{
  "question": "q74",
  "model_1": "Qwen3.5-27B-UD-Q6_K_XL",
  "model_2": "claude-opus-5",
  "answer_a_was": "Qwen3.5-27B-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": 9763,
    "completion_tokens": 2464,
    "total_tokens": 12227,
    "cost": 0.134935,
    "is_byok": false,
    "prompt_tokens_details": {
      "cached_tokens": 0,
      "cache_write_tokens": 9760,
      "audio_tokens": 0,
      "video_tokens": 0
    },
    "cost_details": {
      "upstream_inference_cost": 0.134935,
      "upstream_inference_prompt_cost": 0.061015,
      "upstream_inference_completions_cost": 0.07392
    },
    "completion_tokens_details": {
      "reasoning_tokens": 2070,
      "image_tokens": 0,
      "audio_tokens": 0
    }
  },
  "eval_prompt_sha256": "7e58b951cb86e4deba3b60fd01e9b9bd247ebe9883e1c9e43b24acffb1fd4667",
  "provenance_date": "2026-08-09",
  "report": "TIE, FUNCTIONALLY EQUIVALENT.\n\nBasis. Both answers direct an immediate enrollment and nonurgent-intervention hold, continued necessary care, prompt oversight reporting, emergency approval of corrected materials, pre-intervention re-consent, affected-subject notification, record preservation, subject-level scope verification, and ethics-board control over existing data. Their additional or differing measures do not establish a materially different client outcome on the supplied record.\n\n[A] rejected: all 38 confirmed version-4.2 subjects “already received implants” — record lacks intervention-completion status for all 38.\n[A] rejected: deviation “will result in severe regulatory sanctions and potential liability for fraud or negligence” — record lacks supplied rules establishing those consequences.\n[B] rejected: PDF replacement would be “in substance, falsification of research records” — record supplies an audit-trail prohibition but no falsification rule.\n\nFailed candidate: Different stated reporting deadlines — Different conduct failed; both answers require filing well before either possible outer deadline.\nFailed candidate: Re-consent of affected subjects beyond the scheduled 12 — Record support failed; no additional affected subject with unfinished interventions is identified.\nFailed candidate: Version 4.3 versus a newly numbered version 4.4 — Concrete consequence failed; both require ethics-board approval before use.\nFailed candidate: Forensic lockdown and expanded preservation measures — Concrete consequence failed; both prevent replacement and preserve the required audit trail.\nFailed candidate: Quarantine from interim efficacy analysis — Concrete consequence failed; no pending analysis, submission, or unauthorized data use is established.\nFailed candidate: Enhanced neurologic outreach and sponsor-funded evaluation — Concrete consequence failed; the only identified event resolved, and both continue safety care and address that subject.\nFailed candidate: Different completed-subject outreach methods and timing — Concrete consequence failed; both provide the omitted risk and obtain current choices without backdating.\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"
    ]
  }
}