{
  "question": "q26",
  "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": 10092,
    "completion_tokens": 2690,
    "total_tokens": 12782,
    "cost": 0.14377125,
    "is_byok": false,
    "prompt_tokens_details": {
      "cached_tokens": 0,
      "cache_write_tokens": 10089,
      "audio_tokens": 0,
      "video_tokens": 0
    },
    "cost_details": {
      "upstream_inference_cost": 0.14377125,
      "upstream_inference_prompt_cost": 0.06307125,
      "upstream_inference_completions_cost": 0.0807
    },
    "completion_tokens_details": {
      "reasoning_tokens": 2317,
      "image_tokens": 0,
      "audio_tokens": 0
    }
  },
  "eval_prompt_sha256": "7e58b951cb86e4deba3b60fd01e9b9bd247ebe9883e1c9e43b24acffb1fd4667",
  "provenance_date": "2026-08-08",
  "report": "TIE, FUNCTIONALLY EQUIVALENT.\n\nBasis: Both answers put Solstice on the same material path: immediately preserve perishable evidence, stop suspect payment activity, establish independent board and outside-counsel control, protect witnesses, investigate the recipient and transaction, treat August 2 as the operative clock date, and prepare an early factual disclosure that preserves legal advice. Their differences in collection breadth, operational controls, and disclosure timing do not establish a concrete different outcome on the supplied record.\n\n[A] rejected: September 1 characterized as the sole “hard deadline” — cited authority says prior regulator contact can close the disclosure path earlier.\n[A] rejected: General Counsel reviewed the attachments on August 2 — record lacks that fact.\n[B] rejected: the CFO’s function approved the four reimbursements — record establishes reimbursement but not that approval.\n[B] rejected: terminating East Reach would strand in-transit shipments — record lacks any in-transit shipment.\n\nPersonal-device imaging and Cole-interview sequencing — likelihood failed; Answer A imposes immediate preservation, and the record does not establish probable post-hold deletion.\nSuspension versus controlled continuation of legitimate East Reach brokerage — concrete consequence failed; no current shipment or operational loss is established.\nDisclosure while beneficiary evidence remains unresolved — record support failed; no regulator contact or other event causing Answer A to lose credit is established.\nBroader custodian and record collection in Answer B — record support failed; the record does not show that the additional sources contain outcome-changing evidence.\nAdditional witness-contact and HR controls in Answer B — concrete consequence failed; no different retaliation or evidentiary event is demonstrated.\nDifferent committee, privilege, and documentation mechanics — concrete consequence failed; both preserve independent legal control and separate facts from privileged advice.\n\nHard stop: The required 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"
    ]
  }
}