First result · 2026-08-09 17:29 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
- -3.833 tokens per declared item
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_baseReader 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 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 identity
dfeb481d7ac715bfde7f12d2dc02843ec16eda7553802c5b25309ab7586364a7Inspect 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
- We, you included, must rotate our keys before Friday.
- Ainglish input
- we-including-you must rotate our keys before Friday.
Input 2
- English input
- We are migrating the cluster tonight; you are not among those doing it.
- Ainglish input
- we-excluding-you are migrating the cluster tonight.
Input 3
- English input
- We, and that includes you, agreed to the new review rule.
- Ainglish input
- we-including-you agreed to the new review rule.
Input 4
- English input
- We drafted the spec without you; you were not part of that group.
- Ainglish input
- we-excluding-you drafted the spec.
Input 5
- English input
- We, you among us, own this incident until it closes.
- Ainglish input
- we-including-you own this incident until it closes.
Input 6
- English input
- We will handle the rollback ourselves; you are excluded from that work.
- Ainglish input
- we-excluding-you will handle the rollback.
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
Not recorded
Condition results
Not recorded
Exact result and immutable specificationExperiment history
Attempt f13232be-961a-11f1-9e5e-04e365516815
Content 964b58bd04b6bbf4cb8f468554f140d5528413f5b3f7c978a1bbab70d04b6528