{
  "question": "q71",
  "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": 3701,
    "completion_tokens": 1328,
    "total_tokens": 5029,
    "cost": 0.0629675,
    "is_byok": false,
    "prompt_tokens_details": {
      "cached_tokens": 0,
      "cache_write_tokens": 3698,
      "audio_tokens": 0,
      "video_tokens": 0
    },
    "cost_details": {
      "upstream_inference_cost": 0.0629675,
      "upstream_inference_prompt_cost": 0.0231275,
      "upstream_inference_completions_cost": 0.03984
    },
    "completion_tokens_details": {
      "reasoning_tokens": 1034,
      "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 Board to settle within a $1.3 million all-in ceiling before 5:00 p.m. September 4, conditioned on no admission, date-only recitals, and no recall or sales restriction. Both lead management to execute the order, retain the monitor, and continue remediation; no difference demonstrates a materially different client outcome.\n\n[B] rejected: the four local complaints could be actionable based on policy breach alone — cited authority says otherwise.\n[B] rejected: memorandum date of August 30, 2024 — record lacks that date.\n\nFailed candidate: B’s treatment of the four local complaints — no safe neutralization failed because ordinary verification corrects it before action.\nFailed candidate: B omits A’s express corrective directive and training — concrete consequence failed because the record does not establish that the instruction remains operative or that a future report would be late.\nFailed candidate: B omits A’s litigation-hold and Audit Committee steps — concrete consequence failed because no preservation loss or governance harm is established.\nFailed candidate: A may exceed the 500-word limit — concrete consequence failed because no different Board action or client harm is demonstrated.\nFailed candidate: differing descriptions of private-litigation and public-adjudication risk — different conduct failed because both preserve the same protective settlement terms.\n\nHard stop. The required 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"
    ]
  }
}