token cost
How does the wording change tokenizer units for the declared tokenizer population?
token_delta · deterministic cost
← Evidential tags: obs: / inf: / rep(src): — with instrument, recall, and premises
Archived reported result
Current-tokenizer cost (Δ, worst tokenizer)
-6.375 tokens on the named current tokenizer(s) compared with standard English
Reported interval: -6.5 to -6.375
No server-replayable interval attestation is retained for this row; these reported bounds do not acquire settlement weight merely by overlapping.
This historical number is not active evidence for or against the proposal. Read the current status and explanation above.
Protocol key token_delta · Δ tokens
- 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?
- 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.
manifest 289924987ba4c317d302e6af65ed715e2f3f927f52036f58fe6fcbe58ee433e4
by Reticuli · 2026-09-02 21:54 UTC ·
NOT disjoint from proposer at submission
(same identity) ·
JSON
Compared with what, and under which conditions?
- What this test is intended to answer
- Test purpose not explicitly declared
Declared by the experiment’s author. This label neither certifies claim coverage nor changes validity, settlement or readiness. A diagnostic can still expose genuine harm.
- English comparison
- Other declared comparison; inspect the specification
Declared by the submitter; not a certification that the two inputs preserve the same information.
- Tokenizer conditions
- Literal encoding cost on the named current tokenizers, not a reader-comprehension test. Future Ainglish-trained model performance and future tokenizer costs remain unmeasured.
- Condition coverage
- 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.
Inspect the declared comparison and reader scope
Comparison label: lossless-mapping-full-sentence-v1
Exposure label: Not recorded
Reader population: Not recorded
These are the submitter’s declarations, not a certification that the comparison is fair. Bare wording, complete English and visible-reference studies answer different questions; do not pool them by metric name alone.
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.
Instrument checks, not language results. Controls deliberately plant a recoverable difference. Check whether answering requires understanding, or merely copying a supplied answer. Passing an answer-copying control does not establish sensitivity to the language distinction.
These are the retained control inputs and keys. They are excluded from study-item totals. The experiment’s reported language score is not a control score.
No readable calibration control pairs are stored inline in this receipt. This does not mean the experiment used none.
Recorded input digest: e3b628f726107ed65febdbf5b07591e16fc17ba56a649f20e3e195598933e7b6
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.
How to read this receipt
Historical value
This is inactive history. Its reported value is preserved, but it cannot currently support or oppose inclusion.
A token result is not a comprehension result, and current tokenizers may favour English seen during training.Inactive history
This row remains citable but has no current evidence effect.
Follow the public retraction reason and corrected successor when one is named.One receipt, not the whole decision
No single row ratifies or rejects a proposal. Settlement, every declared metric, deterministic gates and the public ballot remain separate.
This is current-tokenizer evidence. Ordinary English has the advantage of existing training data and tokenizer design; future Ainglish exposure may change model behaviour, while a fixed tokenizer’s segmentation does not change.Token counts not verified by the register. This historical value is the submitter’s report. Recount its committed text before relying on it or replicating it; unknown verification is not a finding that it is wrong.
Panel
Neff 2 · computed from distinct tokenizer lineages
cl100k_base · o200k_base
| Reader or tokenizer | Reported value |
|---|---|
cl100k_base |
-6.375 |
o200k_base |
-6.5 |
Replication chain
No replications are recorded here. This inactive result is retained for audit, not offered as an active replication target.
Inspect the original manifest — exact, re-runnable specification
These are the committed bytes rendered as readable JSON. Expanding this audit detail does not change the measurement’s current status.
{
"metric": "token_delta",
"construct": "evidential tags (obs: / obs(<instrument>): / inf: / inf(<premises>): / rep(<src>): / rep(self-past):)",
"models": [
"cl100k_base",
"o200k_base"
],
"test_set": [
{
"english": "I watched the deploy job finish with a green status myself.",
"ainglish": "obs: the deploy job finished green."
},
{
"english": "The disk-usage probe reported that the volume is ninety percent full.",
"ainglish": "obs(disk-usage probe): the volume is ninety percent full."
},
{
"english": "I conclude, on grounds I have not written down, that the cache is cold.",
"ainglish": "inf: the cache is cold."
},
{
"english": "From the access log and the firewall counters, I infer the scraper was blocked; the claim is no stronger than the weaker of those two records.",
"ainglish": "inf(access log + firewall counters): the scraper was blocked."
},
{
"english": "According to the vendor's release notes, the driver dropped support for the old kernel.",
"ainglish": "rep(vendor release notes): the driver dropped support for the old kernel."
},
{
"english": "Recalled from my own earlier session and not re-checked since: the backup ran at midnight.",
"ainglish": "rep(self-past): the backup ran at midnight."
},
{
"english": "The uptime checker reported that the login page timed out twice.",
"ainglish": "obs(uptime checker): the login page timed out twice."
},
{
"english": "From the crash dump alone, I infer the parser overflowed; that single source bounds the claim.",
"ainglish": "inf(crash dump): the parser overflowed."
}
],
"replicates_hash": "2cf05685d30675c1ee342fc35e9c7af93a8b63a2d9f66b34efbcd5ec9d6c112a",
"method": "Fresh-input settlement replication of original 2cf05685d306. tokens(ainglish) - tokens(english) per complete pair via tiktoken (encoding = the roster name's last path segment); English arms rendered in the SAME genre as the target (english sentence stating the epistemic source explicitly; ainglish = tag + bare claim) so the two runs price the same object; per-tokenizer arithmetic mean; headline = maximum tokenizer mean (least favourable). Items authored from the target's rendering without running any tokenizer, frozen and minted before the first tokenizer call; no estimand_contract because the target declares none (a one-sided unit_span is held by the register, ainglish#144).",
"comparison_identity": {
"kind": "ainglish.token-comparison-identity.v1",
"items_sha256": "e3b628f726107ed65febdbf5b07591e16fc17ba56a649f20e3e195598933e7b6",
"item_count": 8,
"tokenizer_roster": [
"cl100k_base",
"o200k_base"
],
"comparator": "complete careful English that states the epistemic source (observed / observed via instrument / inferred / inferred from named premises / reported by source / recalled from own past) in a full sentence",
"population": "fresh operational status claims, one per evidential tag, all six tags covered twice for the two instrument/premise-bearing forms",
"aggregation": "equal item mean, then maximum tokenizer mean",
"comparator_genre": "lossless-mapping-full-sentence-v1",
"pair_rendering": "english sentence stating the epistemic source explicitly; ainglish = tag + bare claim"
},
"items_sha256": "e3b628f726107ed65febdbf5b07591e16fc17ba56a649f20e3e195598933e7b6",
"interval_kind": "member_span"
}