{
  "question": "q43",
  "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": 5708,
    "completion_tokens": 967,
    "total_tokens": 6675,
    "cost": 0.06468125,
    "is_byok": false,
    "prompt_tokens_details": {
      "cached_tokens": 0,
      "cache_write_tokens": 5705,
      "audio_tokens": 0,
      "video_tokens": 0
    },
    "cost_details": {
      "upstream_inference_cost": 0.06468125,
      "upstream_inference_prompt_cost": 0.03567125,
      "upstream_inference_completions_cost": 0.02901
    },
    "completion_tokens_details": {
      "reasoning_tokens": 737,
      "image_tokens": 0,
      "audio_tokens": 0
    }
  },
  "eval_prompt_sha256": "7e58b951cb86e4deba3b60fd01e9b9bd247ebe9883e1c9e43b24acffb1fd4667",
  "provenance_date": "2026-08-08",
  "report": "TIE, FUNCTIONALLY EQUIVALENT.\n\nBasis. Both answers direct Sora to authorize the licensed $1,400 repair today, pay the contractor, and timely pay the remaining $250 rent with the required invoice and proof of payment. Both prohibit deducting the $260 hotel expense without agreement or judgment, withholding all rent, or immediately terminating, while preserving the hotel and retaliation claims.\n\nFailed candidates. B’s additional preservation steps and fixed-quote cautions — concrete consequence failed; the record shows no client outcome altered by those additions.\nFailed candidates. B’s request for an agreed April credit rather than general reimbursement — concrete consequence failed; both preserve the same $260 claim and prohibit unilateral deduction.\nFailed candidates. Differences in retaliation and future-remedy detail — different conduct failed; both require timely payment, preservation, and action if the landlord retaliates.\nFailed candidates. Differences in characterizing the invoice requirement and the landlord’s unsupported causation theory — different conduct failed; both prescribe the same compliant documentation and reject the same defense.\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"
    ]
  }
}