence effect.
Target no longer carries evidenceThe target original was retracted. This replication remains visible, but no longer adds a settlement voice to that target. This does not itself invalidate the replication’s observations.
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
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 row remains citable but has no current evidence effect.
Is this result within the cost allowance?
This headline is within the allowance.
The reported difference is -20.125 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?
Inactive history.
This row remains citable but has no current evidence effect.
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 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
At 2026-08-01T00:00Z, no admissible query in the exact bounded retrieval surface receipt customer-profile-surface-receipt@001-r1 returns or addresses customer-profile-001; other surfaces and storage copies are unasserted.
At 2026-08-02T01:00Z, no admissible query in the exact bounded retrieval surface receipt support-ticket-surface-receipt@002-r1 returns or addresses support-ticket-002; other surfaces and storage copies are unasserted.
At 2026-08-03T02:00Z, no admissible query in the exact bounded retrieval surface receipt document-surface-receipt@003-r1 returns or addresses document-003; other surfaces and storage copies are unasserted.
At 2026-08-04T03:00Z, no admissible query in the exact bounded retrieval surface receipt photo-surface-receipt@004-r1 returns or addresses photo-004; other surfaces and storage copies are unasserted.
At 2026-08-05T04:00Z, no admissible query in the exact bounded retrieval surface receipt message-surface-receipt@005-r1 returns or addresses message-005; other surfaces and storage copies are unasserted.
At 2026-08-06T05:00Z, no admissible query in the exact bounded retrieval surface receipt model-input-surface-receipt@006-r1 returns or addresses model-input-006; other surfaces and storage copies are unasserted.
Recorded input digest: 4df7b7fed2074b149082ec4374f9aede5a695352e66a25e530c05988dfc79748
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.
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
Target no longer carries evidence
The target original was retracted. This replication remains visible, but no longer adds a settlement voice to that target. This does not itself invalidate the replication’s observations.
Is this result within the cost allowance?
This headline is within the allowance.
The reported difference is -2.125 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?
Target no longer carries evidence.
This replication reports -2.125 tokens; the named original reported -20.125.
The target original was retracted. This replication remains visible, but no longer adds a settlement voice to that target. This does not itself invalidate the replication’s observations.
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 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
At the stated epoch, no query admissible under the primary mailbox receipt for its named principal class returned the July bounce messages; other folders, backups and archives remain unasserted.
Ainglish input
The July bounce messages, removed-from(primary-mailbox-receipt@r1) as_of(2026-08-29T09:00Z).
Input 2
English input
No recoverable representation of the July bounce messages remained in any locus enumerated by the mail-server inventory receipt under its declared recovery model; unlisted or later copies remain unasserted.
Ainglish input
The July bounce messages, erased-from(mail-server-inventory-receipt@v1) as_of(2026-08-29T09:00Z).
Input 3
English input
At the stated epoch, no query admissible under the public proposal projection returned the contribution-terms receipt for its named principal class; the write response and privileged views remain unasserted.
Ainglish input
The contribution-terms receipt, removed-from(public-proposal-projection@r2) as_of(2026-08-29T10:00Z).
Input 4
English input
At the stated epoch, no admissible query under the notification-list receipt for its named principal class and consistency bound returned the six marketing messages; the trash folder and server-side backups remain unasserted.
Ainglish input
The six marketing messages, removed-from(notification-list-receipt@r4) as_of(2026-08-29T09:10Z).
Input 5
English input
No recoverable representation of the session waiters remained in any locus enumerated by the process-table inventory receipt under its declared recovery model; any respawned or detached copies remain unasserted.
Ainglish input
The session waiters, erased-from(process-table-inventory-receipt@v3) as_of(2026-08-28T21:38Z).
Input 6
English input
At the stated epoch, no query admissible under the index-load receipt for its declared byte budget addressed the peers roster line; the file on disk and privileged reads remain unasserted.
Ainglish input
The peers roster line, removed-from(index-load-receipt@r5) as_of(2026-08-29T00:00Z).
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.
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.