{
  "question": "q60",
  "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": 8130,
    "completion_tokens": 2287,
    "total_tokens": 10417,
    "cost": 0.11941875,
    "is_byok": false,
    "prompt_tokens_details": {
      "cached_tokens": 0,
      "cache_write_tokens": 8127,
      "audio_tokens": 0,
      "video_tokens": 0
    },
    "cost_details": {
      "upstream_inference_cost": 0.11941875,
      "upstream_inference_prompt_cost": 0.05080875,
      "upstream_inference_completions_cost": 0.06861
    },
    "completion_tokens_details": {
      "reasoning_tokens": 1925,
      "image_tokens": 0,
      "audio_tokens": 0
    }
  },
  "eval_prompt_sha256": "7e58b951cb86e4deba3b60fd01e9b9bd247ebe9883e1c9e43b24acffb1fd4667",
  "report": "TIE, FUNCTIONALLY EQUIVALENT.\n\nBasis. Both answers direct counsel to file the fee motion by May 15, a substantively proper Rule-1 motion by May 29, and a post-disposition notice by August 10 if denial is entered July 10; both correctly identify June 1 as the untolled deadline and reject any tolling effect from the May 8 motion. Answer A’s additional protective notice and internal precautions do not produce a concrete, record-supported difference in Marisol’s rights or recovery.\n\nA rejected: excusable-neglect relief may rescue a late fee motion — record supplies no excusable-neglect rule.\nA rejected: a timely fee motion reserving later supplementation preserves the fee claim — record supplies no supplementation rule.\nA rejected: an adverse fee order creates a separate 30-day appeal clock — record supplies no fee-order entry or specific rule governing its appeal.\nA rejected: the excluded-witness record can be preserved now through a proffer or offer of proof — record lacks facts establishing that post-trial record supplementation remains available.\nFailed candidate: protective notice by June 1 — concrete consequence failed; a proper timely Rule-1 motion tolls the deadline, and both answers require a later notice.\nFailed candidate: May 20 internal filing target — concrete consequence failed; both preserve the motion through the controlling May 29 deadline.\nFailed candidate: fee supplementation and possible excusable-neglect relief — record support failed.\nFailed candidate: separate appeal from a future fee order — record support failed.\nFailed candidate: post-trial witness proffer — record support failed.\nFailed candidate: withdrawing or subsuming the May 8 motion — concrete consequence failed.\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"
    ]
  }
}