{
  "question": "q11",
  "model_1": "Qwen3.5-27B-UD-Q6_K_XL",
  "model_2": "claude-opus-5",
  "answer_a_was": "claude-opus-5",
  "answer_b_was": "Qwen3.5-27B-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": 8384,
    "completion_tokens": 2592,
    "total_tokens": 10976,
    "cost": 0.13015625,
    "is_byok": false,
    "prompt_tokens_details": {
      "cached_tokens": 0,
      "cache_write_tokens": 8381,
      "audio_tokens": 0,
      "video_tokens": 0
    },
    "cost_details": {
      "upstream_inference_cost": 0.13015625,
      "upstream_inference_prompt_cost": 0.05239625,
      "upstream_inference_completions_cost": 0.07776
    },
    "completion_tokens_details": {
      "reasoning_tokens": 2118,
      "image_tokens": 0,
      "audio_tokens": 0
    }
  },
  "eval_prompt_sha256": "7e58b951cb86e4deba3b60fd01e9b9bd247ebe9883e1c9e43b24acffb1fd4667",
  "provenance_date": "2026-08-05",
  "report": "TIE, FUNCTIONALLY EQUIVALENT.\n\nBasis. Both answers direct Harborline to demand before Friday that the insurer accept the $950,000 within-limits settlement, warn of liability for an excess judgment, request independent counsel, and avoid either unilateral settlement or an unprotected contribution. After ordinary verification removes unsupported collateral instructions, both readers remain on the same materially safe path.\n\n[A] rejected: insurer can fund under reservation and later pursue reimbursement — record lacks a reimbursement rule.\n[A] rejected: Harborline lacks capacity to satisfy any excess judgment — record shows $600,000 in reserves and a projected excess beginning at $400,000.\n[A] rejected: insurer necessarily owes coverage-litigation fees, consequential damages, and all listed additional remedies — record lacks those remedial rules.\n[B] rejected: October 26, 2023 date — record lacks a calendar year or exact date.\n[B] rejected: refusal to fund settlement may constitute constructive denial of the defense — cited authority says the Rule 7 exception requires wrongful denial of a defense.\n[B] rejected: Harborline should freeze payment to current defense counsel — record lacks authority for Harborline to suspend the insurer’s payments.\n[B] rejected: commence a bad-faith lawsuit immediately after expiration — cited authority conditions excess-judgment liability on a later excess verdict.\n\nFuller policy, prejudice, extension, and settlement-letter demands in A: likelihood failed; the record does not show they would change settlement acceptance or preserve the demand.\nDifferent characterization of the pursuit conflict: different conduct failed; both demand independent counsel for the same coverage-sensitive factual conflict.\nB’s “up to $2.6 million” notice rather than A’s uncapped wording: concrete consequence failed; no higher verdict is established, and B separately reserves all rights.\nA’s more detailed fallback contribution structure: different conduct failed; both recommend no contribution absent a protective written agreement.\nUnsupported reimbursement, constructive-denial, counsel-payment, and immediate-suit instructions: no-safe-neutralization failed; each is rejected directly from the supplied rules without reconstructing either answer’s core analysis.\nDifferences in detail concerning the exclusion and late notice: different conduct failed; both conclude that the negligence count triggers a full defense and that substantial prejudice cannot presently be shown.\n\nHard stop. It 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"
    ]
  }
}