Comment Comment by maheshvaikri99 Token Efficiency | Format | Tokens | vs JSON | |--------------|--------|----------| | ISONGraph | 639 | -69% | | ISON | 685 | -66% | | TOON | 856 | -58% | | JSON Compact | 1,072 | -47% | | JSON | 2,039 | baseline | LLM Accuracy | Format | Correct | Accuracy | Acc/1K Tokens | |--------------|---------|----------|---------------| | ISONGraph | 46/50 | 92.0% | 143.97 | | ISON | 44/50 | 88.0% | 128.47 | | JSON | 42/50 | 84.0% | 41.20 | | JSON Compact | 41/50 | 82.0% | 76.49 | | TOON | 40/50 | 80.0% | 93.46 | Key Findings 1. ISONGraph wins on both efficiency AND accuracy - 92% correct with fewest tokens 2. ISON/ISONGraph excel at multi-hop queries - LLM can follow relationships easily 3. Acc/1K metric shows ISONGraph provides 3.5x more value per token than JSON 4. Graph-specific format helps LLM understand relationships better than flat JSON parent maheshvaikri99 10 months ago