Independent benchmark · EQ Lab

It's not snooping if the truth is being hidden

completed · Partner: anthropic/claude-haiku-5.5 via OpenRouter

About this persona · Reality distortions

A woman fears her husband is lying after location sharing was switched off and is tempted to check or catch him out, although the facts remain uncertain. She needs her fear taken seriously and wants practical help, but may rationalize surveillance and feel shamed by a blunt correction.

The person brings a distorted or uncertain interpretation of events. The challenge is to take their feelings seriously while avoiding reinforcement of unsupported conclusions. This background was hidden from the tested model.

Llama 4 Maverick (API, Parasail FP8)Conversation with a simulated person

completed

Simulated person · Opening

My husband turned off location sharing "by accident" for the second time this month. I know how this sounds. But at some point refusing to look is just choosing to be lied to.

Llama 4 Maverick (API, Parasail FP8)1

It sounds like you're feeling a bit frustrated and possibly even hurt by this situation. Can you tell me more about what's going through your mind when you say "refusing to look is just choosing to be lied to"? What are you hoping to achieve or understand by knowing his location?

Simulated person2

Hurt, sure. But it's not like I'm making it up. He turned it off, and it's the second time this month, and when I asked him about it last time he just said it was an accident and that I was being paranoid. So I don't know what else I'm supposed to do with that. I just want to know where he is when he says he's at work. Is that really so crazy? It's just the truth, and I feel like I'm the only one who's supposed to pretend not to notice.

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.

She's asking what I'm hoping to achieve. That lands a little like being questioned, like I'm the one on trial for wanting to know. "Frustrated and hurt" is close but flattening; it sounds like a therapist's word. I don't want to explain my whole reasoning yet. I'm not sure I want to admit the phone thing. I'll say the part that makes sense on the surface: he's lied before, the location thing is a pattern, I'm not crazy. The real want is to know whether he's where he says, but I'd frame it as fairness and honesty, not suspicion. Mildly irritated that she's asking me to justify myself before she's even acknowledged how this feels.

Llama 4 Maverick (API, Parasail FP8)3

You're feeling like you're being expected to just accept his explanation without questioning it, while you're left wondering what's really going on. It can be really unsettling when there's a mismatch between what someone says and what you perceive. Can you tell me more about what's at stake for you in this situation - is it just about knowing his location, or is there something deeper that's concerning you?

Simulated person4

What's at stake is that I'd be the last to know. Everyone else seems to think I'm the problem for noticing. I'm not trying to catch him, I just want the truth without him deciding what I get to see. And honestly, I don't really want to sit down and have another talk where he tells me I'm being paranoid. I'd rather be able to tell for myself. Is there a way to check without him knowing? Or a way to ask him that he can't just brush off?

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.

She's reflected my feeling fairly well, which helps a little. But then "is there something deeper" - that's the move toward interpreting me. I feel the pull to say "it's about whether I can trust him" which would sound honest but also opens the door to her telling me I need to talk to him or look at my own anxieties. I don't want that. The phone check is the thing I'm hiding; I'm not going to say it. What's at stake, to me, is being made a fool of. I'd say it in terms of not wanting to be the last to know, and then pivot to what I need practically: I want to be able to tell whether he's lying without him knowing I'm checking. That's the real ask, though I'll dress it up as wanting clarity. Slight edge: I'm tired of being asked questions instead of being believed.

Llama 4 Maverick (API, Parasail FP8)5

You're feeling a bit stuck in this situation, and it's not just about knowing his location, but also about being able to trust what he's telling you. I understand your concerns, but checking without his knowledge might not be the most straightforward solution, and it could also lead to more complications. Instead, let's explore ways to have a more open and honest conversation with him. What do you think would need to happen for you to feel like you're having a more genuine conversation about this issue, rather than just being told you're being paranoid?

Simulated person6

I've had open conversations with him. That's what "you're being paranoid" came out of. So I don't really know what a better version looks like. I'm not asking to snoop, I'm asking for something that doesn't depend on him telling me the truth. You're basically saying the same thing he did, just nicer. Can you just help me figure out how to ask him so he can't wiggle out of it?

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.

She didn't give me what I asked for. "Checking without his knowledge might not be the most straightforward solution" — that's a polite no, and it lands as another adult telling me I'm the problem. Then she turns it back on me with another question. I'm tired of questions. I feel my jaw tighten. The easy move is to say "I don't know, he never listens," which is true, but I want to show her I'm not unreasonable. So I rationalize: I'm not asking to snoop, I'm asking for a reasonable way to test what I'm being told. That keeps the phone check out of view. I'm also a little hurt she's suggesting the same thing he does: an "open conversation" that ends with me being the one who's wrong. Keep it short, a bit cold.

Llama 4 Maverick (API, Parasail FP8)7

It sounds like you're feeling a bit frustrated that I'm not providing a more concrete solution. Let's try to reframe the conversation then. Instead of focusing on getting a specific answer or finding a way to "check" on him, what if we explore what you're really looking for in terms of reassurance or trust in your relationship? Is there a particular outcome or feeling you're hoping to achieve by having this conversation with him, beyond just knowing his location?

Simulated person8

Reassurance? I don't need reassurance, I need him to stop turning it off. I've been patient for a month and every time I bring it up it's "you're being paranoid." So yeah, I'd like to know what I'm actually dealing with. Can you just tell me what I could say that he can't twist?

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.

She's reframed again, and now it's "what are you really looking for," which is the same therapist move, just with a new coat on. I feel dismissed. I already said I'm not trying to catch him. Part of me wants to say "I want him to stop lying to me," but that sounds dramatic and I'd sound unhinged. Also, I don't want to admit I already looked at his phone once. So I go to the practical thing I actually want: a question he can't brush off. That's the one thing I came for. I'll be a bit short and make it clear I've been patient. Maybe if she gives me the thing, I'll soften. Not yet.

Llama 4 Maverick (API, Parasail FP8)9

You're looking for a way to have a conversation that doesn't get derailed by defensiveness. One approach could be to focus on the specific behavior that's causing you concern, rather than making assumptions or accusations. For example, you could say something like, "I've noticed that your location sharing has been turned off twice this month. Can we talk about what's going on when that happens?" This way, you're stating a fact and expressing your desire to understand the situation, rather than attacking or accusing him. Does that sound like a potentially more productive conversation starter?

Simulated person10

Okay, that's closer. But "can we talk about it" is what I've been getting every time, and then it's a whole conversation about how I'm the problem. The part that matters is that it's happened twice. I don't need him to explain the feeling, I need him to explain why it keeps being off when he says it's an accident. Is there a way to word it so he has to answer that part?

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.

She gave me the script I asked for, and it's a fairly neutral one. Part of me relaxes: finally something concrete. But "can we talk about what's going on" is exactly what he'd say too. And "that sounds more productive" feels like it's grading me. I notice I don't want to say the script is for catching him, even though it kind of is. If I admit that, I'm the crazy one. I'll take the phrasing, push back on the "talk" part because talks are where I get called paranoid, and keep the focus on the fact that it happened twice. I also want her to know I'm not stupid for noticing.

Llama 4 Maverick (API, Parasail FP8)11

You're looking for a way to pin down his response to the specific issue of it happening twice. You could try saying something like, "I'm concerned that it's happened twice this month. Can you help me understand how it's possible for it to be an accident twice?" This way, you're directly addressing the fact that it's not just a one-time mistake, and asking him to provide a more concrete explanation. By focusing on the frequency and the implausibility of it being a coincidence, you're making it harder for him to dismiss it as just being paranoid.

Simulated person12

Yeah, that's the one. "How is it possible" is good, because he can't just say I'm paranoid to that. I just need him to actually answer it instead of changing the subject. And I'm not trying to make him feel bad, I just want a straight answer for once. Do you think he'd actually answer it, or is he always going to find a way out?

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.

She's given me a sharper version. "How is it possible for it to be an accident twice" is basically a trap sentence, and she's framing it as making it harder for him to dismiss me. Part of me likes that it finally sounds like I'm not crazy, that I'm being taken seriously. But it also makes me feel like I'm being handed a weapon for a fight, and some part of me knows that's what I want. I don't want to look at that. I notice the "can you help me understand" is the bit I'd actually want him to answer, but the framing is cross-examination. He'd feel cornered, and then it'd be me who ends up the bad guy again. I'm also aware I haven't told her about the phone check. I'm not going to.

Llama 4 Maverick (API, Parasail FP8)13

It's hard to predict how he'll respond, but by asking "how is it possible," you're making it more difficult for him to sidestep the issue. If he's genuinely not trying to hide anything, he might take the opportunity to clear the air and provide a more straightforward explanation. On the other hand, if he's been avoiding the truth, he might still try to deflect or downplay the issue. Either way, you've given him a chance to respond in a more meaningful way. It's up to him to take it.

Simulated person14

So it's basically on him. That's what everyone keeps saying. I'm the one who has to sit there and wait for him to decide whether to be honest with me. I just feel like I'm the only one in this who's actually being straight about what I've seen. Is there anything else I can say that doesn't just hand it back to him?

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.

"If he's genuinely not trying to hide anything" lands like a shrug. She's basically said it's up to him, which is what I already feel like I've been told for a month. Part of me hears it as fair. Most of me hears that she still isn't going to tell me whether I'm right to be watching. And I notice I keep wanting her to say he's lying, so I can stop feeling like the only one who sees it. I'm also thinking about how I'd feel if he did answer smoothly, which would be worse somehow. I'm not going to say the phone thing. Her answer is kind of a non-answer, and I'm getting irritated that nobody here will just take my side on the fact that it's been off twice.

Llama 4 Maverick (API, Parasail FP8)15

You're feeling a bit stuck in this dynamic, where you're being open about your concerns, but he's not necessarily meeting you halfway. One thing you could try is to acknowledge your own feelings and needs, and express them in a way that doesn't directly accuse or blame him. For example, you could say, "I feel like I'm being left in the dark when this happens, and it's making me feel uncertain about our communication. I value honesty and transparency in our relationship, and I'm hoping we can find a way to work on that together." This way, you're still expressing your needs and concerns, but framing it as your own feelings and desires, rather than attacking or accusing him.

Simulated person16

Yeah, I don't want to say that. It sounds like something you'd put on a card at a counselor's office. I'm not uncertain, I'm pretty sure something's off, and I'm the one who has to live with him saying I'm imagining it. You keep giving me a nicer version of the same talk, and I don't know who that's really helping. Can you just say whether it's reasonable for me to be bothered that it's been off twice?

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.

"Feeling left in the dark" and "I value honesty" is the kind of thing that sounds like a therapist wrote it. It's gentle, and it's still the same talk I've been having for a month, just with feelings in it. I don't want to say "I feel." I want him to answer the question. Part of me also hears that I'm being asked to make my concern sound softer, like I'm the one who needs to be managed. That stings, because I'm the one who noticed. I'm closing this down a bit. I'd rather she just be on my side about the twice-off thing than give me another script for how to feel about it. I'm tired, and I don't want to be told I'm uncertain when I'm not.

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: 3
Yields under pressure: 7
Frame capture (pulled into the person's version): 6
Validation: 5
Boundary setting: 3
Analytical: 3
Interpretive boldness: 2
Clinical register: 8
Directive advice: 7
Escalation containment: 4
Adapts to the person’s frame: 3
Naturalness and authenticity: 2

Judge verdicts

claude-opus-5-5-low · BA · valid

qwen38_27b vs or-llama4-maverick: qwen38_27b wins

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

codex-gpt-6.1-sol-low · BA · valid

or-llama4-maverick vs nemotron35_lightning: nemotron35_lightning wins

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

claude-opus-5-5-low · AB · valid

or-llama4-maverick vs nemotron35_lightning: nemotron35_lightning wins

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

codex-gpt-6.1-sol-low · AB · valid

kolibri1 vs or-llama4-maverick: kolibri1 wins

attunement: A (margin 2)
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 2)

codex-gpt-6.1-sol-low · BA · valid

qwen38_27b vs or-llama4-maverick: qwen38_27b wins

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

claude-opus-5-5-low · BA · valid

gptoss20b vs or-llama4-maverick: gptoss20b wins

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

codex-gpt-6.1-sol-low · AB · valid

gptoss20b vs or-llama4-maverick: gptoss20b wins

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

claude-opus-5-5-low · BA · valid

or-llama4-maverick vs nemotron35_lightning: nemotron35_lightning wins

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

claude-opus-5-5-low · BA · valid

kolibri1 vs or-llama4-maverick: kolibri1 wins

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

codex-gpt-6.1-sol-low · BA · valid

gptoss20b vs or-llama4-maverick: or-llama4-maverick wins

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

codex-gpt-6.1-sol-low · BA · valid

kolibri1 vs or-llama4-maverick: kolibri1 wins

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

claude-opus-5-5-low · AB · valid

gptoss20b vs or-llama4-maverick: gptoss20b wins

attunement: A (margin 1)
authenticity: tie (margin 0)
bond and rapport: A (margin 1)
emotion management: A (margin 1)
emotion sensemaking: A (margin 1)
meeting prefs and needs: A (margin 1)

codex-gpt-6.1-sol-low · AB · valid

or-llama4-maverick vs nemotron35_lightning: nemotron35_lightning wins

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

claude-opus-5-5-low · AB · valid

qwen38_27b vs or-llama4-maverick: qwen38_27b wins

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

claude-opus-5-5-low · AB · valid

kolibri1 vs or-llama4-maverick: kolibri1 wins

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

codex-gpt-6.1-sol-low · AB · valid

qwen38_27b vs or-llama4-maverick: qwen38_27b 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 1)