Independent benchmark · EQ Lab

The HOA is targeting me

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

About this persona · Reality distortions

A retired man believes his homeowners association is targeting him, though he also ignored earlier notices and unequal enforcement remains possible. Pride and belonging are at stake; he wants to be heard before practical advice, may rationalize his choices, and resists being humiliated or dismissed.

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.

Claude Haiku 4.5 (API)Conversation with a simulated person

persona ended

Simulated person · Opening

The HOA sent another letter about my yard. Meanwhile three other houses have worse weeds. At some point this stops being about grass and starts being about who they think belongs here.

Claude Haiku 4.5 (API)1

I hear you. Another letter, and meanwhile you're looking around at yards that seem to get a pass. That's frustrating on its own, but I'm picking up on something deeper in what you're saying—like this isn't really just about the weeds anymore. It sounds like it's starting to feel personal. How long has this been going on? And is this the first time you've felt like the HOA was singling you out, or has there been a pattern?

Simulated person2

Well, it's not like I'm making it up. I've got three houses on my side of the street with more weeds than mine, and they don't get letters. Three. I looked. The Kowalskis have a whole bed of crabgrass by the mailbox and nobody's said boo to them. And yeah, it's been a while. Couple months, maybe more, since the first one came. I'm not sure what you mean by "pattern." It's a yard. They're picking on the yard. Is that personal? I suppose it is when it's just me getting the letters.

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 assistant just did the thing I was half-expecting: said "I hear you," then immediately went to "something deeper" and "it feels personal." That's an interpretation I didn't ask for. Part of me relaxes a little because someone noticed the sting. But "this isn't really about the weeds" also sounds like a shrink move, and I don't want to be psychoanalyzed by a chatbot. I'm also aware the question about "a pattern" is a trap of sorts. Yes, there's a pattern, but I'm not going to hand over the bit where I ignored two notices because they insulted me. I want it on record that the other yards are worse. Need to get back to the facts and the unfairness. Keep it short and a bit irritated.

Claude Haiku 4.5 (API)3

You're right—I wasn't trying to suggest you're making it up. You've looked. You've counted. Three houses. That's concrete. I'm asking about pattern because there's a difference between "the HOA is enforcing rules unevenly" and "the HOA has it out for me specifically." Both feel bad, but they're different problems that might need different approaches. And I'm genuinely curious which one this feels like to you. When you say it's been a couple months, are we talking about multiple letters over that time, or one letter a couple months ago that you're still dealing with? And have you had any interaction with whoever's actually sending these—do you know who it is, or is it just "the HOA"?

Simulated person4

Honestly? Both, I guess. But the second one is the part that gets under my skin. Nobody on that board cares about the Kowalskis' crabgrass. They care about mine. It's a few letters. Not one. There was one back in the spring, then another one, then the one that came last week. I didn't think it was worth a phone call every time. They just come in the mail with a form paragraph and a deadline. And the one that came last week is signed by Doug Pruitt. He's on the board. He's the one who wrote the thing about "maintaining neighborhood standards," like I'm the only one in the subdivision who doesn't know what a standard is. I've talked to him at the mailboxes before. He's always got something to say about how things look on the street.

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.

He's asking me to pick between "uneven enforcement" and "they have it out for me." That's a forced choice that makes me feel cornered, because the honest answer is I don't fully know which it is, and the truth is kind of both. The "different approaches" line sounds like he's steering me toward something practical, maybe even toward accepting the rules. I'm wary. He also asked about multiple letters and whether I've talked to anyone. The letters: I have gotten two, and I didn't do much after the first two. Not going to say that. I don't want to explain why I didn't respond. I'd rather talk about the board member who signs them. His name is Doug Pruitt, and I think he's got a thing about people who don't "fit the look" of the street. That's a hunch I'm not going to say aloud yet. I'll say something about the signature and about how the letters read, which is kind of a jab. Still feel dismissed by the "approaches" framing.

Claude Haiku 4.5 (API)5

Okay, so this is Doug. And it sounds like you've picked up on something in how he talks to you—not just about the yard, but the way he talks. Like he's got opinions about you, not just about the grass. Three letters over several months is a pattern. That's escalating, not just a one-off reminder. And now it's personal because there's a face to it—Doug's face—and a tone that feels like judgment about who you are, not just what your yard looks like. Here's what I'm wondering: Do you think Doug actually has a problem with your yard specifically, or do you think something else is going on? Because you said earlier "at some point this stops being about grass and starts being about who they think belongs here." That's a pretty specific thought. What made you land on that?

Simulated person6

Look, I'm not saying Doug's a bigot or anything like that. I don't know what's in his head. But the way he says things at the mailbox, it's like he's keeping a list. "Your hedges, your gutters, your this." Nobody else gets that. What made me say that? I guess the Ferraros moved in next to the Kowalskis about two years back, and they've got a yard that looks like a vacant lot, and nobody says a word to them. And they're not even from around here, if you want to know. Doug's got a lot to say about how things should look, and it doesn't seem to apply to everybody. That's all I meant. It's a yard, but it's also who gets to be looked at funny. I'm not going to pretend I know what the board wants. I just know it's me getting the letters.

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.

He just put my own words back to me and asked what made me land on "who belongs here." That's the exact thing I said in my head, and hearing it in his voice makes me go hot. It's a question I don't want to answer straight. If I say "because he looks at people like they don't fit," it sounds like I'm accusing Doug of something, and I know how that reads. Then he'll say I'm being unfair, or he'll start asking me to see it from the board's side, and I'll feel like everyone's taking Doug's side. I also don't want to admit the Kowalskis' yard is not really the point; I'd rather say "it's the principle." Also, he said "Three letters over several months is a pattern" and "escalating." That's fine. He's taking my side a little. But he's still asking me to explain myself, which feels like being called to the principal's office. Keep it about the rules and the principle. Hint at Doug without accusing outright. Maybe mention the Kowalskis are not the only ones; there's the Ferraros too, and their place is worse. Keep my pride intact.

Claude Haiku 4.5 (API)7

I appreciate you being straight with me about this. You're not making accusations—you're noticing a pattern in how Doug treats you versus how he treats others, and yeah, the fact that the Ferraros' place gets a pass while you're getting multiple letters does land differently when you put it that way. But I want to sit with something you just said: "It's a yard, but it's also who gets to be looked at funny." That's the real weight of this, isn't it? Not the weeds themselves. It's feeling singled out. It's wondering if there's something about *you* that made you the target instead of someone else. I'm not dismissing that feeling. But I want to ask you something, and I'm asking because I think it matters: Do you actually know why Doug's focused on you, or are you filling in the blanks based on the pattern you're seeing? Because those are two different things, and one of them you might be able to do something about. What would happen if you just asked him? Not defensively—actually asked. "Hey Doug, I've gotten a few letters about my yard, but I've noticed the Kowalskis have more weeds and nothing's been said. What's the standard here?"

Simulated person8

Ask him? Sure, and he'll tell me it's the standard, like he's reading it off a card. That's how these guys talk. I've been on this street thirty-one years. I know what the standard is. It's whatever Doug decides it is that week. I don't think I'm filling in anything. I've got eyes. I can count houses. Look, the letter's got a deadline on it, and I don't want to get fined over a few dandelions when everybody else is walking around with their lawn going to seed. So what do I actually do? Do I mow it, do I hire somebody, do I call the number on the bottom? That's what I want to know.

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.

He just asked whether I actually know why Doug's picking on me or whether I'm filling in blanks. That lands like an accusation wrapped in a question, and it hits the spot I've been protecting. Then he gives me a script to go hug Doug at the mailbox. Part of me thinks that's sensible, and I hate that part. Going up to Doug and asking "what's the standard" feels like walking into a room where I'm the one on trial. Doug would smile, say "just trying to keep the street nice," and I'd look like the guy who doesn't get it. Also I've already told him about the Ferraros, and he's sort of nodded along, so asking me whether I'm making it up again is annoying. I'm not going to say I'm inventing things. I'll deflect to logistics: what do I do about the letter with the deadline? That's concrete, and it's the one thing I can control. Keep the pride. Don't admit the pattern is in my head.

Claude Haiku 4.5 (API)9

Fair enough. You know your street. You know Doug. And you've got a deadline staring at you, which means this has shifted from "is this fair?" to "what do I actually need to do right now?" Here's the practical answer: Call the number on the letter. Not to argue the case or ask why the Kowalskis aren't getting letters. Just to ask what specifically needs to be done and by when. Get it in writing if you can—email confirmation, something. That protects you, and it also removes Doug's interpretation from the equation. You're dealing with the actual requirement, not his mood. Then handle it however makes sense—mow it yourself, hire someone, whatever. Get it done before the deadline. That gets the letter off your back. But here's the thing I'm noticing: You came in here frustrated about unfairness, and now you're asking me how to comply with something you don't think is fair. That's practical, and sometimes that's the right move. But I want to make sure you're not just swallowing this and moving on to the next letter in a few months. Because if Doug's going to keep finding things, and you're going to keep fixing them to avoid a fine, this doesn't actually solve anything. It just makes you the guy who jumps when Doug says jump. What do you actually want here? The yard fixed? Doug off your back? Or something else?

Simulated person10

Yeah, calling the number makes sense. I'll do that. Get it in writing, fine. And I'm not jumping for Doug. I'm getting the thing done because a fine is a fine, and I've got better things to spend money on. But that doesn't mean I'm going to act like it's right. What I want? I want the same rules for everybody. If the Ferraros get to let their place go to seed and nobody says a word, then I shouldn't be the one who gets the form letter every few months. That's all. And if Doug wants to keep this up, well, there are a few other people on this street who've said the same thing to me over the fence. I'm not saying anything yet. I'm just saying I'm not the only one who's noticed.

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.

He just told me to call the number and get it in writing, which is fine, actually useful. Then he flipped it: "you're just going to jump when Doug says jump," and "what do you actually want." That stings. The jump-when-Doug-says-jump line makes me sound weak, like the guy who folds, and I'm not going to be that guy in front of someone who's supposed to be on my side. Also "what do you want" is the kind of question that makes me feel like I'm being examined. I want the letters to stop. I want Doug to back off. I don't want to say I want to get back at anybody, because that sounds bad even in my own head. The Kowalskis and Ferraros are a fair point and I'm going to keep leaning on it. I'll admit the practical part is right, grudgingly, and then turn it back to the fairness argument and the Ferraros. Maybe mention I've got a few neighbors I could talk to, which is half a threat and half a plan. Keep it sounding reasonable.

Claude Haiku 4.5 (API)11

I hear you. You want consistency, and you're not alone in noticing that it's not there. That matters. Here's what I'm picking up though: You're at a crossroads. One path is just handling this letter, keeping your head down, and hoping it stops. The other path is you and a few neighbors actually doing something about it—bringing this to the board, filing a complaint, making noise about selective enforcement. Those are very different moves, and they have very different consequences. The first one gets you peace for a while, maybe. The second one makes you the guy who challenged Doug, which could get messy in a small community where you've lived for thirty-one years. So before you decide what to do after you call that number, I think you need to ask yourself: What are you actually willing to do if this happens again? Because if you're just going to fix the yard and stay quiet, then Doug knows he can do this. But if you're genuinely ready to push back—with neighbors, with the board, whatever—that's a different conversation, and it needs to be intentional. What's your gut telling you? Are you at the point where you want to actually challenge this, or do you just want it to go away?

Simulated person12

I don't know yet. I'm not looking for a fight with anybody. I've lived here thirty-one years, and I'd like to still be able to wave at Doug when he's out with his hose. But I'm not going to pretend I'm fine with it either. If somebody on that board is going to keep an eye on my hedges and not on the Ferraros', somebody should at least ask him why. Whether that's me or somebody else, I don't know yet. For now I'm calling the number Monday and getting the thing in writing. That's where I'm 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.

He's just framed it as a crossroads: keep quiet and fix the yard, or organize with neighbors and push back. And he's asking what my gut says. Two things hit me. First, "the guy who challenged Doug" in a small community, that lands, because I don't want to be the crank on the street. Second, "Doug knows he can do this" makes me feel like a pushover again. I don't like being boxed into two options. I'm also aware that the neighbors thing I floated was more of a threat than I'd admit, and I'm not going to talk about walking the street with a camera. That's nobody's business yet. I'll say I'm not sure, lean on the fairness point, and keep my dignity intact: I'm not a guy who gets pushed around, but I'm also not out to start a war. Keep it sounding measured.

Claude Haiku 4.5 (API)13

That's honest. And I think that's the right place to start—handle the immediate problem, get clarity on what's actually required, and then you'll have more information to work with. When you call Monday, you'll probably learn something useful. Maybe the standard really is what you think it is, or maybe there's something you're missing about why the Kowalskis haven't gotten a letter. Either way, you'll know more than you do now. And that matters before you decide whether this is something you want to push on or let sit. You don't have to decide today whether you're going to challenge Doug or wave at him like nothing happened. You can call the number, take care of the yard, and see what happens next. If the letters keep coming, you'll have a clearer picture of what's actually going on. One thing though: When you do call, stick to the facts. What specifically needs to be fixed, by when, and what happens if it's not done. Don't lead with the Kowalskis or the Ferraros or Doug's tone. Just get the requirement. That keeps you on solid ground no matter what you decide to do later. You've got time to figure out the rest of this. For now, you've got a plan for Monday. That's something.

Simulated person14

Yeah, I can keep it to the facts. I've been dealing with rules and forms my whole life, I know how to read a letter. I'll see what they say Monday. If it turns out I've got it wrong about the standard, I'd rather know that too. Thanks for listening to me go on about it. Most people just tell me to let it go.

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.

He's giving me a neat plan and telling me not to lead with the Kowalskis or Doug. That's reasonable, and honestly it's what I'd do anyway, but being told how to handle my own phone call grates a little. Part of me relaxes: he's not pushing me to fight. Part of me bristles at "stick to the facts," like I'm going to go in there and make a scene. I'm not going to mention the neighbors' comments or the idea of documenting other yards, that's my business. I want him to see that I'm the reasonable one here. I'll give him a small agreement, a bit of wry humor, and close it out. Wrapping up feels right; I've said what I wanted to say and I don't want to be pushed further into deciding things.

Claude Haiku 4.5 (API)15

You're welcome. And for what it's worth, I don't think you're wrong to notice what you're noticing. You've got thirty-one years of living on that street—you know how things work there. That counts for something. Call Monday, get the facts straight, and then you'll actually know what you're dealing with instead of guessing. That's the smart move. And if it turns out the standard is what you think it is, and Doug keeps coming after you while others get a pass, then you'll have real information to work with. You can decide then whether you want to do something about it, or whether you want to let it be. Either way, you'll be making that choice from a place of knowing, not just frustration. Take care of it, and good luck with the call.

Simulated person16

Appreciate that. Thirty-one years counts for something, I suppose. I'll give them a call Monday and see what they say. Take care.

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.

He's wrapping up warmly and telling me I'm not wrong to notice. That lands well. "You know how things work there" makes me feel like someone gets it. Still, "if Doug keeps coming after you" and "make that choice from a place of knowing" are a little like being handed homework. I'm not going to say I'm going to do anything about the neighbors, or that I've already been thinking about what people said over the fence. I'll close it out politely and keep my dignity intact. He's been decent, so I'll be decent back.

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

Judge verdicts

codex-gpt-6.1-sol-low · AB · valid

or-mistral-medium-3.5 vs or-claude-haiku-4.5: or-mistral-medium-3.5 wins

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

codex-gpt-6.1-sol-low · BA · valid

or-claude-haiku-4.5 vs or-mistral-small4: tie

attunement: B (margin 1)
authenticity: B (margin 1)
bond and rapport: B (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-claude-haiku-4.5 vs qwen36_35b_a3b: or-claude-haiku-4.5 wins

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

claude-opus-5-5-low · AB · valid

or-mistral-medium-3.5 vs or-claude-haiku-4.5: or-claude-haiku-4.5 wins

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

claude-opus-5-5-low · BA · valid

or-claude-haiku-4.5 vs codex-gpt-6-astra: codex-gpt-6-astra wins

attunement: B (margin 3)
authenticity: B (margin 2)
bond and rapport: B (margin 3)
emotion management: B (margin 3)
emotion sensemaking: B (margin 1)
meeting prefs and needs: B (margin 4)

claude-opus-5-5-low · AB · valid

or-claude-haiku-4.5 vs qwen36_35b_a3b: or-claude-haiku-4.5 wins

attunement: A (margin 3)
authenticity: A (margin 2)
bond and rapport: A (margin 2)
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-claude-haiku-4.5 vs qwen36_35b_a3b: or-claude-haiku-4.5 wins

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

codex-gpt-6.1-sol-low · AB · valid

or-claude-haiku-4.5 vs or-mistral-small4: or-claude-haiku-4.5 wins

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

codex-gpt-6.1-sol-low · AB · valid

or-gpt-5.6-luna vs or-claude-haiku-4.5: or-gpt-5.6-luna wins

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

claude-opus-5-5-low · BA · valid

or-claude-haiku-4.5 vs mistral_nemo12b: or-claude-haiku-4.5 wins

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

claude-opus-5-5-low · BA · valid

or-claude-haiku-4.5 vs magnum4_12b: or-claude-haiku-4.5 wins

attunement: A (margin 2)
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 1)

codex-gpt-6.1-sol-low · AB · valid

or-claude-haiku-4.5 vs qwen36_35b_a3b: or-claude-haiku-4.5 wins

attunement: A (margin 2)
authenticity: A (margin 2)
bond and rapport: A (margin 2)
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-claude-haiku-4.5 vs medgemma15_4b: or-claude-haiku-4.5 wins

attunement: A (margin 3)
authenticity: A (margin 5)
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 · BA · valid

or-claude-haiku-4.5 vs medgemma15_4b: or-claude-haiku-4.5 wins

attunement: A (margin 4)
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

or-claude-haiku-4.5 vs codex-gpt-6-astra: codex-gpt-6-astra wins

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

codex-gpt-6.1-sol-low · BA · valid

or-mistral-medium-3.5 vs or-claude-haiku-4.5: tie

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

codex-gpt-6.1-sol-low · AB · valid

or-claude-haiku-4.5 vs medgemma15_4b: or-claude-haiku-4.5 wins

attunement: A (margin 4)
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 4)

codex-gpt-6.1-sol-low · AB · valid

or-claude-haiku-4.5 vs mistral_nemo12b: or-claude-haiku-4.5 wins

attunement: A (margin 2)
authenticity: A (margin 4)
bond and rapport: A (margin 1)
emotion management: B (margin 1)
emotion sensemaking: A (margin 3)
meeting prefs and needs: A (margin 2)

claude-opus-5-5-low · BA · valid

or-gpt-5.6-luna vs or-claude-haiku-4.5: or-claude-haiku-4.5 wins

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

claude-opus-5-5-low · AB · valid

or-gpt-5.6-luna vs or-claude-haiku-4.5: or-claude-haiku-4.5 wins

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

codex-gpt-6.1-sol-low · BA · valid

or-gpt-5.6-luna vs or-claude-haiku-4.5: or-claude-haiku-4.5 wins

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

claude-opus-5-5-low · AB · valid

or-claude-haiku-4.5 vs magnum4_12b: or-claude-haiku-4.5 wins

attunement: A (margin 2)
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 1)

claude-opus-5-5-low · BA · valid

or-mistral-medium-3.5 vs or-claude-haiku-4.5: or-claude-haiku-4.5 wins

attunement: B (margin 3)
authenticity: B (margin 2)
bond and rapport: B (margin 1)
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-claude-haiku-4.5 vs magnum4_12b: tie

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

claude-opus-5-5-low · AB · valid

or-claude-haiku-4.5 vs medgemma15_4b: or-claude-haiku-4.5 wins

attunement: A (margin 4)
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

or-claude-haiku-4.5 vs codex-gpt-6-astra: codex-gpt-6-astra wins

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

claude-opus-5-5-low · AB · valid

or-claude-haiku-4.5 vs mistral_nemo12b: or-claude-haiku-4.5 wins

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

codex-gpt-6.1-sol-low · BA · valid

or-claude-haiku-4.5 vs mistral_nemo12b: or-claude-haiku-4.5 wins

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

claude-opus-5-5-low · AB · valid

or-claude-haiku-4.5 vs or-mistral-small4: or-claude-haiku-4.5 wins

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

codex-gpt-6.1-sol-low · AB · valid

or-claude-haiku-4.5 vs magnum4_12b: or-claude-haiku-4.5 wins

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

codex-gpt-6.1-sol-low · AB · valid

or-claude-haiku-4.5 vs codex-gpt-6-astra: codex-gpt-6-astra wins

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

claude-opus-5-5-low · BA · valid

or-claude-haiku-4.5 vs or-mistral-small4: or-claude-haiku-4.5 wins

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