{
  "question": "q20",
  "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": 9252,
    "completion_tokens": 1740,
    "total_tokens": 10992,
    "cost": 0.11002125,
    "is_byok": false,
    "prompt_tokens_details": {
      "cached_tokens": 0,
      "cache_write_tokens": 9249,
      "audio_tokens": 0,
      "video_tokens": 0
    },
    "cost_details": {
      "upstream_inference_cost": 0.11002125,
      "upstream_inference_prompt_cost": 0.05782125,
      "upstream_inference_completions_cost": 0.0522
    },
    "completion_tokens_details": {
      "reasoning_tokens": 1428,
      "image_tokens": 0,
      "audio_tokens": 0
    }
  },
  "eval_prompt_sha256": "7e58b951cb86e4deba3b60fd01e9b9bd247ebe9883e1c9e43b24acffb1fd4667",
  "provenance_date": "2026-08-05",
  "report": "TIE, FUNCTIONALLY EQUIVALENT.\n\nBoth answers put counsel and the board on the same material path: stop reliance on the existing deck, disclose the corrected ARR, NRR, and customer non-renewal before the unsigned investors commit, offer the anchor rescission or informed renegotiation, halt the founder secondary absent full disclosure, reject the CEO’s proposal, and delay/reprice the financing. Answer B adds procedures and commercial predictions, but none demonstrates a materially different client outcome on the supplied record.\n\n[A] rejected: directors face “unlimited liability” — record lacks facts establishing the scope of personal liability.\n[B] rejected: correction requires “10 business days minimum” — record lacks any prescribed waiting period.\n[B] rejected: corrected valuation is $130–165M with specified financing terms — record lacks market, runway, and investor-preference inputs.\n[B] rejected: advancement clawback and policy-rescission consequences — record lacks policy terms and governing rules beyond the stated fraud exclusion.\n\nCorrective-disclosure granularity — different conduct failed.\nAnchor-fund segregation and election mechanics — record support failed.\nSecondary withdrawal versus suspension pending disclosure — concrete consequence failed.\nMilestone-reset financing structure — record support failed.\nAdditional committee, personnel, and disclosure-control measures — concrete consequence failed.\nValuation-range precision — record support failed.\nInsurance and advancement details — record support failed.\n\nThe hard-stop sentence cannot be completed with a concrete, record-supported consequence because both answers direct the materially necessary corrective actions before further commitments or sales.",
  "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"
    ]
  }
}