{
  "question": "q05",
  "model_1": "Qwen3.5-27B-UD-Q6_K_XL",
  "model_2": "claude-opus-5",
  "answer_a_was": "Qwen3.5-27B-UD-Q6_K_XL",
  "answer_b_was": "claude-opus-5",
  "verdict_code": "TIE",
  "winner": "TIE",
  "judge_model": "openai/gpt-5.6-sol",
  "server_model": "openai/gpt-5.6-sol",
  "provider": "OpenAI",
  "finish_reason": "stop",
  "usage": {
    "prompt_tokens": 12520,
    "completion_tokens": 2002,
    "total_tokens": 14522,
    "cost": 0.13830625,
    "is_byok": false,
    "prompt_tokens_details": {
      "cached_tokens": 0,
      "cache_write_tokens": 12517,
      "audio_tokens": 0,
      "video_tokens": 0
    },
    "cost_details": {
      "upstream_inference_cost": 0.13830625,
      "upstream_inference_prompt_cost": 0.07824625,
      "upstream_inference_completions_cost": 0.06006
    },
    "completion_tokens_details": {
      "reasoning_tokens": 1552,
      "image_tokens": 0,
      "audio_tokens": 0
    }
  },
  "eval_prompt_sha256": "7e58b951cb86e4deba3b60fd01e9b9bd247ebe9883e1c9e43b24acffb1fd4667",
  "provenance_date": "2026-08-05",
  "report": "TIE, FUNCTIONALLY EQUIVALENT.\n\nBasis. Both answers put the board on the same material path: expect entire-fairness review, preserve exculpation defenses, establish an independent litigation body, investigate Elena and Peak, pursue third-party recovery, evaluate settlement, and implement prospective governance reforms. Their differences in timing, liability allocation, and tactical emphasis do not establish a directionally better client outcome on the supplied record.\n\n[B] rejected: federal securities and proxy exposure — record lacks governing federal law.\n[B] rejected: officer-exculpation, demand-futility, indemnification, and insurance conclusions — record lacks the governing rules and policy terms.\n[B] rejected: $20–70 million damages estimate and $35–90 million settlement range — record lacks valuation, insurance, collectability, and settlement inputs.\n[A] rejected: the company will be the primary payor through insurance and indemnification — record lacks policy and indemnification terms.\n[A] rejected: post-closing write-down establishes a high damages anchor — record does not establish signing-date fair value or causation.\n\nFailed candidates. Controller and committee analysis — different conduct failed; both readers prepare for entire fairness.\nFailed candidates. Committee-member bad faith — different conduct failed; both readers investigate knowledge and preserve exculpation.\nFailed candidates. Early settlement versus post-investigation mediation — concrete consequence failed; the record does not establish which timing produces a better financial result.\nFailed candidates. Director-liability allocation — no safe neutralization failed; Answer A states the care-based exculpation defense, while Answer B’s additional allocation rules lack supplied authority.\nFailed candidates. Claims against the NovaSense investor and federal/regulatory responses — record support failed.\nFailed candidates. Fair-price treatment of the write-down — likelihood failed; an ordinarily competent reader would verify signing-date value before acting under either answer.\nFailed candidates. Separate counsel and governance separation from Elena — concrete consequence failed; no demonstrated litigation or financial outcome follows on this record.\nFailed candidates. Settlement and damages ranges — record support failed.\nFailed candidates. Additional governance detail — concrete consequence failed for the present client matter.\n\nHard stop. The sentence cannot be completed with a concrete, record-supported consequence.",
  "judge_reasoning": "",
  "_public_record": {
    "type": "published record",
    "policy": "../../PUBLIC_RECORD_POLICY.md",
    "transformations": [
      "non-substantive machine metadata normalized",
      "published-record annotation added"
    ],
    "retained": [
      "substantive report",
      "verdict code",
      "winner mapping",
      "A/B assignment",
      "model and judge identifiers",
      "finish reason",
      "token counts",
      "provenance date"
    ]
  }
}