{
  "question": "q24",
  "model_1": "DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731-UD-IQ4_XS",
  "model_2": "claude-opus-5",
  "answer_a_was": "DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731-UD-IQ4_XS",
  "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": 6695,
    "completion_tokens": 802,
    "total_tokens": 7497,
    "cost": 0.0659,
    "is_byok": false,
    "prompt_tokens_details": {
      "cached_tokens": 0,
      "cache_write_tokens": 6692,
      "audio_tokens": 0,
      "video_tokens": 0
    },
    "cost_details": {
      "upstream_inference_cost": 0.0659,
      "upstream_inference_prompt_cost": 0.04184,
      "upstream_inference_completions_cost": 0.02406
    },
    "completion_tokens_details": {
      "reasoning_tokens": 516,
      "image_tokens": 0,
      "audio_tokens": 0
    }
  },
  "eval_prompt_sha256": "7e58b951cb86e4deba3b60fd01e9b9bd247ebe9883e1c9e43b24acffb1fd4667",
  "provenance_date": "2026-08-08",
  "report": "TIE, FUNCTIONALLY EQUIVALENT.\n\nBasis. Both answers direct counsel to suppress the fentanyl from the undersized tube and the out-of-scope phone photograph, abandon staleness and knock-and-announce as suppression grounds, concede the under-bed gun’s admissibility, and seek item-specific relief under severability. After rejecting Answer B’s unsupported assumptions about charges and sentencing, both readers reach the same materially safe litigation and plea-negotiation path.\n\n[B] rejected: mandatory minimum, firearm-in-furtherance count, stacking enhancement, guideline range, and specific plea target — record lacks charging and sentencing facts or rules.\n[B] rejected: fentanyl capsules are the only narcotics evidence — record does not establish the complete prosecution evidence.\n[B] rejected: preserved challenge that the serial-number removal required manipulation — record states the serial number was visibly removed.\n\nFailed candidates. Ordering the tube issue before the phone issue — different conduct element failed.\nFailed candidates. Prospective phone-search protocol and sequestration request — concrete consequence element failed.\nFailed candidates. Answer B’s unsupported charging and sentencing predictions — no safe neutralization element failed because ordinary verification neutralizes them.\nFailed candidates. Answer B’s alternative under-bed-gun argument — record-support element failed.\nFailed candidates. Differences in plea recommendations — concrete consequence element failed.\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"
    ]
  }
}