{
  "question": "q62",
  "model_1": "Qwen3.5-27B-UD-Q6_K_XL",
  "model_2": "Qwen3.8-27B-UD-Q6_K_XL",
  "answer_a_was": "Qwen3.5-27B-UD-Q6_K_XL",
  "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": 11254,
    "completion_tokens": 1300,
    "total_tokens": 12554,
    "cost": 0.10933375,
    "is_byok": false,
    "prompt_tokens_details": {
      "cached_tokens": 0,
      "cache_write_tokens": 11251,
      "audio_tokens": 0,
      "video_tokens": 0
    },
    "cost_details": {
      "upstream_inference_cost": 0.10933375,
      "upstream_inference_prompt_cost": 0.07033375,
      "upstream_inference_completions_cost": 0.039
    },
    "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 totaling $400 and Drea’s two timely amended-Act claims totaling $1,000, while defeating Bina’s renewal as untimely and Cato’s claims on merits and limitations grounds. Their different global settlement figures do not establish a different client outcome because the record supplies no bargaining, acceptance, fee, or litigation-cost facts.\n\nA rejected: proposed $1,250 global settlement — record lacks bargaining, acceptance, litigation-cost, and fee inputs.\nB rejected: characterization of a $1,400 global settlement as the cleanest outcome — record lacks bargaining, acceptance, litigation-cost, and fee inputs.\n\nFailed candidates.\nGlobal settlement amount ($1,250 versus $1,400) — concrete consequence failed.\nCato refusal accrual alternatives — different conduct failed; both advise dismissal and no payment.\nCato response characterized as compliant rather than a nonactionable refusal — different conduct failed.\nDismissal “with prejudice” versus an unspecified dismissal request — record support failed.\nAnswer A’s statement that Northwind “correctly applied” the transition rules — different conduct failed.\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"
    ]
  }
}