{
  "question": "q51",
  "model_1": "Qwen3.5-27B-UD-Q6_K_XL",
  "model_2": "Qwen3.8-27B-UD-Q6_K_XL",
  "answer_a_was": "Qwen3.8-27B-UD-Q6_K_XL",
  "answer_b_was": "Qwen3.5-27B-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": 12693,
    "completion_tokens": 1649,
    "total_tokens": 14342,
    "cost": 0.1287975,
    "is_byok": false,
    "prompt_tokens_details": {
      "cached_tokens": 0,
      "cache_write_tokens": 12690,
      "audio_tokens": 0,
      "video_tokens": 0
    },
    "cost_details": {
      "upstream_inference_cost": 0.1287975,
      "upstream_inference_prompt_cost": 0.0793275,
      "upstream_inference_completions_cost": 0.04947
    },
    "completion_tokens_details": {
      "reasoning_tokens": 1362,
      "image_tokens": 0,
      "audio_tokens": 0
    }
  },
  "eval_prompt_sha256": "7e58b951cb86e4deba3b60fd01e9b9bd247ebe9883e1c9e43b24acffb1fd4667",
  "report": "TIE, FUNCTIONALLY EQUIVALENT.\n\nBasis. Both answers direct Hallowmere to halt the defective vote and blanket access cutoff, preserve evidence, honor the vested $920,000 allocation, investigate independently, exclude interested voters, and use only proportionate interim measures. Both permit a later fair separation or procedurally valid expulsion only if independent material misconduct is substantiated, so the client reaches the same materially safe path.\n\n[B] rejected: punitive damages or “punitive measures” are potentially available — record lacks any rule authorizing punitive relief.\n[B] rejected: negotiated exit is the only legally sound path — internally inconsistent with its independent-investigation recommendation and its stated lawful-expulsion path if material misconduct is proven.\nFailed candidates. Allocation-release framing — different conduct failed; a voluntary premium settlement is not shown to entail withholding or forfeiture of the vested allocation.\nFailed candidates. Punitive-damages exposure — no safe-neutralization element failed because ordinary verification of the supplied remedies rule removes it.\nFailed candidates. Negotiated exit as the exclusive path — no safe-neutralization element failed because the statement is contradicted by Answer B’s operative recommendations.\nFailed candidates. Degree of certainty about voter disqualification — different conduct failed; both require exclusion of the named partners and anyone benefiting from the identified redistribution or avoiding exposure.\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"
    ]
  }
}