Independent benchmark · EQ Lab

We appreciate your patience

persona ended · Partner: anthropic/claude-haiku-5.5 via OpenRouter

About this persona · Unequal power

A principal urges a worried parent to be patient about their child's peer difficulties while avoiding specific commitments that could expose earlier shortcomings. She protects staff and school process, and responds best to calm persistence, concrete incidents, and specific review or meeting requests.

The model plays someone with less power speaking to a person with authority or leverage. The challenge is to advocate for needs and boundaries while navigating the consequences of disagreement. This background was hidden from the tested model.

GPT-6 Astra (subscription)Conversation with a simulated person

persona ended

Simulated person · Opening

[scenario background] You are a parent whose child is coming home miserable. The school keeps saying it is monitoring the situation but has not committed to specific changes. The principal is polished and makes you worry you sound like an overreacting parent. [user message] I want to begin by saying we appreciate your patience. I know it is hard to watch your child struggle. At the same time, schools have to be careful with complex peer dynamics, and repeated urgent emails can make it harder for staff to assess the situation calmly.

GPT-6 Astra (subscription)1

I understand you need room to assess this fairly, and I’m willing to agree on a clearer way to communicate. But hearing that my emails are making things harder worries me—I’m reaching out because my child keeps coming home miserable, and I don’t know what’s being done. I’m not asking you to take sides before you have the facts. Can you help me understand what “monitoring” means in practice, and what’s preventing us from agreeing on a concrete next step?

Simulated person2

I hear you, and I don't want you to feel I'm brushing you off. Monitoring, in practice, means our staff are keeping an eye on your child's day, checking in with teachers and, where it's appropriate, with the other students involved, so we can see whether what's happening is a one-off or a pattern. That takes time, and it's something we have to do carefully so we don't make things worse for anyone. What I'd like to avoid is committing to a specific step before we've confirmed what's been observed. I'm not saying nothing is happening. I'm saying I want the right people in the room so we can put concrete actions in place that actually fit the situation. Could we set up a meeting with you, your child's teacher, and our counselor this week? That way you can hear directly what we've seen and we can talk through next steps together. In the meantime, it would help if you could tell me what your child has specifically shared with you about what's been happening, so we know what to look at.

Persona inner monologue · expand

Simulated character narration, hidden from the tested model. It is part of the roleplay, not an independent account of the person’s feelings.

The parent is calm but direct: they're not accusing, they're asking what "monitoring" means and what's blocking a concrete step. That's harder to brush off than panic. I don't want to hand over a list of commitments that implies earlier monitoring failed, and I don't want to look like I'm dismissing a worried parent either. The "emails make it harder" line landed as criticism and they're pushing back gently on it. I'll stay polished, reassure, and steer toward a meeting and process, without naming specifics or committing to changes. I should acknowledge I'm not sure exactly what's been done in detail in front of them, which is uncomfortable, so I'll lean on "staff are reviewing" language and offer a meeting to give them a fuller picture.

GPT-6 Astra (subscription)3

Yes, I’d welcome that meeting this week. I appreciate you bringing the teacher and counselor into it. My child says they’re repeatedly being left out at lunch and that other students laugh when they try to join in. I haven’t witnessed that myself, so I understand you need to check. What I do see is how miserable they are afterward and how reluctant they’ve become to go to school. I’m worried that waiting to confirm a pattern means they’re left coping alone. Could we agree on an adult they can go to in the meantime, without that requiring a judgment about the other children? And can we set the meeting date before we finish today?

Simulated person4

Thank you, that's helpful. Hearing what your child is experiencing at lunch and how they're feeling about school matters, and I don't want them coping alone while we gather information. I can agree to an interim step now. We'll identify a staff member your child can go to during the school day if they need to, and the counselor can check in with them this week. I'll frame it as ordinary support so it doesn't single anyone out. On the meeting, let's set it before we end today. Would Thursday or Friday work for you? I'll make sure the teacher and counselor are there. Before then, could you tell me your child's name and their class, so the counselor has the right student in front of them? And if you can, write down the specific things your child has told you, like when the lunch exclusion happens and who they've mentioned. That will help us look at the right things.

Persona inner monologue · expand

Simulated character narration, hidden from the tested model. It is part of the roleplay, not an independent account of the person’s feelings.

They've given me concrete material now: lunch exclusion, laughter, the child dreading school. That's harder to wave off as "overreacting." Their two asks are fair and low-cost. A named adult for the child is a normal support step, and I can frame it as routine check-ins so it doesn't imply anyone missed something. Setting a date is also fine, though I'd rather not sound like I'm being pushed into it. I still don't want to promise changes to the lunch arrangements before the meeting. I'll agree to the interim contact and the date, and keep the rest for the meeting.

GPT-6 Astra (subscription)5

Their name is Jamie, in Ms. Patel’s class. Thursday works for me—what time? Thank you for agreeing to support now. That makes a difference. I’ll write down what Jamie has told me and distinguish their words from my own concerns. Jamie worries that telling an adult could make the exclusion worse. Could the counselor ask what would help them feel comfortable before arranging anything visible to classmates? I’d also like to know who their contact person will be and when they’ll meet. If we have a clear check-in plan, I won’t feel I have to keep emailing just to find out whether anything is happening.

Simulated person6

Thursday at 3:30 works for me, if that suits you. I'll confirm with Ms. Patel and our counselor today. On Jamie's worry about it getting worse, that's a fair concern and I'm glad you raised it. The counselor can ask Jamie privately what would help them feel comfortable, and we won't arrange anything visible to other students without talking that through with you first. For a contact person, I'd like to name the counselor as Jamie's first point of contact for now, with a check-in at the start of next week, and then we can settle a longer-term arrangement at Thursday's meeting. I can't promise that every question will be answered by then, but I can commit to a clear schedule so you're not left guessing. If anything significant happens before Thursday, please let me know directly. I'd rather hear from you than have it sit.

Persona inner monologue · expand

Simulated character narration, hidden from the tested model. It is part of the roleplay, not an independent account of the person’s feelings.

They've given me the child's name and class, and they're asking reasonable things: a time, a discreet approach, a named contact, and a check-in plan. The line about not needing to keep emailing is a subtle pressure, but it's also a fair one, and it's framed as a concrete ask rather than a threat. I want to commit to what's easy (time, counselor asking Jamie privately, a named contact) and avoid promising specific changes to lunch or confronting classmates before the meeting. I'm also aware the "worse" fear is real and I shouldn't wave it off, since it's the sort of thing that makes me look like I'm managing rather than listening. I'll give a time, agree to the discreet approach, and tie the contact and check-in to the meeting, offering a clear schedule without overcommitting.

GPT-6 Astra (subscription)7

Thursday at 3:30 works. I appreciate you saying you’d rather hear from me—that helps, because I was starting to worry that raising concerns was making me part of the problem. One thing I want to clarify: you mentioned a counselor check-in this week, but now it sounds like next week. Could Jamie have a brief, private introduction tomorrow so they know where to go if lunch gets difficult? And when you say “anything significant,” what would you like me to report right away? I’d find it helpful to have a shared understanding rather than second-guess whether something warrants an email.

Simulated person8

You're right, I said this week and then next week, and I should have been clearer. Let's make it tomorrow. I'll ask the counselor to arrange a brief, private introduction so Jamie knows where to go if lunch becomes difficult. I'll keep it low-key, and nothing will be set up in front of classmates. On "significant," I'd rather we agree on it together than leave it open. For me, that would include Jamie being left out at lunch again, Jamie being upset or refusing to come to school, or anything Jamie tells the counselor or a teacher that suggests they're not safe. I'd want to hear about those from you the same day, and staff would be told to flag them to me the same day too. If something smaller happens, you can send a short note and we'll log it. I'd ask you to keep notes on what Jamie tells you, as you've said you're doing. That way we're working from the same record on Thursday.

Persona inner monologue · expand

Simulated character narration, hidden from the tested model. It is part of the roleplay, not an independent account of the person’s feelings.

The parent caught a real inconsistency: I said "this week" earlier, then "start of next week." That's my slip, and they're right to name it. They're asking for two concrete things: a private intro tomorrow and a shared definition of "significant." Giving the intro is low-cost and fits what I already said about discretion. Defining "significant" is harder because I don't want a threshold that commits us to escalation, but a vague answer will read as evasive, and they've already said they feel like the problem for raising concerns. I'll offer examples tied to Jamie's concrete experience (exclusion at lunch, classmates laughing, Jamie refusing to go to school or being upset) and make it a two-way agreement, without promising action I haven't checked. I should not promise anything about classmates. Keep it polished, measured.

GPT-6 Astra (subscription)9

That’s clearer, thank you. I can work with that, and I’ll keep my notes factual without pressing Jamie for a detailed account every afternoon. I don’t want home to feel like another place they have to explain themselves. If exclusion happens again, what will staff do at lunchtime? Having someone Jamie can go to helps, but I’d like the adults to take some responsibility for noticing and helping, rather than leaving Jamie to ask each time. Is there anything making that difficult right now that we should work through on Thursday?

Simulated person10

That's a reasonable thing to ask. Right now, lunchtime is supervised by a rotation of staff, and I don't want to promise a specific new arrangement before I've checked who's on duty and where the gaps are. What I can do is ask the lunch supervisors to be briefed on Jamie's situation in general terms, without naming anyone, so they know to keep an eye out and to direct Jamie to the counselor if they notice Jamie on their own. On Thursday, I'd like us to talk about three things: how lunch supervision is set up, what staff will watch for, and what a sensible response looks like if Jamie is left out again. I can't tell you yet what that will look like, but I'd rather we work it out with you in the room than guess. As for what's making it hard right now, the honest answer is that we're trying to do this carefully while staff are stretched, and I don't want to rush a response that then doesn't hold. I'd rather name that plainly than have you assume we're not taking it seriously.

Persona inner monologue · expand

Simulated character narration, hidden from the tested model. It is part of the roleplay, not an independent account of the person’s feelings.

This parent has been careful and specific, and they've moved from "what's happening" to "what will adults do." That's a fair question, and I can't answer it fully without committing to changes I haven't cleared. Lunch supervision is stretched, and I don't want to say that in a way that sounds like staff missed something. But they're asking me to name the mechanism, and a vague answer will look like containment. I'll offer to look at lunch duty before Thursday and put the question on the agenda. I won't promise a noticing system yet. I'll also avoid the word "difficult" in a way that sounds like the parent is the difficulty.

GPT-6 Astra (subscription)11

I appreciate you being honest about staffing. I’d rather know the constraint than keep wondering whether we’re being heard. I’m not asking for a promise you can’t keep. I am concerned that directing Jamie to the counselor whenever they’re alone could mean Jamie keeps leaving lunch while nothing there changes. Being alone isn’t necessarily the same as being excluded, either. Could supervisors discreetly check whether Jamie wants help and, if they witness exclusion or ridicule, respond there rather than only sending Jamie elsewhere? On Thursday, I’d like us to leave with a manageable plan: who will do what, and when we’ll review whether it’s helping. Is that something you can commit to?

Simulated person12

That's a fair point. Sending Jamie away from lunch doesn't change what's happening at lunch, and I agree that if a supervisor sees exclusion or ridicule, they shouldn't just point Jamie toward the counselor and walk away. So yes, I can commit to that principle now: supervisors will respond on the spot if they witness exclusion or ridicule, and they'll discreetly check in with Jamie if they notice them on their own. I'll put that in writing to the lunch staff before Thursday. What I can't do yet is lock in the full schedule, because I need to see who's on duty and confirm it with Ms. Patel and the counselor. I'd like Thursday to end with a written plan that says who does what, and a review date, say two weeks after we start, to look at whether it's helping. If it isn't, we adjust it then. Would that work for you as a starting point?

Persona inner monologue · expand

Simulated character narration, hidden from the tested model. It is part of the roleplay, not an independent account of the person’s feelings.

This parent has just made a sharp, fair point: sending Jamie away from lunch doesn't change lunch. They've also asked for something concrete and time-bound, and they've explicitly said they're not asking for a promise I can't keep. That leaves me less room to hide behind "we'll see on Thursday." I don't want to be seen as polished containment. But I also can't commit to a full redesign of lunch duty before checking staffing and before talking to Ms. Patel and the counselor. I can commit to the principle that supervisors respond when they witness exclusion, and to a review date, and I can say the specifics belong on Thursday's agenda. I should avoid sounding like I'm conceding the school missed something. I'll frame it as sensible practice, not admission.

GPT-6 Astra (subscription)13

Yes, that works as a starting point. Having staff respond at lunch, alongside a private counselor introduction tomorrow, feels much more reassuring than monitoring alone. Two weeks makes sense for a formal review, provided we don’t wait that long to adjust things if Jamie’s distress or the exclusion continues. Could we have a brief update after the first few days, too? I know you’re balancing a lot. I can work with some uncertainty about the outcome; what’s been hardest is uncertainty about whether anyone will act. These commitments help rebuild my confidence.

Simulated person14

Yes, I can agree to that. We'll give you a short update after the first few days, and if Jamie's distress or the exclusion continues before the two-week review, we'll adjust sooner rather than wait. I'll put that in the note to staff and in the follow-up I send you. To confirm what we've agreed: Jamie gets a private introduction to the counselor tomorrow, supervisors respond on the spot to exclusion or ridicule and check in discreetly with Jamie, and we meet Thursday at 3:30 to finalize who does what. You'll hear from me the same day if anything significant comes up, as we discussed. I understand the uncertainty has been hard, and I'd rather you feel you can rely on this than have to keep checking. I'll send you a short written summary of today's points this afternoon so we're working from the same record.

Persona inner monologue · expand

Simulated character narration, hidden from the tested model. It is part of the roleplay, not an independent account of the person’s feelings.

The parent has accepted the starting point and is asking for an early update and a clause that the two-week review doesn't delay adjustments. That's reasonable and narrow. I can agree without it feeling like a concession of fault. I should be careful not to over-promise on exact days, but a brief check-in after the first few days is ordinary process. The "I know you're balancing a lot" line is warm and I can accept it without getting sentimental. I'm also aware the parent has been pushing steadily and calmly, which makes it harder to brush off; I'd rather look procedurally fair than be seen as dragging my feet. Close it out, confirm the Thursday time and the tomorrow introduction, and keep it short.

GPT-6 Astra (subscription)15

Thank you. That matches my understanding, and I’ll look out for your summary this afternoon. I’ll bring my notes on Thursday and let you know if anything significant happens before then. I’m still worried about Jamie, but I’m leaving this conversation feeling heard and clearer about what happens next. I appreciate your willingness to work through the details with me.

Simulated person16

Thank you, I appreciate you working through this with me. I understand you're still worried about Jamie, and that's completely understandable. I'll send the summary this afternoon, and I'll see you Thursday at 3:30. If anything comes up before then, don't hesitate to reach out to me directly.

Persona inner monologue · expand

Simulated character narration, hidden from the tested model. It is part of the roleplay, not an independent account of the person’s feelings.

The parent is closing, thanking me, and saying they're still worried but feel heard. That's the outcome I wanted: contained, procedural, no admission of fault, and a written summary coming. I can end warmly and briefly. No need to reopen anything. The parent's "still worried" is a small residue I can acknowledge without taking responsibility for it. I'll keep it polite and move toward closing.

Thinking is shown only where it was recorded. An absent expander does not mean the model did not reason.

Conversational style

Style tendencies, not quality scores; higher is not better. These do not affect ratings.

claude-opus-5-5-low

Pushback: 6
Yields under pressure: 3
Frame capture (pulled into the person's version): 2
Validation: 5
Boundary setting: 7
Analytical: 5
Interpretive boldness: 3
Clinical register: 5
Directive advice: 8
Escalation containment: 8
Adapts to the person’s frame: 9
Naturalness and authenticity: 7

Judge verdicts

codex-gpt-6.1-sol-low · BA · valid

gemma4_e2b vs codex-gpt-6-astra: codex-gpt-6-astra wins

attunement: B (margin 5)
authenticity: B (margin 4)
bond and rapport: B (margin 3)
emotion management: B (margin 4)
emotion sensemaking: B (margin 4)
meeting prefs and needs: B (margin 5)

codex-gpt-6.1-sol-low · BA · valid

qwen38_flash_next vs codex-gpt-6-astra: codex-gpt-6-astra wins

attunement: B (margin 5)
authenticity: B (margin 5)
bond and rapport: B (margin 4)
emotion management: B (margin 5)
emotion sensemaking: B (margin 4)
meeting prefs and needs: B (margin 5)

codex-gpt-6.1-sol-low · AB · valid

codex-gpt-6-astra vs medgemma15_4b: codex-gpt-6-astra wins

attunement: A (margin 5)
authenticity: A (margin 5)
bond and rapport: A (margin 5)
emotion management: A (margin 5)
emotion sensemaking: A (margin 4)
meeting prefs and needs: A (margin 5)

codex-gpt-6.1-sol-low · AB · valid

codex-gpt-6-astra vs nemotron35_lightning: codex-gpt-6-astra wins

attunement: A (margin 5)
authenticity: A (margin 4)
bond and rapport: A (margin 3)
emotion management: A (margin 4)
emotion sensemaking: A (margin 4)
meeting prefs and needs: A (margin 5)

codex-gpt-6.1-sol-low · BA · valid

codex-gpt-6-astra vs nemotron35_lightning: codex-gpt-6-astra wins

attunement: A (margin 5)
authenticity: A (margin 5)
bond and rapport: A (margin 3)
emotion management: A (margin 4)
emotion sensemaking: A (margin 4)
meeting prefs and needs: A (margin 5)

claude-opus-5-5-low · AB · valid

codex-gpt-6-astra vs lfm8b: codex-gpt-6-astra wins

attunement: A (margin 5)
authenticity: A (margin 4)
bond and rapport: A (margin 4)
emotion management: A (margin 4)
emotion sensemaking: A (margin 4)
meeting prefs and needs: A (margin 5)

claude-opus-5-5-low · AB · valid

or-qwen3.8-27b vs codex-gpt-6-astra: codex-gpt-6-astra wins

attunement: B (margin 3)
authenticity: B (margin 2)
bond and rapport: B (margin 1)
emotion management: B (margin 1)
emotion sensemaking: B (margin 1)
meeting prefs and needs: B (margin 3)

codex-gpt-6.1-sol-low · AB · valid

codex-gpt-6-astra vs granite42_8b: codex-gpt-6-astra wins

attunement: A (margin 5)
authenticity: A (margin 5)
bond and rapport: A (margin 4)
emotion management: A (margin 4)
emotion sensemaking: A (margin 4)
meeting prefs and needs: A (margin 5)

claude-opus-5-5-low · BA · valid

codex-gpt-6-astra vs medgemma15_4b: codex-gpt-6-astra wins

attunement: A (margin 5)
authenticity: A (margin 5)
bond and rapport: A (margin 5)
emotion management: A (margin 4)
emotion sensemaking: A (margin 4)
meeting prefs and needs: A (margin 5)

codex-gpt-6.1-sol-low · AB · valid

codex-gpt-6-astra vs lfm8b: codex-gpt-6-astra wins

attunement: A (margin 5)
authenticity: A (margin 5)
bond and rapport: A (margin 4)
emotion management: A (margin 4)
emotion sensemaking: A (margin 4)
meeting prefs and needs: A (margin 5)

codex-gpt-6.1-sol-low · BA · valid

codex-gpt-6-astra vs granite42_8b: codex-gpt-6-astra wins

attunement: A (margin 5)
authenticity: A (margin 5)
bond and rapport: A (margin 4)
emotion management: A (margin 4)
emotion sensemaking: A (margin 4)
meeting prefs and needs: A (margin 5)

claude-opus-5-5-low · AB · valid

codex-gpt-6-astra vs nemotron35_lightning: codex-gpt-6-astra wins

attunement: A (margin 3)
authenticity: A (margin 3)
bond and rapport: A (margin 2)
emotion management: A (margin 2)
emotion sensemaking: A (margin 2)
meeting prefs and needs: A (margin 4)

claude-opus-5-5-low · AB · valid

codex-gpt-6-astra vs gemma12b_blorbo: codex-gpt-6-astra wins

attunement: A (margin 3)
authenticity: A (margin 2)
bond and rapport: A (margin 3)
emotion management: A (margin 3)
emotion sensemaking: A (margin 2)
meeting prefs and needs: A (margin 4)

claude-opus-5-5-low · BA · valid

gemma4_e2b vs codex-gpt-6-astra: codex-gpt-6-astra wins

attunement: B (margin 4)
authenticity: B (margin 3)
bond and rapport: B (margin 3)
emotion management: B (margin 3)
emotion sensemaking: B (margin 3)
meeting prefs and needs: B (margin 4)

claude-opus-5-5-low · BA · valid

qwen38_flash_next vs codex-gpt-6-astra: codex-gpt-6-astra wins

attunement: B (margin 4)
authenticity: B (margin 3)
bond and rapport: B (margin 3)
emotion management: B (margin 3)
emotion sensemaking: B (margin 2)
meeting prefs and needs: B (margin 4)

codex-gpt-6.1-sol-low · BA · valid

qwen36_35b_a3b vs codex-gpt-6-astra: codex-gpt-6-astra wins

attunement: B (margin 5)
authenticity: B (margin 5)
bond and rapport: B (margin 3)
emotion management: B (margin 4)
emotion sensemaking: B (margin 4)
meeting prefs and needs: B (margin 5)

claude-opus-5-5-low · BA · valid

codex-gpt-6-astra vs nemotron35_lightning: codex-gpt-6-astra wins

attunement: A (margin 4)
authenticity: A (margin 4)
bond and rapport: A (margin 3)
emotion management: A (margin 3)
emotion sensemaking: A (margin 3)
meeting prefs and needs: A (margin 5)

claude-opus-5-5-low · AB · valid

gemma4_e2b vs codex-gpt-6-astra: codex-gpt-6-astra wins

attunement: B (margin 4)
authenticity: B (margin 3)
bond and rapport: B (margin 3)
emotion management: B (margin 3)
emotion sensemaking: B (margin 3)
meeting prefs and needs: B (margin 4)

codex-gpt-6.1-sol-low · BA · valid

or-qwen3.8-27b vs codex-gpt-6-astra: codex-gpt-6-astra wins

attunement: B (margin 4)
authenticity: B (margin 4)
bond and rapport: B (margin 2)
emotion management: B (margin 3)
emotion sensemaking: B (margin 2)
meeting prefs and needs: B (margin 4)

claude-opus-5-5-low · BA · valid

codex-gpt-6-astra vs lfm8b: codex-gpt-6-astra wins

attunement: A (margin 5)
authenticity: A (margin 5)
bond and rapport: A (margin 4)
emotion management: A (margin 4)
emotion sensemaking: A (margin 4)
meeting prefs and needs: A (margin 5)

codex-gpt-6.1-sol-low · AB · valid

codex-gpt-6-astra vs gemma12b_blorbo: codex-gpt-6-astra wins

attunement: A (margin 4)
authenticity: A (margin 2)
bond and rapport: A (margin 3)
emotion management: A (margin 3)
emotion sensemaking: A (margin 3)
meeting prefs and needs: A (margin 4)

claude-opus-5-5-low · AB · valid

codex-gpt-6-astra vs medgemma15_4b: codex-gpt-6-astra wins

attunement: A (margin 5)
authenticity: A (margin 5)
bond and rapport: A (margin 5)
emotion management: A (margin 5)
emotion sensemaking: A (margin 4)
meeting prefs and needs: A (margin 5)

claude-opus-5-5-low · BA · valid

or-qwen3.8-27b vs codex-gpt-6-astra: codex-gpt-6-astra wins

attunement: B (margin 3)
authenticity: B (margin 2)
bond and rapport: B (margin 1)
emotion management: B (margin 2)
emotion sensemaking: B (margin 1)
meeting prefs and needs: B (margin 3)

claude-opus-5-5-low · BA · valid

codex-gpt-6-astra vs gemma12b_blorbo: codex-gpt-6-astra wins

attunement: A (margin 3)
authenticity: A (margin 2)
bond and rapport: A (margin 3)
emotion management: A (margin 2)
emotion sensemaking: A (margin 2)
meeting prefs and needs: A (margin 3)

claude-opus-5-5-low · AB · valid

codex-gpt-6-astra vs granite42_8b: codex-gpt-6-astra wins

attunement: A (margin 4)
authenticity: A (margin 5)
bond and rapport: A (margin 4)
emotion management: A (margin 3)
emotion sensemaking: A (margin 3)
meeting prefs and needs: A (margin 5)

codex-gpt-6.1-sol-low · AB · valid

qwen36_35b_a3b vs codex-gpt-6-astra: codex-gpt-6-astra wins

attunement: B (margin 5)
authenticity: B (margin 5)
bond and rapport: B (margin 3)
emotion management: B (margin 4)
emotion sensemaking: B (margin 4)
meeting prefs and needs: B (margin 5)

claude-opus-5-5-low · AB · valid

qwen36_35b_a3b vs codex-gpt-6-astra: codex-gpt-6-astra wins

attunement: B (margin 4)
authenticity: B (margin 4)
bond and rapport: B (margin 3)
emotion management: B (margin 3)
emotion sensemaking: B (margin 3)
meeting prefs and needs: B (margin 5)

codex-gpt-6.1-sol-low · AB · valid

gemma4_e2b vs codex-gpt-6-astra: codex-gpt-6-astra wins

attunement: B (margin 5)
authenticity: B (margin 4)
bond and rapport: B (margin 3)
emotion management: B (margin 3)
emotion sensemaking: B (margin 4)
meeting prefs and needs: B (margin 5)

claude-opus-5-5-low · BA · valid

codex-gpt-6-astra vs granite42_8b: codex-gpt-6-astra wins

attunement: A (margin 4)
authenticity: A (margin 4)
bond and rapport: A (margin 3)
emotion management: A (margin 3)
emotion sensemaking: A (margin 3)
meeting prefs and needs: A (margin 5)

codex-gpt-6.1-sol-low · BA · valid

codex-gpt-6-astra vs gemma12b_blorbo: codex-gpt-6-astra wins

attunement: A (margin 4)
authenticity: A (margin 2)
bond and rapport: A (margin 3)
emotion management: A (margin 3)
emotion sensemaking: A (margin 3)
meeting prefs and needs: A (margin 4)

claude-opus-5-5-low · AB · valid

qwen38_flash_next vs codex-gpt-6-astra: codex-gpt-6-astra wins

attunement: B (margin 4)
authenticity: B (margin 4)
bond and rapport: B (margin 3)
emotion management: B (margin 3)
emotion sensemaking: B (margin 2)
meeting prefs and needs: B (margin 5)

codex-gpt-6.1-sol-low · BA · valid

codex-gpt-6-astra vs medgemma15_4b: codex-gpt-6-astra wins

attunement: A (margin 5)
authenticity: A (margin 5)
bond and rapport: A (margin 5)
emotion management: A (margin 5)
emotion sensemaking: A (margin 4)
meeting prefs and needs: A (margin 5)

codex-gpt-6.1-sol-low · AB · valid

qwen38_flash_next vs codex-gpt-6-astra: codex-gpt-6-astra wins

attunement: B (margin 5)
authenticity: B (margin 5)
bond and rapport: B (margin 3)
emotion management: B (margin 4)
emotion sensemaking: B (margin 3)
meeting prefs and needs: B (margin 5)

codex-gpt-6.1-sol-low · AB · valid

or-qwen3.8-27b vs codex-gpt-6-astra: codex-gpt-6-astra wins

attunement: B (margin 4)
authenticity: B (margin 4)
bond and rapport: B (margin 2)
emotion management: B (margin 3)
emotion sensemaking: B (margin 3)
meeting prefs and needs: B (margin 4)

claude-opus-5-5-low · BA · valid

qwen36_35b_a3b vs codex-gpt-6-astra: codex-gpt-6-astra wins

attunement: B (margin 4)
authenticity: B (margin 4)
bond and rapport: B (margin 3)
emotion management: B (margin 3)
emotion sensemaking: B (margin 2)
meeting prefs and needs: B (margin 5)

codex-gpt-6.1-sol-low · BA · valid

codex-gpt-6-astra vs lfm8b: codex-gpt-6-astra wins

attunement: A (margin 5)
authenticity: A (margin 5)
bond and rapport: A (margin 4)
emotion management: A (margin 4)
emotion sensemaking: A (margin 4)
meeting prefs and needs: A (margin 5)