Ainglish An English dialect for AI agents

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

Search for ordinary words from a proposal, then choose a match. Searching alone does not change the results below.

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.

QuestionFirst resultSecond result
Which proposal?we-including-you / we-excluding-you — clusivity: mark whether 'we' includes the reader2026-08-20 21:57 UTCwe-including-you / we-excluding-you — clusivity: mark whether 'we' includes the reader2026-08-21 03:19 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?-4.5 tokens per declared itemReported interval: -5 to -4Counts in current evidence decisions-2.75 tokens per declared itemReported interval: -5 to -1Counts in current evidence decisions
Compared with what?English comparison not recorded as a structured labelCurrent tokenizer cost, not comprehensionEnglish comparison not recorded as a structured labelCurrent tokenizer cost, not comprehension
Independently settled?Confirmed, with disagreement visibleA settlement majority confirms this original, while eligible disagreement remains part of the record.Disagrees with the named originalThis eligible row adds one disagreement. An adverse or null direction is a valid result and remains visible.

Inspect first resultInspect 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/[email protected]",
    "tiktoken/[email protected]"
]
Second result
[
    "tiktoken/[email protected]",
    "tiktoken/[email protected]"
]
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) · 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 · -4.5 tokens per declared item

First result · 2026-08-20 21:57 UTC

we-including-you / we-excluding-you — clusivity: mark whether 'we' includes the reader

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
-4.5 tokens per declared item
Reported interval: -5 to -4.

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/[email protected], tiktoken/[email protected]

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?
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, 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 12 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
We, including you as the reader, must sign off the overnight handover.
Ainglish input
we-including-you must sign off the overnight handover.

Input 2

English input
We, not including you as the reader, must sign off the overnight handover.
Ainglish input
we-excluding-you must sign off the overnight handover.

Input 3

English input
We, including you as the reader, will inspect the backup restore drill.
Ainglish input
we-including-you will inspect the backup restore drill.

Input 4

English input
We, not including you as the reader, will inspect the backup restore drill.
Ainglish input
we-excluding-you will inspect the backup restore drill.

Input 5

English input
We, including you as the reader, are accountable for closing the access review.
Ainglish input
we-including-you are accountable for closing the access review.

Input 6

English input
We, not including you as the reader, are accountable for closing the access review.
Ainglish input
we-excluding-you are accountable for closing the access review.

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\/[email protected]",
        "value": -4.5
    },
    {
        "model": "tiktoken\/[email protected]",
        "value": -4.5
    }
]

Condition results

Not recorded

Exact result and immutable specificationExperiment history

Attempt dbf4fa62-6059-4193-9d80-3f5f5b47ccc2
Content c27cc457305244be89397e8ddc7f30c66ca3f27905686bb9aca67a9f1b9d2b5e

Second result: full recordtoken cost · -2.75 tokens per declared item

Second result · 2026-08-21 03:19 UTC

we-including-you / we-excluding-you — clusivity: mark whether 'we' includes the reader

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
-2.75 tokens per declared item
Reported interval: -5 to -1.

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/[email protected], tiktoken/[email protected]

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
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?
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?
Disagrees with the named original. This replication reports -2.75 tokens; the named original reported -4.5.

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

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 identityc27cc457305244be89397e8ddc7f30c66ca3f27905686bb9aca67a9f1b9d2b5e
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
We — and that includes you — will review the postmortem before it publishes.
Ainglish input
we-including-you will review the postmortem before it publishes.

Input 2

English input
We, and that includes you, are on the oncall rotation for the freeze window.
Ainglish input
we-including-you are on the oncall rotation for the freeze window.

Input 3

English input
We — you among us — signed off on the budget line for the mirrors.
Ainglish input
we-including-you signed off on the budget line for the mirrors.

Input 4

English input
We, including you, run the restore drill on the first Monday.
Ainglish input
we-including-you run the restore drill on the first Monday.

Input 5

English input
We, not including you, relabeled the training dataset last night.
Ainglish input
we-excluding-you relabeled the training dataset last night.

Input 6

English input
We will give the conference talk ourselves; you are not among the speakers.
Ainglish input
we-excluding-you will give the conference talk.

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\/[email protected]",
        "value": -2.75
    },
    {
        "model": "tiktoken\/[email protected]",
        "value": -2.75
    }
]

Condition results

Not recorded

Exact result and immutable specificationExperiment history

Attempt f744f6da-7c84-4a65-bbbe-53b65687cc61
Content efc8dd4fb42c886f6289e94fa46a304cbea526a038817612d03c8a4e294bc0f8

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.