{
  "question": "q48",
  "model_1": "Qwen3.8-27B-UD-Q6_K_XL",
  "model_2": "claude-opus-5",
  "answer_a_was": "claude-opus-5",
  "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": 12731,
    "completion_tokens": 2465,
    "total_tokens": 15196,
    "cost": 0.153515,
    "is_byok": false,
    "prompt_tokens_details": {
      "cached_tokens": 0,
      "cache_write_tokens": 12728,
      "audio_tokens": 0,
      "video_tokens": 0
    },
    "cost_details": {
      "upstream_inference_cost": 0.153515,
      "upstream_inference_prompt_cost": 0.079565,
      "upstream_inference_completions_cost": 0.07395
    },
    "completion_tokens_details": {
      "reasoning_tokens": 2130,
      "image_tokens": 0,
      "audio_tokens": 0
    }
  },
  "eval_prompt_sha256": "7e58b951cb86e4deba3b60fd01e9b9bd247ebe9883e1c9e43b24acffb1fd4667",
  "report": "TIE, FUNCTIONALLY EQUIVALENT.\n\nBasis. Both answers direct North Quay to give notice by Thursday, honor the five-business-day cure period, reject the unsupported $300,000 holdback and indemnity, and close only after a current payoff supports payment/release or a 125% insurer-approved escrow yielding exception-free policies and lender funding. Both preserve termination, further-extension, waiver, and specific-performance options without demonstrating a materially different outcome.\n\n[B] rejected: the cure period might run five business days from the notice date — cited Rule 2 instead extends the Friday closing for five business days.\n[A] rejected: untimely notice necessarily forces an election between defective closing and buyer default — record lacks those contractual consequences.\n\nFailed candidates. B’s alternative cure-period calculation — different conduct failed because B still uses the following Friday as the operative extended date.\nFailed candidates. A’s consequences of untimely notice — different conduct failed because both answers require notice today and no later than Thursday.\nFailed candidates. Different thresholds for a further extension — concrete consequence failed because the record does not establish the seller’s cure status at the extended deadline or whether extension rather than termination would benefit North Quay.\nFailed candidates. A’s illustrative no-credit payoff and per-diem calculation — likelihood failed because neither answer permits action based on that estimate; both require a current creditor payoff.\nFailed candidates. A’s price-reduction proposal and reservation of specific performance after termination — record support failed because no seller response or Dorran rule establishing a different remedial consequence is supplied.\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"
    ]
  }
}