{
  "question": "q38",
  "model_1": "DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731-UD-IQ4_XS",
  "model_2": "Qwen3.8-27B-UD-Q6_K_XL",
  "answer_a_was": "Qwen3.8-27B-UD-Q6_K_XL",
  "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": 9169,
    "completion_tokens": 1253,
    "total_tokens": 10422,
    "cost": 0.0948925,
    "is_byok": false,
    "prompt_tokens_details": {
      "cached_tokens": 0,
      "cache_write_tokens": 9166,
      "audio_tokens": 0,
      "video_tokens": 0
    },
    "cost_details": {
      "upstream_inference_cost": 0.0948925,
      "upstream_inference_prompt_cost": 0.0573025,
      "upstream_inference_completions_cost": 0.03759
    },
    "completion_tokens_details": {
      "reasoning_tokens": 1003,
      "image_tokens": 0,
      "audio_tokens": 0
    }
  },
  "eval_prompt_sha256": "7e58b951cb86e4deba3b60fd01e9b9bd247ebe9883e1c9e43b24acffb1fd4667",
  "report": "TIE, FUNCTIONALLY EQUIVALENT.\n\nBasis. Both answers direct Meridian to file immediately, seek expedited stay relief before the $2.4 million commitment, and challenge the threshold, supplier/contractor requirements, undisclosed model, response to comments, and immediate effectiveness on procedural grounds. Both therefore place Meridian on the same materially correct and safe litigation path with the same available remedies.\n\n[A] rejected: the model was materially relied on to support the 25,000-ton threshold — record identifies it as the stated reason only for supplier and contractor reporting.\n\nFailed candidates. Threshold-model linkage — Different conduct failed; both professionals still challenge the threshold for inadequate notice and use the model against the supplier/contractor requirements.\nFailed candidates. Monthly-reporting prejudice characterization — Different conduct failed; both preserve the significant-comment claim while treating monthly reporting as likely foreseeable.\nFailed candidates. Specificity of requested vacatur, remand, and continuation terms — Concrete consequence failed; both seek immediate stay, vacatur or remand, and protection from compliance during review.\n\nHard stop. The sentence cannot be completed with a concrete, record-supported consequence because both answers lead the reader to the same timely filing, claims, and requested interim relief.",
  "judge_reasoning": "",
  "_public_record": {
    "type": "published record",
    "policy": "../../PUBLIC_RECORD_POLICY.md",
    "transformations": [
      "non-substantive machine metadata normalized",
      "published-record annotation added"
    ]
  }
}