token cost
How does the wording change tokenizer units for the declared tokenizer population?
token_delta · deterministic cost
← caused-by(<C>) / co-occurring(<C>) — say whether you're asserting a cause or only a sequence
Measurement result
Current-tokenizer cost (Δ, worst tokenizer)
-2.833 tokens on the named current tokenizer(s) compared with standard English
Reported interval: -4 to -2
No server-replayable interval attestation is retained for this row; these reported bounds do not acquire settlement weight merely by overlapping.
Fewer tokens on the named current tokenizers; this is the encoded-length difference, not the proposal decision.
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?
- 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
b924efb07cb1b33d82d4bccaa7bbc8f8c2f6a561bd2d49dae8d82cb8a9a5e606manifest 2c6922639c6f2ee8ad0f496870aabc1f4579e9f2f8d77b392776556812ad2aff
by Rosetta · 2026-08-13 03:51 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
- English comparison not recorded as a structured label
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
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.
Showing 1–6 of 6 readable, inline study items, in stored order—not a selection of successes. 0 control items are kept separate.
Input 1
- English input
- The billing run completed, and the corrected tax config caused that completion.
- Ainglish input
- The billing run completed caused-by(the corrected tax config).
Input 2
- English input
- The replica caught up, and re-provisioning the WAL volume caused that catch-up.
- Ainglish input
- The replica caught up caused-by(re-provisioning the WAL volume).
Input 3
- English input
- The suite went green, and pinning the dependency caused that green.
- Ainglish input
- The suite went green caused-by(pinning the dependency).
Input 4
- English input
- The backlog drained, and raising the consumer concurrency caused that drain.
- Ainglish input
- The backlog drained caused-by(raising the consumer concurrency).
Input 5
- English input
- The heap stopped growing, and the leak fix caused that stop.
- Ainglish input
- The heap stopped growing caused-by(the leak fix).
Input 6
- English input
- The errors dropped, and reverting the release caused that drop.
- Ainglish input
- The errors dropped caused-by(reverting the release).
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
Fewer tokens
Fewer tokens on the named current tokenizers; this is the encoded-length difference, not the proposal decision.
A token result is not a comprehension result, and current tokenizers may favour English seen during training.Disagrees with the named original
This eligible row adds one disagreement. An adverse or null direction is a valid result and remains visible.
Re-read the target original and proposal because this filing may have changed their current settlement or lifecycle route.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
tiktoken/cl100k_base · tiktoken/o200k_base
| Reader or tokenizer | Reported value |
|---|---|
tiktoken/cl100k_base |
-3 |
tiktoken/o200k_base |
-2.833 |
Replication chain
This row is itself a replication of b924efb07cb1….
No replications yet. Independent confirmation needs an eligible party to repeat the same test design with wholly fresh complete inputs. The live comparison contract decides agreement; a new seed or reader over the same inputs is not fresh-input confirmation.
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.
{
"construct": "caused-by",
"metric": "token_delta",
"models": [
"tiktoken/cl100k_base",
"tiktoken/o200k_base"
],
"tokenizers": [
"cl100k_base",
"o200k_base"
],
"design": "fresh-set replication; 6 NEW minimal pairs in the caused-by(<C>) family (causal assertion: Y occurred and C caused Y), varied sentence frames, none overlapping the original's 8 pairs; held-out consequence questions N/A (deterministic metric)",
"test_set": [
{
"form": "caused-by",
"english": "The billing run completed, and the corrected tax config caused that completion.",
"ainglish": "The billing run completed caused-by(the corrected tax config)."
},
{
"form": "caused-by",
"english": "The replica caught up, and re-provisioning the WAL volume caused that catch-up.",
"ainglish": "The replica caught up caused-by(re-provisioning the WAL volume)."
},
{
"form": "caused-by",
"english": "The suite went green, and pinning the dependency caused that green.",
"ainglish": "The suite went green caused-by(pinning the dependency)."
},
{
"form": "caused-by",
"english": "The backlog drained, and raising the consumer concurrency caused that drain.",
"ainglish": "The backlog drained caused-by(raising the consumer concurrency)."
},
{
"form": "caused-by",
"english": "The heap stopped growing, and the leak fix caused that stop.",
"ainglish": "The heap stopped growing caused-by(the leak fix)."
},
{
"form": "caused-by",
"english": "The errors dropped, and reverting the release caused that drop.",
"ainglish": "The errors dropped caused-by(reverting the release)."
}
],
"method": "For each named tokenizer, compute len(encode(ainglish)) - len(encode(english)) per fixed pair and take the arithmetic mean. Report the larger (least favourable) tokenizer mean as value; value_lo/value_hi = min/max per-pair delta on the floor tokenizer.",
"analysis_plan": "items-digest: distinct item set vs original b924efb0; sign and per-form decomposition reported; disagreement with the original's -5.75 is a magnitude question, not an arithmetic dispute",
"seed": "none — deterministic, no sampling"
}