{
  "question": "q10",
  "model_1": "DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731-UD-IQ4_XS",
  "model_2": "Qwen3.8-27B-UD-Q6_K_XL",
  "answer_a_was": "DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731-UD-IQ4_XS",
  "answer_b_was": "Qwen3.8-27B-UD-Q6_K_XL",
  "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": 15384,
    "completion_tokens": 1850,
    "total_tokens": 17234,
    "cost": 0.15164625,
    "is_byok": false,
    "prompt_tokens_details": {
      "cached_tokens": 0,
      "cache_write_tokens": 15381,
      "audio_tokens": 0,
      "video_tokens": 0
    },
    "cost_details": {
      "upstream_inference_cost": 0.15164625,
      "upstream_inference_prompt_cost": 0.09614625,
      "upstream_inference_completions_cost": 0.0555
    },
    "completion_tokens_details": {
      "reasoning_tokens": 1552,
      "image_tokens": 0,
      "audio_tokens": 0
    }
  },
  "eval_prompt_sha256": "7e58b951cb86e4deba3b60fd01e9b9bd247ebe9883e1c9e43b24acffb1fd4667",
  "report": "TIE, FUNCTIONALLY EQUIVALENT.\n\nBasis. Both answers direct Haven Ridge toward the same material path: seek only limited lawful access, halt unauthorized roadwork, treat full retreat access as legally weak, and pursue a recorded negotiated expansion with operational limits, compensation, redesign, or alternative access. Neither answer demonstrates a different action that would materially alter Haven Ridge’s access, liability, project viability, or litigation position.\n\n[A] rejected: possible statutory or treble damages for tree removal — record lacks any applicable timber-damages statute.\n[B] rejected: a recorded license can bind successors — record lacks any rule making a license successor-binding through recordation alone.\n\nFailed candidate: Different characterization of existing nuisance from completed road alterations — Different conduct failed; both preserve claims for restoration, damages, and injunctive relief.\nFailed candidate: Different confidence levels concerning preliminary relief — Different conduct failed; both recommend a limited injunction and advise against seeking preliminary authorization for full retreat traffic.\nFailed candidate: Permanent amended easement versus a potentially term-limited access arrangement — Concrete consequence failed; both present negotiable alternatives, and the record does not establish which structure Harris would accept or which would produce a better outcome.\nFailed candidate: Additional ancillary claims and defenses listed by each answer — No safe neutralization failed; unsupported labels can be rejected without changing the recommended claims, evidence gathering, or protective action.\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"
    ]
  }
}