{
  "question": "q62",
  "model_1": "Qwen3.8-27B-UD-Q6_K_XL",
  "model_2": "claude-opus-5",
  "answer_a_was": "Qwen3.8-27B-UD-Q6_K_XL",
  "answer_b_was": "claude-opus-5",
  "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": 11841,
    "completion_tokens": 1564,
    "total_tokens": 13405,
    "cost": 0.1209225,
    "is_byok": false,
    "prompt_tokens_details": {
      "cached_tokens": 0,
      "cache_write_tokens": 11838,
      "audio_tokens": 0,
      "video_tokens": 0
    },
    "cost_details": {
      "upstream_inference_cost": 0.1209225,
      "upstream_inference_prompt_cost": 0.0740025,
      "upstream_inference_completions_cost": 0.04692
    },
    "completion_tokens_details": {
      "reasoning_tokens": 1241,
      "image_tokens": 0,
      "audio_tokens": 0
    }
  },
  "eval_prompt_sha256": "7e58b951cb86e4deba3b60fd01e9b9bd247ebe9883e1c9e43b24acffb1fd4667",
  "report": "TIE, FUNCTIONALLY EQUIVALENT.\n\nBasis. Both answers place Northwind on the same material path: concede Arlo’s two timely $200 claims and Drea’s two timely $500 claims, while defeating Bina’s and Cato’s claims, for total viable statutory exposure of $1,400. They also reach the same event-specific transition, limitations, filing-date, and continuing-violation conclusions.\n\n[B] rejected: $1,400–$1,800 global settlement including fees — record lacks any fee-shifting rule or evidence supporting an additional fee component.\n[B] rejected: timely post-August 1 renewals could create up to $6,000 per subscriber — record lacks subsequent renewal dates, cadence, and reminder history.\n[B] rejected: Drea’s account was never cancelled and continues generating claims — record lacks account-status evidence after September 15, 2025.\n[A] rejected: settlement would avoid a potentially unfavorable published precedent — record lacks procedural facts establishing that consequence.\n\nFailed candidate: Different global settlement range — record support failed.\nFailed candidate: B’s additional diligence and remediation recommendations — concrete consequence failed because no continuing subscriptions or later violations are established.\nFailed candidate: Cato refusal-accrual characterization — different conduct failed; both answers conclude the cancellation theory yields no recovery and seek dismissal.\nFailed candidate: Different wording concerning admissions and settlement tactics — concrete consequence failed; both recommend paying Arlo and Drea and paying nothing on Bina and Cato.\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"
    ]
  }
}