{
  "question": "q14",
  "model_1": "Qwen3.5-27B-UD-Q6_K_XL",
  "model_2": "Qwen3.8-27B-UD-Q6_K_XL",
  "answer_a_was": "Qwen3.5-27B-UD-Q6_K_XL",
  "answer_b_was": "Qwen3.8-27B-UD-Q6_K_XL",
  "verdict_code": "B",
  "winner": "Qwen3.8-27B-UD-Q6_K_XL",
  "judge_model": "openai/gpt-5.6-sol",
  "server_model": "openai/gpt-5.6-sol",
  "provider": "OpenAI",
  "finish_reason": "stop",
  "usage": {
    "prompt_tokens": 4443,
    "completion_tokens": 3076,
    "total_tokens": 7519,
    "cost": 0.120045,
    "is_byok": false,
    "prompt_tokens_details": {
      "cached_tokens": 0,
      "cache_write_tokens": 4440,
      "audio_tokens": 0,
      "video_tokens": 0
    },
    "cost_details": {
      "upstream_inference_cost": 0.120045,
      "upstream_inference_prompt_cost": 0.027765,
      "upstream_inference_completions_cost": 0.09228
    },
    "completion_tokens_details": {
      "reasoning_tokens": 2588,
      "image_tokens": 0,
      "audio_tokens": 0
    }
  },
  "eval_prompt_sha256": "7e58b951cb86e4deba3b60fd01e9b9bd247ebe9883e1c9e43b24acffb1fd4667",
  "report": "ANSWER B IS MATERIALLY BETTER.\n\nBasis. Answer A excludes Vendor’s data-security obligations from the liability cap but creates no such obligations, leaving the exclusion functionally empty. Answer B imposes commercially reasonable safeguards and incident-notification duties, giving Bellhaven enforceable contractual protections that are subject to the required supercap.\n\nExact difference. Answer A omits affirmative vendor data-security duties; Answer B Section 9.4 requires safeguards and prompt Security Incident notice.\nDifferent conduct. A’s reader must draft missing security obligations before approving the agreement; B’s reader can approve the supplied protections.\nConcrete consequence. Under A, Bellhaven lacks a contractual claim for failure to maintain reasonable safeguards or provide prompt incident notice; under B, it has one.\nRecord support. The vendor draft contains no security duty, while the mandate requires Vendor’s data-security obligations to be addressed and directs that necessary language be added where the draft is silent.\nMaterial magnitude. Enforceable safeguards and incident notice materially affect Bellhaven’s legal, evidentiary, and operational position following a security incident.\nLikelihood. A competent customer-side lawyer would require operative security duties before treating the cap exclusion as satisfying the mandate.\nNo safe neutralization by ordinary verification. Detecting the omission is straightforward, but curing it requires drafting the substantive obligations that Answer A failed to supply.\n\nA’s early-term ordinary cap — concrete consequence failed because the record does not state fee timing or whether twelve months of fees are prepaid.\nA’s supercap cross-reference — different conduct failed because the independent $4 million floor satisfies the permitted fallback.\nUsage Data ownership — concrete consequence failed because no distinct ownership dispute or disposition is established by the record.\nFeedback-license wording — material magnitude failed because both answers reject assignment and permit only licensed use.\nRenewal structure — exact difference failed as a mandate violation because both one-year automatic renewal and no automatic renewal are permitted.\nIndemnity scope and remedy detail — different conduct failed because both provide the required third-party IP defense and indemnity.\nDropped incidental, special, punitive, and loss-of-data exclusions — concrete consequence failed because the record does not establish a claim or the direction of net harm under the mutual exclusion.\n\nHard stop. Because Answer A omitted operative Vendor data-security duties, the reader would likely have to draft those duties instead of approving the agreement as supplied, causing Bellhaven otherwise to lack enforceable safeguard and incident-notification protections.",
  "judge_reasoning": "",
  "_public_record": {
    "type": "published record",
    "policy": "../../PUBLIC_RECORD_POLICY.md",
    "transformations": [
      "non-substantive machine metadata normalized",
      "published-record annotation added"
    ]
  }
}