{
  "question": "q41",
  "model_1": "DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731-UD-IQ4_XS",
  "model_2": "claude-opus-5",
  "answer_a_was": "claude-opus-5",
  "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": 9436,
    "completion_tokens": 1381,
    "total_tokens": 10817,
    "cost": 0.10040125,
    "is_byok": false,
    "prompt_tokens_details": {
      "cached_tokens": 0,
      "cache_write_tokens": 9433,
      "audio_tokens": 0,
      "video_tokens": 0
    },
    "cost_details": {
      "upstream_inference_cost": 0.10040125,
      "upstream_inference_prompt_cost": 0.05897125,
      "upstream_inference_completions_cost": 0.04143
    },
    "completion_tokens_details": {
      "reasoning_tokens": 993,
      "image_tokens": 0,
      "audio_tokens": 0
    }
  },
  "eval_prompt_sha256": "7e58b951cb86e4deba3b60fd01e9b9bd247ebe9883e1c9e43b24acffb1fd4667",
  "provenance_date": "2026-08-08",
  "report": "TIE, FUNCTIONALLY EQUIVALENT.\n\nBoth answers direct Lantern Row to pay $160,000 under protest by March 6, cure and document the nonmonetary issues by March 16, reject February relief, submit final March sales data by April 10, claim any proven $48,000 credit, and avoid possession after a valid termination. Their differences do not alter the materially safe path preserving the lease, offset claim, and guaranty cap.\n\n[A] rejected: Lantern Row apparently never delivered a timely February sales statement — record lacks any fact about February statement delivery.\n[A] rejected: post-termination obligations may include accelerated rent, reletting costs, brokerage, downtime, holdover rent, and enforcement costs — record lacks lease terms establishing those obligations.\n[A] rejected: the landlord’s prospective-adjustment offer would be withdrawn under the CEO’s plan — record does not establish withdrawal.\n\nFailed candidates. B omits A’s detailed gross-sales accounting categories — different conduct failed because B still requires final figures calculated under the lease’s gross-sales definition.\nFailed candidates. B omits A’s notice-compliance review — concrete consequence failed because both plans fully cure and the record identifies no notice defect.\nFailed candidates. A recommends filing before March 20 while B requires an order preserving possession before March 23 — likelihood failed because both instructions arise only if termination remains asserted despite cure, and no resulting procedural loss is demonstrated.\nFailed candidates. A adds expanded insurance, force-majeure, and conditional-surrender documentation — concrete consequence failed because B directs the same timely cures and surrender if termination is valid.\nFailed candidates. A’s February-statement assertion — record support failed.\nFailed candidates. A’s examples of uncapped obligations — record support failed.\nFailed candidates. A’s predicted withdrawal of negotiations — record support failed.\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"
    ]
  }
}