{
  "question": "q13",
  "model_1": "DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731-UD-IQ4_XS",
  "model_2": "claude-opus-5",
  "answer_a_was": "claude-opus-5",
  "answer_b_was": "DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731-UD-IQ4_XS",
  "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": 5109,
    "completion_tokens": 2801,
    "total_tokens": 7910,
    "cost": 0.1159575,
    "is_byok": false,
    "prompt_tokens_details": {
      "cached_tokens": 0,
      "cache_write_tokens": 5106,
      "audio_tokens": 0,
      "video_tokens": 0
    },
    "cost_details": {
      "upstream_inference_cost": 0.1159575,
      "upstream_inference_prompt_cost": 0.0319275,
      "upstream_inference_completions_cost": 0.08403
    },
    "completion_tokens_details": {
      "reasoning_tokens": 2305,
      "image_tokens": 0,
      "audio_tokens": 0
    }
  },
  "eval_prompt_sha256": "7e58b951cb86e4deba3b60fd01e9b9bd247ebe9883e1c9e43b24acffb1fd4667",
  "provenance_date": "2026-08-05",
  "report": "TIE, FUNCTIONALLY EQUIVALENT.\n\nBasis: Both answers place the client on the same material preservation path: issue a three-year, continuing hold; prevent custodian self-selection; immediately stop messaging-app deletion; preserve Bell’s laptop and mailbox; suspend shared-drive, Slack, and telemetry destruction; snapshot Jira/Git; and direct preservation by Fenwick and the support vendor. Their differences do not establish that any identified evidence would be preserved under one answer but lost under the other.\n\n[A] rejected: the messaging app has no server-side or backup copy, all messages older than seven days are gone, and continued loss risks an intent-to-deprive finding — record lacks those facts and the supplied rule requires intent for severe sanctions.\n[A] rejected: capture must cover exactly nine devices — record identifies nine users but not their number of devices.\n[A] rejected: D. Alvarez’s identity, contact information, and Hold No. 25-04 — record lacks those details.\n[B] rejected: Bell’s laptop has no backup and contains irreplaceable unique evidence — record lacks those facts.\n\nFailed candidate: Different “most time-critical” action — different conduct failed because both answers require action on the messaging app today and preservation of Bell’s laptop before Friday.\nFailed candidate: B’s narrower hold-recipient list — concrete consequence failed because the record does not establish that omitted personnel possess evidence that the technical actions would not preserve.\nFailed candidate: A’s broader subject matter and source list — different conduct failed because both preserve the record-supported VX-9, Ridgeline, engineering, QA, and support information.\nFailed candidate: Different collection and snapshot deadlines — concrete consequence failed because no intervening deletion event is shown for the differing periods.\nFailed candidate: B’s vendor deadline versus A’s same-day letter — likelihood failed because B requires action before any retention deletion and the record identifies no earlier scheduled purge.\nFailed candidate: B’s placeholders versus A’s unsupported send-ready details — concrete consequence failed because neither establishes a record-supported contact, and completing known sender details does not alter preservation conduct.\nFailed candidate: A’s restriction on discussion and new commentary — concrete consequence failed because no record-supported investigation or operational need is shown to be impaired.\nFailed candidate: B’s screenshot/export fallback — different conduct failed because it applies only pending Legal involvement and is supplemented by same-day forensic collection.\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"
    ]
  }
}