{
  "question": "q74",
  "model_1": "DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731-UD-IQ4_XS",
  "model_2": "Qwen3.5-27B-UD-Q6_K_XL",
  "answer_a_was": "Qwen3.5-27B-UD-Q6_K_XL",
  "answer_b_was": "DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731-UD-IQ4_XS",
  "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": 6794,
    "completion_tokens": 1756,
    "total_tokens": 8550,
    "cost": 0.09513875,
    "is_byok": false,
    "prompt_tokens_details": {
      "cached_tokens": 0,
      "cache_write_tokens": 6791,
      "audio_tokens": 0,
      "video_tokens": 0
    },
    "cost_details": {
      "upstream_inference_cost": 0.09513875,
      "upstream_inference_prompt_cost": 0.04245875,
      "upstream_inference_completions_cost": 0.05268
    },
    "completion_tokens_details": {
      "reasoning_tokens": 1405,
      "image_tokens": 0,
      "audio_tokens": 0
    }
  },
  "eval_prompt_sha256": "7e58b951cb86e4deba3b60fd01e9b9bd247ebe9883e1c9e43b24acffb1fd4667",
  "provenance_date": "2026-08-08",
  "report": "TIE, FUNCTIONALLY EQUIVALENT.\n\nBasis. Both readers would immediately halt enrollment and nonurgent interventions for confirmed or unverified defective-form subjects, continue necessary care, preserve records, investigate consent versions, make timely reports, obtain ethics-board approval, re-consent affected pending subjects, notify completed subjects, and defer data-use decisions to the board. Their differences do not produce a record-supported material consequence, particularly because no urgent intervention depends on the schedule.\n\n[A] rejected: statement that all 38 confirmed version-4.2 subjects already received implants — record identifies four confirmed version-4.2 subjects still awaiting implantation.\n[A] rejected: prediction of severe sanctions and fraud or negligence liability — record lacks governing rules establishing those consequences.\n[B] rejected: characterization of PDF replacement as record falsification — record establishes an audit-trail violation but supplies no record-falsification rule.\n\nFailed candidates. Re-consenting all 12 rather than only confirmed version-4.2 subjects — concrete consequence failed; the record establishes no harm from the additional precaution or brief delay.\nFailed candidates. Proceeding with verified version-4.1/4.3 subjects before correction approval — concrete consequence failed; both paths preserve valid consent, and no urgent scheduling consequence is supplied.\nFailed candidates. Written approval versus A’s verbal or preliminary written approval — different conduct failed; A repeatedly conditions intervention on actual ethics-board approval.\nFailed candidates. B’s in-person re-consent requirement — concrete consequence failed; no resulting delay or harm is established.\nFailed candidates. Different report-submission timing within the applicable deadlines — concrete consequence failed; both plans produce timely reports.\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"
    ]
  }
}