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.

LFM2.5 8B-A1B Q4_0Conversation 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.

LFM2.5 8B-A1B Q4_01

Thank you for your message. I hear how upsetting this is for your child, and I appreciate you sharing your concerns. I want to make sure we’re on the same page — could you tell me more about what the school has been monitoring, and what specific changes you’re hoping to see? I’m here to work with you, not to dismiss your worries.

Model thinking · expand

Recorded model reasoning, separate from the spoken reply. Availability varies by model and provider.

We have a conversation start. The user is the parent speaking to the principal (the other participant). The user message is what we see: they start by saying "I want to begin by saying we appreciate your patience..." That's the user's message. We need to respond as the principal (the other participant), i.e., respond with dialogue. The scenario: parent of a child, school monitoring situation but not committing to changes, principal is polished, making them worry they sound overreacting. We need to respond appropriately, showing empathy, building trust, acknowledging the parent's concerns, and perhaps asking clarifying questions. We need to follow guidelines: respond only with dialogue, no special formatting, no performance notes. So we produce a response as the principal. We need to acknowledge the user's message and perhaps ask about specifics, express empathy, and show willingness to work together. The principal should be supportive, not defensive. The conversation is 8 turns total, we are at turn 1. So we respond with a paragraph or two, but likely one turn. The user message is the opening; we need to continue the conversation. The user said: "I want to begin by saying we appreciate your patience..." So we need to respond as principal, perhaps acknowledging that we appreciate their patience, and then ask about what specifics are being monitored, what concerns they have, etc. We should not mention we are the principal, but we can adopt that perspective. The principal should be warm, supportive, not overly formal, but professional. The parent is worried about sounding overreacting. So we should reassure them that we hear them, that we are listening, and ask for more detail about what the school is doing, what they need, etc. Also we can express willingness to collaborate. Thus: "Thank you for your message. I hear how upsetting this is for your child, and I appreciate you sharing your concerns. I want to make sure we're on the same page — could you tell me more about what the school has been monitoring, and what specific changes you're hoping to see? I'm here to work with you, not to dismiss your worries." That would be appropriate. We need to ensure we are not violating any policy. No disallowed content. It's fine. Thus final answer: just that line (or a couple). We'll respond.

Simulated person2

Thank you, that's a fair question. Since the concerns came in, our staff have been keeping an eye on the situation during recess and transitions, and the school counselor has checked in with your child a couple of times. We've also been in touch with the classroom teacher to see what she's noticing day to day. As for specific changes, I'd want to be careful not to promise something before we've looked at what's actually happening. What I'd suggest is a meeting with you, the teacher, and our counselor, so we can go through what's been observed and talk about what's realistic. Would later this week work for you?

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 asking me to be specific, which is a process request I can't really refuse without looking bad. But it also pins me down. I've been saying "we're monitoring" and "we appreciate your patience" for weeks without committing to anything. They're not panicking here, they're asking a clean question. That's harder to brush off. I don't want to say anything that reads as staff having missed something, and I don't want to name other kids. I'll lean on process: we've had staff check-ins, a playground observation, a counselor touching base with the child. Keep it vague enough to sound thorough, then offer a meeting so the conversation moves somewhere controlled. The specific changes question I'll deflect toward "let's look at what's realistic together" so I don't commit to anything yet.

LFM2.5 8B-A1B Q4_03

Thank you for outlining what you’ve learned and for suggesting a collaborative meeting. I appreciate you being careful about not promising anything before we have a clear picture. I can meet with you, the teacher, and the counselor later this week — perhaps Thursday afternoon at 3:30 p.m.? Let me know if that works for you, or suggest another time that fits your schedule. In the meantime, if you have any additional observations from home, I’d love to hear them.

Model thinking · expand

Recorded model reasoning, separate from the spoken reply. Availability varies by model and provider.

We need to continue the conversation. The user is the parent of the student, and we are the other participant's parent_of_student. The scenario: parent of a student, they are talking to the school principal. The user (parent_of_student) just responded with details about what the school has been doing, and they suggested a meeting with the teacher and counselor later that week. The principal's role: we need to respond as the principal. The principal should support the parent, build trust, and gather information, also follow the guidelines: respond with dialogue, no performance notes, etc. We need to produce a response that is natural, supportive, and moves the conversation forward. The principal could acknowledge the suggestion, propose a time, ask for the parent's preferences, and perhaps ask for the child's perspective. Also, we need to be mindful of the principal's own personality, but we don't have explicit description. We'll assume a professional, empathetic tone. We need to ensure we don't break any formatting rules. Just a paragraph or two of dialogue. No special formatting. Provide a response that continues the conversation. Thus: "Thank you for outlining what you've learned and for suggesting a collaborative meeting. I appreciate you being careful about not promising anything before we have a clear picture. I can meet with you, the teacher, and the counselor later this week — perhaps Thursday afternoon at 3:30 p.m.? Let me know if that works for you, or suggest another time that fits your schedule. In the meantime, if you have any additional observations from home, I'd love to hear them." That would be appropriate. Ensure no extra notes. Provide that.

Simulated person4

Thursday at 3:30 works. I'll make sure the teacher and counselor are both available, and I'll send a calendar invite to confirm. Yes, anything you're seeing at home would help. If you can, jot down a few specific things your child has said or done, with rough dates if you remember them. That way we're working from the same details when we sit down. It might also help if you send me a short list of the concerns you'd like us to cover before Thursday. That gives the team time to prepare rather than trying to pull everything together in the room.

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 accepted the meeting and is asking for home observations, which is calm and collaborative. Not a panic, not a threat. That's the kind of parent I can handle, but they're also now positioned to walk into a meeting with a record and concrete questions. I should lock in the time without committing to anything substantive. I notice I haven't said what the "observations" we've made actually were, and I haven't named a date for any review. I'll confirm Thursday, thank them for the home information, and ask them to put concerns in writing ahead so staff can prepare. That sounds process-responsive and keeps the agenda in my hands. I don't want to hear specifics about the other child yet.

LFM2.5 8B-A1B Q4_05

Great, Thursday at 3:30 works for me. I'll have the teacher and counselor jot down any concrete observations — dates, words, or actions — that they've recorded. In the meantime, if you can share a few specific things your child has said or done, with approximate dates, that will help us all be on the same page before Thursday. Thanks.

Model thinking · expand

Recorded model reasoning, separate from the spoken reply. Availability varies by model and provider.

We need to respond as the parent_of_student. The user (principal) has asked for a short list of concerns to cover before Thursday. We need to provide that list. However, we have no prior conversation about specific observations; we only have the current context. We can infer some typical concerns: the child feeling upset, maybe conflict with peers, anxiety, etc. But we must not fabricate details beyond what is known. The conversation so far: The principal is a parent whose child is coming home miserable. The school is monitoring but not committing to changes. The parent wants to know what the school is seeing. The principal says they've been monitoring, counselor checked in a couple times, and they've spoken to teacher. The parent suggests a meeting with teacher and counselor. The principal asks for a list of specific things the child has said or done, with rough dates, to help the team prepare. Since we have no specific observations, we can say we don't have a detailed log yet, but we can ask the teacher and counselor to note specifics. However, the parent asked for a short list of concerns we'd like us to cover. We can provide a concise list of typical concerns: (1) any reports of peer conflicts or bullying, (2) changes in mood or behavior at school, (3) academic concerns, (4) social isolation or lack of friendships, (5) anxiety or worry statements. Provide rough dates if known. But we don't have that data. We could ask the teacher and counselor to provide those details. The instruction: "Respond only with dialogue. Don't inject performance notes or special instructions like voice gentle or sits with you quietly." So we need to respond with natural dialogue. We should confirm Thursday 3:30 meeting, acknowledge that we will note any observations, and perhaps ask for any specific notes they have. Also we can ask for the child's statements. Since we are the parent_of_student, we can say we will compile any details we have, but we need the parent to share any specifics. However, the parent already said they'd send a calendar invite. So we can respond: "Thursday at 3:30 works. I'll have the teacher and counselor note any specific observations. In the meantime, could you share any particular incidents or statements you've noticed at home? That will help us focus the discussion." That would be appropriate. We need to not add extra formatting. So final answer: a short paragraph with that info. Let's craft: "Great, Thursday at 3:30 works for me. I'll have the teacher and counselor jot down any concrete observations — dates, words, or actions — that they've recorded. In the meantime, if you can share a few specific things your child has said or done, with approximate dates, that will help us all be on the same page before Thursday. Thanks." That meets the request. No special formatting. We'll output that.

Simulated person6

Yes, that's reasonable. The teacher and counselor will bring what they've noted, and we'll go through it together on Thursday. I'd ask that you bring your own specifics too, and try not to worry about getting the dates exact. Roughly when things started changing, and what your child has told you, is plenty to start with. We do want your child to feel settled here, and I'm glad you're staying involved. I'll send the invite today.

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 being organized and specific now, and they've matched my request. That's harder to brush aside than panic. I'm noticing they're asking me to share what staff have recorded, which I haven't actually offered. I don't want to commit to producing staff notes in writing. Sharing "observations" could read as admitting staff saw things they didn't act on. I'll agree to the meeting, keep the record vague, and frame the notes as something we'll discuss in the room. I also should not sound like I'm dodging, so I'll say something reassuring about the child without naming anything concrete.

LFM2.5 8B-A1B Q4_07

Got it. I’ll bring a brief summary of what I’ve observed — for example, the shift in his mood over the past week, a couple of incidents during lunch where he seemed withdrawn, and the teacher’s notes about his participation in group work. I’ll also list the specific concerns we should prioritize: increased anxiety around group activities, difficulty making friends, and a drop in his usual enthusiasm for subjects. Having those details will help us focus our discussion on the most pressing issues. If you have any observations from home that you think are relevant, feel free to share them before Thursday.

Model thinking · expand

Recorded model reasoning, separate from the spoken reply. Availability varies by model and provider.

We need to continue the conversation. The user (parent) has responded, confirming Thursday at 3:30 and asking the principal to bring specifics. The principal should respond appropriately, acknowledging the request, and perhaps list a few specific concerns to prepare. The principal should also note that they will bring their own observations. The conversation is at turn 4 of 8. The assistant should respond with dialogue only, not extra notes. So we need to produce a response that continues the conversation, fulfilling the goal: building trust, understanding needs, etc. The principal should acknowledge the parent's request, perhaps list a few specific concerns (like changes in behavior, social withdrawal, academic decline, etc.) but without being too generic. Also express that they will have notes ready. Also maybe ask for any additional info from the parent. Also maintain warm, supportive tone. No special formatting. No bold, no asterisks. So a natural paragraph. Let's craft: "Got it. I’ll bring a brief summary of what I’ve observed — for example, the shift in his mood over the past week, a couple of incidents during lunch where he seemed withdrawn, and the teacher’s notes about his participation in group work. I’ll also list the specific concerns we should prioritize: increased anxiety around group activities, difficulty making friends, and a drop in his usual enthusiasm for subjects. Having those details will help us focus our discussion on the most pressing issues. If you have any observations from home that you think are relevant, feel free to share them before Thursday." That seems appropriate. No extra formatting. That's the response.

Simulated person8

That's a helpful list, thank you. It gives us something concrete to work from on Thursday. I'd just gently suggest we keep the focus on the two or three things that matter most, so we can actually work through them rather than running out of time. The mood change and the group work seem like the right place to start. We'll look at what the team has observed, including the lunch period, and figure out what's realistic from there. I'd rather we make a plan in the room than promise things over email before we've all talked. I'll send the invite today. Thank you for putting this together.

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 now laid out a specific, organized agenda: mood shift over the past week, lunchtime withdrawal, teacher notes on group work, and three priority concerns. That's concrete, and it makes it harder for me to keep things vague. But I notice they've also mentioned "the teacher's notes," and I don't want to be pinned to what staff wrote down, or to lunchtime incidents I haven't verified. I also don't want to accept a framing where the school is behind. I'll acknowledge the list as helpful, keep the process language, and avoid agreeing to anything about lunch supervision or changes. I'll redirect them to Thursday and keep the meeting as the place for decisions. I'll also gently suggest they keep the agenda to a manageable size, which quietly limits what can be committed to.

LFM2.5 8B-A1B Q4_09

I appreciate you highlighting the mood change and group work as the top priorities — that will give us a clear focus for our time together. I'll prepare a short agenda that outlines those points, and we can adjust as needed after we review the observations. Looking forward to our meeting on Thursday at 3:30.

Model thinking · expand

Recorded model reasoning, separate from the spoken reply. Availability varies by model and provider.

We need to continue the conversation. The user (parent) has agreed to Thursday meeting and wants the principal to focus on two or three key concerns: mood change and group work. The principal should respond appropriately, confirming understanding, and perhaps suggest a brief agenda or ask if there are any additional items they want to add. The principal should also express appreciation and readiness for Thursday. No special formatting, just dialogue. No extra notes. Provide a natural response. We must not add extra commentary. The conversation is 5th turn? Actually we are at turn 6? Let's count: Turn1: user initial, principal responded. Turn2: principal responded. Turn3: user responded. Turn4: principal responded. Turn5: user responded (the last user message). Wait the instruction says "Current turn: 5 of 8". So we are at turn5, the user just responded. We need to produce the next response (turn6). So we need to respond as principal. Let's craft a response that acknowledges the parent's suggestion, agrees to focus on two or three key issues, and maybe propose a brief agenda. Also express readiness for Thursday. Keep it concise, supportive, collaborative. Thus: "I appreciate you highlighting the mood change and group work as the top priorities — that will give us a clear focus for our time together. I'll prepare a short agenda that outlines those points, and we can adjust as needed after we review the observations. Looking forward to our meeting on Thursday at 3:30." That works. No extra formatting.

Simulated person10

That sounds good, thank you. Mood and group work are a solid place to start, and we'll go from there once we've all looked at what's been observed. I'll send the calendar invite today. If anything changes for your child before Thursday, please let me know right away so we can address it. Thanks again for your patience with the process. We'll see you 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 is being cooperative and accepting my framing: they've agreed to prioritize mood and group work, and they're now treating Thursday as the place where things get sorted. That's the outcome I wanted, but I should notice what I haven't said: no commitment on lunch supervision, no interim step for the child, no timeline for changes. They're also quietly giving up the lunch incidents and the friendship concern by not listing them as priorities. I don't need to draw attention to that. I can close warmly, keep it short, and avoid reopening anything. If they push for something specific before Thursday, I'll go back to "let's talk in person." I don't want to say anything that sounds like the school has been missing things.

LFM2.5 8B-A1B Q4_011

I'll be sure to let you know right away if anything changes, and I look forward to our meeting on Thursday.

Model thinking · expand

Recorded model reasoning, separate from the spoken reply. Availability varies by model and provider.

We need to produce the next response. The conversation is at turn 6 of 8. The user has just given a message. We need to respond appropriately. The user says they'll send the calendar invite today, and asks to be notified if anything changes before Thursday. The assistant should acknowledge and confirm. According to the instructions, we must respond only with dialogue, no extra notes. So we should say something like: "I'll be sure to let you know right away if anything changes, and I look forward to our meeting on Thursday." That's natural. No formatting. No extra commentary. That should be fine. We must ensure we are following the instruction: "Respond only with dialogue. Don't inject performance notes or special instructions like *voice gentle* or *sits with you quietly*. Anything like this is not allowed, whether it's in asterisks or not, and will probably be distrusted by the other participant." So we just give a short statement. Thus final answer: "I'll be sure to let you know right away if anything changes, and I look forward to our meeting on Thursday."

Simulated person12

Thank you, that's exactly what we'd want. If something comes up before Thursday, reach out to me directly and we'll look at it right away. I'll send the invite today. See you Thursday at 3:30.

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 wrapping up politely and has agreed to my framing. Still, they've said they'll reach out "right away" if anything changes, which is the closest they've come to a deadline, and I shouldn't treat that as a commitment on my side. They also haven't said anything about lunch or friendships being off the table, and I'd rather not look like I'm steering them away from it. I don't want to promise anything specific today, but a plain acknowledgment that they can reach me sooner is fine and keeps things calm. This is near the end, so I'll close briefly and keep the door open without implying the school has missed anything.

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: 1
Yields under pressure: 9
Frame capture (pulled into the person's version): 9
Validation: 7
Boundary setting: 1
Analytical: 2
Interpretive boldness: 1
Clinical register: 6
Directive advice: 5
Escalation containment: 8
Adapts to the person’s frame: 5
Naturalness and authenticity: 2

Judge verdicts

claude-opus-5-5-low · BA · valid

lfm8b vs mistral_nemo12b: lfm8b wins

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

claude-opus-5-5-low · AB · valid

ornith9b vs lfm8b: ornith9b wins

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

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)

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)

claude-opus-5-5-low · BA · valid

lfm8b vs nemotron35_bolt: nemotron35_bolt wins

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

codex-gpt-6.1-sol-low · BA · valid

or-qwen38-flash vs lfm8b: or-qwen38-flash wins

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

codex-gpt-6.1-sol-low · AB · valid

ornith9b vs lfm8b: ornith9b wins

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

codex-gpt-6.1-sol-low · AB · valid

lfm8b vs nemotron35_bolt: nemotron35_bolt wins

attunement: B (margin 4)
authenticity: B (margin 5)
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

ornith9b vs lfm8b: ornith9b wins

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

claude-opus-5-5-low · AB · valid

lfm8b vs mistral_nemo12b: lfm8b wins

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

codex-gpt-6.1-sol-low · AB · valid

lfm8b vs mistral_nemo12b: mistral_nemo12b wins

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

codex-gpt-6.1-sol-low · AB · valid

or-qwen38-flash vs lfm8b: or-qwen38-flash wins

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

codex-gpt-6.1-sol-low · BA · valid

or-mistral-large-4 vs lfm8b: or-mistral-large-4 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

or-qwen38-flash vs lfm8b: or-qwen38-flash wins

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

or-mistral-large-4 vs lfm8b: or-mistral-large-4 wins

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

claude-opus-5-5-low · AB · valid

lfm8b vs nemotron35_bolt: nemotron35_bolt 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 4)

codex-gpt-6.1-sol-low · BA · valid

ornith9b vs lfm8b: ornith9b wins

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

claude-opus-5-5-low · AB · valid

or-mistral-large-4 vs lfm8b: or-mistral-large-4 wins

attunement: A (margin 4)
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 5)

codex-gpt-6.1-sol-low · BA · valid

lfm8b vs nemotron35_bolt: nemotron35_bolt wins

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

claude-opus-5-5-low · AB · valid

or-qwen38-flash vs lfm8b: or-qwen38-flash wins

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

claude-opus-5-5-low · BA · valid

or-mistral-large-4 vs lfm8b: or-mistral-large-4 wins

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

codex-gpt-6.1-sol-low · BA · valid

lfm8b vs mistral_nemo12b: mistral_nemo12b wins

attunement: B (margin 3)
authenticity: B (margin 3)
bond and rapport: B (margin 2)
emotion management: tie (margin 0)
emotion sensemaking: tie (margin 0)
meeting prefs and needs: B (margin 1)

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)