{
  "question": "q71",
  "model_1": "Qwen3.8-27B-UD-Q6_K_XL",
  "model_2": "claude-opus-5",
  "answer_a_was": "claude-opus-5",
  "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": 3692,
    "completion_tokens": 1817,
    "total_tokens": 5509,
    "cost": 0.07758125,
    "is_byok": false,
    "prompt_tokens_details": {
      "cached_tokens": 0,
      "cache_write_tokens": 3689,
      "audio_tokens": 0,
      "video_tokens": 0
    },
    "cost_details": {
      "upstream_inference_cost": 0.07758125,
      "upstream_inference_prompt_cost": 0.02307125,
      "upstream_inference_completions_cost": 0.05451
    },
    "completion_tokens_details": {
      "reasoning_tokens": 1552,
      "image_tokens": 0,
      "audio_tokens": 0
    }
  },
  "eval_prompt_sha256": "7e58b951cb86e4deba3b60fd01e9b9bd247ebe9883e1c9e43b24acffb1fd4667",
  "report": "TIE, FUNCTIONALLY EQUIVALENT.\n\nBasis. Both answers direct the board to authorize settlement by 5:00 p.m. September 4, with current cash cost of $1.2 million and maximum authority of $1.3 million, conditioned on no admission, limited recitals, and no recall or sales restriction. Both distinguish the ten supported violations from the four disputed complaints, appropriately characterize the email, and leave management on the same materially safe execution path.\n\n[A] rejected: “with no offsetting benefit” from litigation — record identifies a hearing on whether the four local complaints count.\n[A] rejected: the email “will be used” to seek an enhanced penalty — record does not establish the agency’s intended use of the email.\n\nFailed candidates. Answer A exceeds the 500-word limit — concrete consequence failed.\nFailed candidates. Answer A adds corrective training, a reporting directive, and Audit Committee review — concrete consequence failed.\nFailed candidates. Answer A’s categorical litigation-benefit statement — no safe neutralization failed.\nFailed candidates. Answer A’s prediction about agency use of the email — no safe neutralization failed.\nFailed candidates. Differences in describing the four local complaints — 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"
    ]
  }
}