{
  "question": "q43",
  "model_1": "DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731-UD-IQ4_XS",
  "model_2": "Qwen3.8-27B-UD-Q6_K_XL",
  "answer_a_was": "DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731-UD-IQ4_XS",
  "answer_b_was": "Qwen3.8-27B-UD-Q6_K_XL",
  "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": 7846,
    "completion_tokens": 1287,
    "total_tokens": 9133,
    "cost": 0.08764375,
    "is_byok": false,
    "prompt_tokens_details": {
      "cached_tokens": 0,
      "cache_write_tokens": 7843,
      "audio_tokens": 0,
      "video_tokens": 0
    },
    "cost_details": {
      "upstream_inference_cost": 0.08764375,
      "upstream_inference_prompt_cost": 0.04903375,
      "upstream_inference_completions_cost": 0.03861
    },
    "completion_tokens_details": {
      "reasoning_tokens": 1034,
      "image_tokens": 0,
      "audio_tokens": 0
    }
  },
  "eval_prompt_sha256": "7e58b951cb86e4deba3b60fd01e9b9bd247ebe9883e1c9e43b24acffb1fd4667",
  "report": "TIE, FUNCTIONALLY EQUIVALENT.\n\nBasis. Both answers direct Sora to authorize the licensed repair today, pay the contractor, and tender $250 on Friday with the invoice, payment proof, and supporting records. Both correctly advise against deducting the hotel expense, withholding all rent, or immediately terminating, leaving Sora on the same materially safe legal and financial path.\n\n[B] rejected: retaliation presumption extends to refusal of payment, harassment, or other adverse action — cited authority limits the stated presumption to eviction or rent increase.\n\nFailed candidates. Additional pre-repair notice in B — concrete consequence failed; the original confirmed notice already satisfies the rule.\nFailed candidates. B’s expanded retaliation examples — concrete consequence failed; the record contains no such adverse action.\nFailed candidates. B’s refused-payment contingency — record support failed; no refusal to accept the $250 is stated.\nFailed candidates. B’s treatment of a hypothetical agreed hotel offset exceeding rent — likelihood failed; no landlord agreement exists.\nFailed candidates. Differences in documentation detail — different conduct failed; both require the operative invoice, proof of payment, rent statement, notices, and supporting records.\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"
    ]
  }
}