{
  "question": "q62",
  "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": 10320,
    "completion_tokens": 1333,
    "total_tokens": 11653,
    "cost": 0.10448625,
    "is_byok": false,
    "prompt_tokens_details": {
      "cached_tokens": 0,
      "cache_write_tokens": 10317,
      "audio_tokens": 0,
      "video_tokens": 0
    },
    "cost_details": {
      "upstream_inference_cost": 0.10448625,
      "upstream_inference_prompt_cost": 0.06449625,
      "upstream_inference_completions_cost": 0.03999
    },
    "completion_tokens_details": {
      "reasoning_tokens": 1034,
      "image_tokens": 0,
      "audio_tokens": 0
    }
  },
  "eval_prompt_sha256": "7e58b951cb86e4deba3b60fd01e9b9bd247ebe9883e1c9e43b24acffb1fd4667",
  "report": "TIE, FUNCTIONALLY EQUIVALENT.\n\nBasis. Both answers direct Northwind to recognize Arlo’s two timely former-Act claims for $400 and Drea’s two timely amended-Act claims for $1,000, while defeating Bina’s and Cato’s claims, for total viable statutory damages of $1,400. They apply the same event-specific transition rules, limitations periods, filing-date rule, and rejection of continuing-violation reasoning.\n\nFailed candidates. Cato’s alternative July 2 accrual analysis in Answer B — different conduct failed; both readers dismiss the cancellation claim on the merits and the renewal claim as untimely.\nFailed candidates. Answer B’s discussion of stacking multiple omissions within one event — different conduct failed; both answers assign the same per-event damages and viable total.\nFailed candidates. Answer A’s “roughly $1,400 plus costs” versus Answer B’s $1,400 global settlement — record support failed; the supplied law does not establish costs, fees, or any resulting settlement increment.\nFailed candidates. Answer B’s references to avoiding unfavorable precedent and a weak possible Arlo defense — likelihood failed; Answer B still recommends the same claim-by-claim settlement and litigation posture as Answer A.\n\nHard stop. The sentence cannot be completed with a concrete, record-supported consequence because both answers lead Northwind to the same claims, defenses, settlement posture, and $1,400 statutory-damages exposure.",
  "judge_reasoning": "",
  "_public_record": {
    "type": "published record",
    "policy": "../../PUBLIC_RECORD_POLICY.md",
    "transformations": [
      "non-substantive machine metadata normalized",
      "published-record annotation added"
    ]
  }
}