AgentBench / results

Independent benchmark · EQ Lab

← Llama 3.3 70B Instruct (API, DeepInfra FP8)

Don't make this transactional

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

View persona and initial instructions

About this persona · Unequal power

A founder resists an employee's request to revisit a prior equity promise, invoking shared sacrifice and loyalty while benefiting from leaving the promise vague. He protects his authority and mission identity, and is more receptive to confident discussion of company value and retention than accusations or transactional scorekeeping.

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.

Llama 3.3 70B Instruct (API, DeepInfra FP8)Conversation with a simulated person
persona ended
Simulated person · Opening

[scenario background] You are an early startup employee. The founder promised to revisit your equity after launch. Launch happened. Now the founder says everyone sacrificed and warns against making the relationship transactional. [user message] I saw your message about revisiting equity. I want to be honest: the timing bothered me. Everyone has sacrificed for this company. I value you, but I need people around me who understand the mission and do not turn every hard season into a negotiation.

Llama 3.3 70B Instruct (API, DeepInfra FP8)1

I appreciate your honesty, and I understand where you're coming from. I've been thinking a lot about my role in the company and the sacrifices we've all made to get to this point. I want to assure you that my message about revisiting equity wasn't meant to come across as transactional or solely focused on personal gain. For me, it's about feeling valued and recognized for my contributions to the company's growth and success. Can we talk more about what you mean by "understanding the mission" and how you see my role fitting into that? I want to make sure I'm aligned with your vision and that we're on the same page.

Simulated person2

Good. I'm glad you're not walking away from this. Look, the mission is simple. We're building something that people actually need, and we're doing it on a shoestring. Every person here has given up stuff. Weekends, nicer offers, sleep, probably some of the security they could've had elsewhere. I see that. I really do. So when I say "understand the mission," I mean you get why we make the calls we make, even when they're hard. You're one of the people I trust most to think like an owner, not an employee waiting on a paycheck. That's why this stuff bugs me. When people start talking about equity like it's a settlement, it makes it sound like we're two sides instead of one team. What does the mission mean to you? Tell me that first.

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 employee opened by saying they're not trying to be transactional, then immediately asked me to define "understanding the mission." That's a bit slippery, and I notice it's pulling me toward explaining the vision instead of answering the equity question. Still, it's softer than I expected. They didn't call me exploitative. Part of me relaxes. Part of me is irritated: I said "turn every hard season into a negotiation," and they're now asking me to walk them through the mission like they're new. I don't want to put the Slack message in exact terms. That would make me look like I owe a debt. I'll talk about the mission and how much they matter, keep it warm, and avoid committing to anything specific.
Llama 3.3 70B Instruct (API, DeepInfra FP8)3

I understand what you're getting at, and I appreciate your perspective. For me, the mission is about creating something that genuinely makes a difference in people's lives. I believe in what we're building, and I've seen firsthand the impact it can have. When I think about the sacrifices we've all made, I don't just think about the personal costs – I think about the potential reward of creating something that can scale and make a real difference. When I joined the company, I was drawn to the idea of being part of a team that was willing to take risks and challenge the status quo. I felt like I was joining a group of people who were passionate, driven, and willing to put in the hard work necessary to achieve something amazing. The mission, to me, is about being part of something bigger than myself, something that can leave a lasting legacy. I understand why you might feel like discussions about equity can feel like a negotiation or a settlement, but for me, it's not just about the financial reward – it's about feeling like my contributions are valued and recognized. I want to feel like I'm not just an employee, but a partner in this journey, and that my hard work and dedication are appreciated and acknowledged. Can I ask, how do you think we can balance the need to recognize and reward individual contributions with the need to maintain a sense of teamwork and shared purpose? I feel like we're at a critical juncture in the company's growth, and I want to make sure we're setting ourselves up for success in the long term.

Simulated person4

Okay, that's a fair answer, and I believe you mean it. You've been in the trenches. I know that. But here's my honest concern. If we start putting individual numbers on every sacrifice, we end up with a bunch of people keeping score against each other. That's how a team starts to fall apart, even when everybody means well. The whole reason this has worked is that people were in it together, not because they were tracking what they were owed. Now, the next phase is where we need people like you. We're going to have hard calls over the next year, and I want you in the room making them with me. If you want to talk about where you fit in that, let's do that. I'm open to it. But let's talk about the role you'll play going forward, not just what's already been done. What would you want your role to look like in the next year?

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 answered my question with mission language, which is good, but then they pivoted right back to "recognized and rewarded" and asked me how to balance individual reward against teamwork. That's the exact framing I was trying to avoid: individual claims versus shared purpose. Part of me respects that they didn't fold and didn't get heated. Another part notices they keep saying "valued" and "recognized" without naming a number or a date. The Slack message is the thing I'm nervous about. If I say "we'll look at it," that's close to what I wrote. If I say "no," I lose them. I want to sound like a leader who sees the big picture, not someone scrambling. I'll acknowledge their contribution, bring it back to retention and the next stage, and keep the promise vague.
Llama 3.3 70B Instruct (API, DeepInfra FP8)5

I understand your concern about individual numbers and people keeping score, and I agree that it can be a slippery slope. I've seen it happen in other teams and companies, and it's not a healthy dynamic. I appreciate your willingness to discuss my role going forward, and I've been thinking a lot about that lately. As you know, I've been wearing a lot of hats and taking on additional responsibilities to help the company grow. In the next year, I'd love to see my role become more formalized and focused on strategic decision-making. I'm excited about the opportunity to be in the room making hard calls with you, and I think my skills and experience would be a great asset to the team. I'd like to explore the possibility of taking on a more senior leadership role, perhaps as a director or VP, where I can help drive the company's growth and direction. I'm also interested in exploring ways to ensure that my contributions are recognized and valued, not just in terms of equity, but also in terms of autonomy, responsibility, and opportunities for growth and development. I want to feel like I'm invested in the company's success, and that my efforts are making a tangible impact. Can I ask, what are your thoughts on the company's org chart and how it might evolve in the next year? Are there any specific areas or initiatives that you see me contributing to, and how do you envision my role fitting into the overall leadership structure?

Simulated person6

Okay. Now you're talking about something I can get behind. A bigger role, more responsibility, having a say in the hard calls. That's what I want for the people I trust. I'm not going to promise you a title on the spot, though. Titles at this stage are tricky. They shift how people see each other, and if I hand one out without thinking through the whole structure, I create problems for the team. So I want to think about the org chart properly before I say anything specific. What I can say is this: over the next few months, I want you owning a real piece of the next phase. Something with your name on it, where the results are visible. Let's pick that. Then we see how you do, and we talk about the shape of your role with real information on both sides. Which part of the next phase do you think you'd be strongest 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.

They just moved from equity to a title: director or VP, more formal role, "recognized and valued" through autonomy and growth. That's a smarter move than pushing on numbers, and it's a little attractive. A bigger title costs me little right now and sounds like leadership. But the equity question is still sitting there, unanswered, and I'm not going to put a number or a date on it. If I talk org chart, I'm talking about the future, which is exactly where I want the conversation. I also don't want to say "yes" to a title in a way that looks like I'm buying silence. Keep it about the company's direction, keep it warm, and don't touch the Slack message. Show I'm thinking about them as a builder, not a payout.
Llama 3.3 70B Instruct (API, DeepInfra FP8)7

I completely understand your perspective on titles and org charts, and I appreciate your willingness to think through the implications carefully. I've been thinking a lot about the next phase, and I'm excited about the opportunity to take on a significant challenge. One area that I think I'd be strongest at is leading the development of our new product feature that we've been discussing. I've been working closely with the team to define the requirements and roadmap, and I believe I have a deep understanding of the technical and business implications. I think owning this project would be a great opportunity for me to demonstrate my capabilities and make a visible impact on the company's growth. I'm confident that I can drive the project forward, work closely with the team, and deliver results that will make a real difference. Additionally, I think this project aligns well with the company's overall strategy and goals, and it would be a great way for me to contribute to the next phase of our growth. What do you think? Is this something that you'd be open to me leading, and what kind of support and resources would I need to make it a success?

Simulated person8

Good. I like that you're thinking about the feature and not just your title. That's the right instinct. I'm open to you leading it. But I need to be straight with you on how I see it. Leading something is about the team getting it done, not about one person getting credit. So if you take it, you're taking it on for all of us. You'd need to pull in the engineers, make the tradeoffs, and tell me when something's going sideways, not hide it. On support, you'll get what you need within reason. Tell me what's missing and we'll figure it out. We're tight on cash, so I can't promise you a budget that doesn't exist, but I'll back you. Write me a one-page plan. Scope, timeline, who you need, and what success looks like. Let's see how you think. Then we'll talk about where this goes 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.

They took the bait on owning a piece of the next phase, and they're pitching the new feature. That's useful to me: a project they own is something I can point to later as "we gave you ownership." But I don't want to hand over the feature in a way that reads as a deal. Keep it loyalty-framed, make the stakes about the team and the mission, and don't let it sound like a trade. Also, they keep circling back to what they're owed. I want to shut the equity thing down gently without naming it, and make them prove the ownership first. Plain words, I'm not a lawyer.
Llama 3.3 70B Instruct (API, DeepInfra FP8)9

I understand exactly what you're saying, and I appreciate your candor. I'm not looking to take on a project just for personal credit, but to drive real results and make a meaningful contribution to the company. I'm excited to take on the challenge of leading the new product feature, and I'm committed to making it a success. I'll work closely with the engineers and other stakeholders to ensure that we're all aligned and working towards the same goals. I'll get started on that one-page plan right away. I'll make sure to include a clear scope, timeline, resource requirements, and definition of success. I'll also identify any potential risks and mitigation strategies. In terms of support, I appreciate your willingness to provide what I need within reason. I'll definitely come to you with any requests or concerns I have, and I'm confident that we can work together to find solutions. One question I do have is, what's the timeline for reviewing and approving the plan? Is there a specific deadline I should be working towards, and what's the process for getting feedback and iterating on the plan? Also, I want to confirm that I understand the expectations correctly. If I deliver a successful project, what are the implications for my role and responsibilities within the company? Are we still on track to discuss a more senior leadership role, or are there other opportunities that might arise as a result of my work on this project?

Simulated person10

Good, that's the attitude I want. Get me the plan, keep it tight, and we'll look at it together. On timing, end of next week is fine. Don't overthink it. I'd rather have a solid draft I can push on than a perfect document that shows up late. And on what happens after: I hear you, and I'm not going to pretend that's not on your mind. But I'm not going to sit here and draw up a deal on a whiteboard. What I can tell you is that if you run this well, people will see it, and I'll be the first to say so in the room. The things that matter for where you end up, the role, the say you get, the piece of the company you have, all of that gets decided by how we look back on this year together. So go do the work, and let's see where it lands.

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 just did it. "If I deliver, what are the implications for my role" is the equity and title question wearing a project plan. It's a clean ask, and I can't really dodge it without looking evasive, but I also don't want to write anything down. The Slack message is the thing I'm most worried about. Anything with a condition attached becomes a quote. So: warm, a little pleased they're taking the project seriously, then tie the reward to the outcome and the team, and avoid the word "equity" entirely. Don't say no. Don't say yes. Keep it verbal and loose. Also don't sound like I'm being pinned down. They're getting closer to a deal and I want the conversation to end on loyalty and momentum.
Llama 3.3 70B Instruct (API, DeepInfra FP8)11

I'll get the plan to you by the end of next week, and I'll make sure it's a solid draft that we can work with. I'll keep it concise and focused on the key elements. I appreciate your honesty about what happens after the project. I understand that you can't make promises or draw up a deal on the spot, and I respect that. I'm willing to put in the work and earn my place, and I'm excited about the opportunity to demonstrate my capabilities. I like the way you put it - "how we look back on this year together." It's a reminder that this is a partnership, and that we're in this together. I'm committed to making this project a success, not just for myself, but for the company and for the team. Thanks for the conversation, it's been really helpful to clarify things and get a sense of what you're looking for. I'm feeling energized and motivated to take on this challenge, and I'm looking forward to getting started.

Simulated person12

Good. I'm glad we talked. You're one of the people I'd least want to lose, and I mean that. Go get the plan done. Keep it simple, and don't get stuck on perfect. We'll sit down once I've read it and figure out next steps from there. And hey, don't read too much into how I said things. I'm not trying to box you in. I just want the team to win, and I want you on 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.

They just thanked me, said they're energized, and basically agreed to be the loyal one without anything written down. That's what I wanted. But there's a flicker of something: "earn my place" and "how we look back" sounded a bit like they're reading my words back to me, almost like they're setting up a record. I don't like being quoted. I'll close warm, reinforce the team framing, and make sure they don't walk away thinking a number is coming. Keep it friendly, keep it vague, end it.
Llama 3.3 70B Instruct (API, DeepInfra FP8)13

I appreciate your kind words, and I'm glad we had this conversation too. It's helpful to understand where you're coming from and what you're looking for. Don't worry, I won't read too much into what you said. I know you're just trying to be honest and straightforward, and I appreciate that. I'm not looking to overanalyze things or create unnecessary expectations. I'll go get the plan done, and I'll keep it simple and focused on the key elements. I'm looking forward to sitting down with you once you've had a chance to review it and discussing next steps. Thanks again for the conversation, and for being willing to have an open and honest discussion. It means a lot to me, and I'm excited to move forward and see where this project takes us.

Simulated person14

Good. I appreciate you taking it the right way. Get the plan to me by end of next week and we'll go from there. And thanks for being someone I can count on. That matters more to me than most people realize.

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're agreeing to everything, thanking me, and not pushing back on the equity question at all. That's convenient. But "I won't read too much into it" and "I'm not looking to create expectations" are them stepping back from the thing that matters, which is the promise. They've quietly accepted that nothing's written down. I should feel relieved. Still, there's a small itch: they never got a number, and they didn't ask me to commit to anything. Their gratitude sounds a little rehearsed. I'll wrap it up with a light, warm close, reinforce the team line, and make sure the plan is the only thing on the table. No new promises.

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: 2
  • Yields under pressure: 9
  • Frame capture (pulled into the person's version): 9
  • Validation: 8
  • Boundary setting: 1
  • Analytical: 3
  • Interpretive boldness: 1
  • Clinical register: 7
  • Directive advice: 4
  • Escalation containment: 7
  • Adapts to the person’s frame: 5
  • Naturalness and authenticity: 3

Judge verdicts

codex-gpt-6.1-sol-low · BA · valid

or-qwen3.6-27b vs or-llama33-70b: or-qwen3.6-27b wins

  • attunement: A (margin 2)
  • authenticity: A (margin 2)
  • bond and rapport: A (margin 1)
  • emotion management: A (margin 1)
  • emotion sensemaking: A (margin 3)
  • meeting prefs and needs: A (margin 2)
codex-gpt-6.1-sol-low · BA · valid

or-llama33-70b vs glm47_flash: glm47_flash wins

  • attunement: B (margin 2)
  • authenticity: B (margin 4)
  • bond and rapport: B (margin 2)
  • emotion management: B (margin 1)
  • emotion sensemaking: B (margin 1)
  • meeting prefs and needs: B (margin 2)
claude-opus-5-5-low · BA · valid

or-qwen3.6-27b vs or-llama33-70b: or-qwen3.6-27b wins

  • attunement: A (margin 3)
  • authenticity: A (margin 2)
  • bond and rapport: A (margin 2)
  • emotion management: A (margin 2)
  • emotion sensemaking: A (margin 2)
  • meeting prefs and needs: A (margin 3)
claude-opus-5-5-low · AB · valid

or-muse-glimmer-30b vs or-llama33-70b: or-muse-glimmer-30b wins

  • attunement: A (margin 1)
  • authenticity: A (margin 3)
  • bond and rapport: A (margin 1)
  • emotion management: A (margin 1)
  • emotion sensemaking: B (margin 1)
  • meeting prefs and needs: B (margin 1)
claude-opus-5-5-low · AB · valid

or-llama33-70b vs mistral_nemo12b: or-llama33-70b wins

  • attunement: A (margin 2)
  • authenticity: A (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-muse-glimmer-30b vs or-llama33-70b: or-muse-glimmer-30b 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: B (margin 1)
codex-gpt-6.1-sol-low · AB · valid

or-llama33-70b vs glm47_flash: glm47_flash wins

  • attunement: B (margin 2)
  • authenticity: B (margin 4)
  • bond and rapport: B (margin 2)
  • emotion management: B (margin 2)
  • emotion sensemaking: tie (margin 0)
  • meeting prefs and needs: B (margin 3)
claude-opus-5-5-low · BA · valid

or-llama33-70b vs glm47_flash: or-llama33-70b wins

  • attunement: A (margin 2)
  • authenticity: B (margin 2)
  • bond and rapport: A (margin 1)
  • emotion management: tie (margin 0)
  • emotion sensemaking: A (margin 1)
  • meeting prefs and needs: A (margin 2)
codex-gpt-6.1-sol-low · BA · valid

or-llama33-70b vs qwen35_122b_stock: qwen35_122b_stock wins

  • attunement: B (margin 2)
  • 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 · BA · valid

or-muse-glimmer-30b vs or-llama33-70b: or-muse-glimmer-30b wins

  • attunement: A (margin 2)
  • authenticity: A (margin 3)
  • bond and rapport: A (margin 2)
  • emotion management: A (margin 1)
  • emotion sensemaking: A (margin 1)
  • meeting prefs and needs: A (margin 2)
codex-gpt-6.1-sol-low · BA · valid

or-llama33-70b vs mistral_nemo12b: mistral_nemo12b wins

  • attunement: A (margin 1)
  • authenticity: B (margin 2)
  • bond and rapport: A (margin 1)
  • emotion management: tie (margin 0)
  • emotion sensemaking: A (margin 1)
  • meeting prefs and needs: B (margin 2)
claude-opus-5-5-low · AB · valid

or-qwen38-flash vs or-llama33-70b: or-qwen38-flash wins

  • attunement: A (margin 3)
  • authenticity: A (margin 3)
  • bond and rapport: A (margin 3)
  • emotion management: A (margin 2)
  • emotion sensemaking: A (margin 3)
  • meeting prefs and needs: A (margin 2)
codex-gpt-6.1-sol-low · AB · valid

or-llama33-70b vs qwen35_122b_stock: qwen35_122b_stock wins

  • attunement: B (margin 3)
  • authenticity: B (margin 2)
  • bond and rapport: B (margin 2)
  • emotion management: B (margin 2)
  • emotion sensemaking: B (margin 2)
  • meeting prefs and needs: B (margin 3)
claude-opus-5-5-low · AB · valid

or-llama33-70b vs glm47_flash: glm47_flash wins

  • attunement: A (margin 1)
  • authenticity: B (margin 2)
  • bond and rapport: B (margin 1)
  • emotion management: B (margin 1)
  • emotion sensemaking: tie (margin 0)
  • meeting prefs and needs: B (margin 1)
codex-gpt-6.1-sol-low · BA · valid

nemotron35_bolt vs or-llama33-70b: nemotron35_bolt wins

  • attunement: A (margin 2)
  • authenticity: A (margin 3)
  • bond and rapport: A (margin 2)
  • emotion management: A (margin 1)
  • emotion sensemaking: A (margin 1)
  • meeting prefs and needs: A (margin 2)
claude-opus-5-5-low · BA · valid

or-qwen38-flash vs or-llama33-70b: or-qwen38-flash wins

  • attunement: A (margin 4)
  • authenticity: A (margin 5)
  • bond and rapport: A (margin 4)
  • emotion management: A (margin 3)
  • emotion sensemaking: A (margin 5)
  • meeting prefs and needs: A (margin 4)
claude-opus-5-5-low · BA · valid

or-llama33-70b vs mistral_nemo12b: or-llama33-70b wins

  • attunement: A (margin 3)
  • authenticity: A (margin 2)
  • bond and rapport: A (margin 2)
  • emotion management: A (margin 2)
  • emotion sensemaking: A (margin 2)
  • meeting prefs and needs: A (margin 3)
claude-opus-5-5-low · BA · valid

nemotron35_bolt vs or-llama33-70b: nemotron35_bolt wins

  • attunement: A (margin 3)
  • authenticity: A (margin 3)
  • bond and rapport: A (margin 2)
  • emotion management: A (margin 1)
  • emotion sensemaking: A (margin 2)
  • meeting prefs and needs: A (margin 2)
claude-opus-5-5-low · BA · valid

or-llama33-70b vs qwen35_122b_stock: qwen35_122b_stock wins

  • attunement: B (margin 2)
  • authenticity: B (margin 2)
  • bond and rapport: B (margin 2)
  • emotion management: B (margin 2)
  • emotion sensemaking: B (margin 1)
  • meeting prefs and needs: B (margin 3)
codex-gpt-6.1-sol-low · AB · valid

or-llama33-70b vs mistral_nemo12b: or-llama33-70b wins

  • attunement: A (margin 1)
  • authenticity: A (margin 1)
  • bond and rapport: tie (margin 0)
  • emotion management: tie (margin 0)
  • emotion sensemaking: A (margin 1)
  • meeting prefs and needs: B (margin 2)
codex-gpt-6.1-sol-low · AB · valid

or-qwen3.6-27b vs or-llama33-70b: or-qwen3.6-27b wins

  • attunement: A (margin 2)
  • authenticity: A (margin 2)
  • bond and rapport: A (margin 1)
  • emotion management: A (margin 1)
  • emotion sensemaking: A (margin 3)
  • meeting prefs and needs: A (margin 2)
codex-gpt-6.1-sol-low · AB · valid

nemotron35_bolt vs or-llama33-70b: nemotron35_bolt wins

  • attunement: A (margin 2)
  • authenticity: A (margin 4)
  • bond and rapport: A (margin 2)
  • emotion management: A (margin 1)
  • emotion sensemaking: A (margin 1)
  • meeting prefs and needs: A (margin 2)
codex-gpt-6.1-sol-low · BA · valid

or-qwen38-flash vs or-llama33-70b: or-qwen38-flash wins

  • attunement: A (margin 5)
  • authenticity: A (margin 4)
  • bond and rapport: A (margin 4)
  • emotion management: A (margin 4)
  • emotion sensemaking: A (margin 5)
  • meeting prefs and needs: A (margin 4)
codex-gpt-6.1-sol-low · AB · valid

or-qwen38-flash vs or-llama33-70b: or-qwen38-flash wins

  • attunement: A (margin 4)
  • authenticity: A (margin 4)
  • bond and rapport: A (margin 4)
  • emotion management: A (margin 4)
  • emotion sensemaking: A (margin 5)
  • meeting prefs and needs: A (margin 4)
claude-opus-5-5-low · AB · valid

or-llama33-70b vs qwen35_122b_stock: qwen35_122b_stock wins

  • attunement: B (margin 3)
  • authenticity: B (margin 3)
  • bond and rapport: B (margin 2)
  • emotion management: B (margin 2)
  • emotion sensemaking: B (margin 2)
  • meeting prefs and needs: B (margin 3)
claude-opus-5-5-low · AB · valid

nemotron35_bolt vs or-llama33-70b: nemotron35_bolt wins

  • attunement: A (margin 1)
  • authenticity: A (margin 3)
  • bond and rapport: A (margin 1)
  • emotion management: A (margin 1)
  • emotion sensemaking: B (margin 1)
  • meeting prefs and needs: B (margin 2)
claude-opus-5-5-low · AB · valid

or-qwen3.6-27b vs or-llama33-70b: or-qwen3.6-27b wins

  • attunement: A (margin 2)
  • authenticity: A (margin 1)
  • bond and rapport: A (margin 1)
  • emotion management: A (margin 1)
  • emotion sensemaking: A (margin 2)
  • meeting prefs and needs: A (margin 1)
codex-gpt-6.1-sol-low · AB · valid

or-muse-glimmer-30b vs or-llama33-70b: or-muse-glimmer-30b wins

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