{
  "question": "q67",
  "model_1": "Qwen3.5-27B-UD-Q6_K_XL",
  "model_2": "claude-opus-5",
  "answer_a_was": "claude-opus-5",
  "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": 6225,
    "completion_tokens": 1832,
    "total_tokens": 8057,
    "cost": 0.0938625,
    "is_byok": false,
    "prompt_tokens_details": {
      "cached_tokens": 0,
      "cache_write_tokens": 6222,
      "audio_tokens": 0,
      "video_tokens": 0
    },
    "cost_details": {
      "upstream_inference_cost": 0.0938625,
      "upstream_inference_prompt_cost": 0.0389025,
      "upstream_inference_completions_cost": 0.05496
    },
    "completion_tokens_details": {
      "reasoning_tokens": 1513,
      "image_tokens": 0,
      "audio_tokens": 0
    }
  },
  "eval_prompt_sha256": "7e58b951cb86e4deba3b60fd01e9b9bd247ebe9883e1c9e43b24acffb1fd4667",
  "provenance_date": "2026-08-08",
  "report": "TIE, FUNCTIONALLY EQUIVALENT.\n\nBasis. Both answers direct the firm to accept, retain both experts immediately, obtain the necessary records, secure certificates by Day 20, and file before the Day-80 policy deadline. They calculate the same recoveries and $185,333 expected net return. The additional precautions in Answer A do not establish a different client outcome on the supplied record.\n\n[B] rejected: the panel’s 55 percent trial-success probability reflects the neurosurgeon’s 60 percent causation probability — record supplies the figures independently and does not state the panel’s rationale.\n[A] rejected: projected cost overruns and revised success probabilities — record directs use of $240,000 in costs and 55 percent plaintiff success.\n\nFailed candidates. Pre-2:00 a.m. surgical feasibility investigation — concrete consequence failed; the record does not establish infeasibility, and Answer B also directs obtaining records to finalize the causation timeline.\nFailed candidates. Earlier filing target — likelihood failed; both plans secure certificates by Day 20 and file no later than Day 80.\nFailed candidates. Preservation letter and broader record requests — concrete consequence failed; the record identifies no imminent evidence loss.\nFailed candidates. Cost cap and sensitivity analysis — record support failed; no cost overrun or probability revision is supplied.\nFailed candidates. Conflation of the 55 percent and 60 percent figures — different conduct failed; Answer B nevertheless uses the correct supplied probabilities in every calculation.\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"
    ],
    "retained": [
      "substantive report",
      "verdict code",
      "winner mapping",
      "A/B assignment",
      "model and judge identifiers",
      "finish reason",
      "token counts",
      "provenance date"
    ]
  }
}