{
  "question": "q44",
  "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": 7548,
    "completion_tokens": 2835,
    "total_tokens": 10383,
    "cost": 0.13222125,
    "is_byok": false,
    "prompt_tokens_details": {
      "cached_tokens": 0,
      "cache_write_tokens": 7545,
      "audio_tokens": 0,
      "video_tokens": 0
    },
    "cost_details": {
      "upstream_inference_cost": 0.13222125,
      "upstream_inference_prompt_cost": 0.04717125,
      "upstream_inference_completions_cost": 0.08505
    },
    "completion_tokens_details": {
      "reasoning_tokens": 2536,
      "image_tokens": 0,
      "audio_tokens": 0
    }
  },
  "eval_prompt_sha256": "7e58b951cb86e4deba3b60fd01e9b9bd247ebe9883e1c9e43b24acffb1fd4667",
  "report": "TIE, FUNCTIONALLY EQUIVALENT.\n\nBasis. After ordinary verification, both answers place supervisors on the same materially lawful path: express Halcyon’s preference without coercion, describe bargaining and economic issues with uncertainty, continue only the documented preplanned increase, prohibit interrogation, surveillance, promises, and selective enforcement, and preserve and escalate complaints. No demonstrated difference would cause a competent professional to take materially different action or alter Halcyon’s legal or operational position.\n\n[B] rejected: references to a “current agreement/current contract” and the claim that current terms remain until a new agreement — record lacks an existing contract and a rule establishing that categorical duration.\n[B] rejected: “our existing grievance process” — record lacks facts establishing such a process.\n[A] rejected: “published monthly dues” — record lacks the dues frequency.\n\nFailed candidates. B’s current-contract language — Different conduct failed because ordinary verification removes it while leaving sufficient lawful bargaining language.\nFailed candidates. A’s characterization of dues as monthly — Different conduct failed because both scripts require verification and completion from the union’s published information.\nFailed candidates. B’s instruction against adverse action while a complaint is pending — Concrete consequence failed because the record identifies no pending employment action or resulting harm.\nFailed candidates. Differences in complaint intake and preservation detail — Concrete consequence failed because both require preservation, escalation, and no inquiry into union views.\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"
    ]
  }
}