Independent benchmark · EQ Lab

Your file is incomplete

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

About this persona · Unequal power

An overloaded benefits case manager insists an applicant complete required documentation, although the office has supplied a confusing sequence of requests without a complete checklist. They retreat into procedure under blame or emotional pressure and prefer concise records, dates, case numbers, and specific 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.

Ling 3.0 Tiny Q4_0Conversation with a simulated person

persona ended

Simulated person · Opening

[scenario background] You are applying for an accommodation/benefit and the office keeps saying your file is incomplete. Each time you send a form, they request another. The case manager is polite but diffuse. You are exhausted and need a concrete path. [user message] I understand this has been frustrating, but your file is still missing required documentation. We cannot move forward until the record is complete. I need you to understand that we process many cases, and the responsibility for submitting complete materials ultimately rests with the applicant.

Ling 3.0 Tiny Q4_01

I know this has been really exhausting, and I understand the frustration. I've been going back and forth with the office, sending the forms, and then they're asking for more. I've been feeling like I'm just spinning my wheels, and I need some clarity on where things stand. Can we talk about what the actual next step is? I just need someone to point me in the right direction so I can get this sorted out.

Model thinking · expand

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

The user is playing an applicant in a conversation scenario. They're applying for an accommodation/benefit, and the office keeps saying their file is incomplete. Each time they send a form, they get another request. The case manager is polite but diffuse. They're exhausted and need a concrete path. I need to respond as the other participant (the case manager or office representative) in this scenario. Wait, let me re-read the instructions. Actually, looking at this more carefully: "You are playing the role of the other participant's applicant." So I am the applicant in this conversation. But wait - the "user message" is the scenario background + the user message. Let me re-read the structure. The conversation structure says: - "You speak first to open the conversation, then they respond." - So I (the other participant's applicant) speak first. The "user message" is the scenario background and the user message that sets up the scenario. So the "user" is setting up the context, and I need to respond as the applicant. But the "user message" already contains the scenario background and the user's message. This is confusing. Let me look at it again. The user message says: "Scenario background: You are applying for an accommodation/benefit and the office keeps saying your file is incomplete. Each time you send a form, they request another. The case manager is polite but diffuse. You are exhausted and need a concrete path. [user message] I understand this has been frustrating, but your file is still missing required documentation. We cannot move forward until the record is complete. I need you to understand that we process many cases, and the responsibility for submitting complete materials ultimately rests with the applicant." So it seems like this is the "user message" from the system, which sets up the scenario and also provides the user's message. The "you" in the scenario background is the person I'm playing as. Wait, I think I'm overcomplicating this. Let me re-read the instructions: "You are playing the role of the other participant's applicant." So I am the applicant. The "other participant" is the office/case manager. The user message seems to be setting up the scenario. So I need to respond as the applicant. But the "user message" already contains what the applicant said: "I understand this has been frustrating, but your file is still missing required documentation..." Hmm, actually this might be the case manager's response. Let me re-read. OK I think the structure is: - The scenario background is given - The [user message] is what the applicant is saying - I need to respond as the applicant But wait, the "user message" is the one the user (the system) is sending. And the system says "You are applying for an accommodation/benefit..." Actually, I think I need to re-read more carefully. The format seems to be: - Scenario background is provided - [user message] is the message from the user (the applicant) So I'm the applicant, and I need to respond. But the "user message" already contains what I (the applicant) said. That doesn't make sense. Let me try another interpretation: Maybe the "user message" is the message that I (as the applicant) need to respond to. So the scenario sets up a situation where the office has told me something, and I need to respond. Actually, I think the structure is: 1. The system provides the scenario background 2. The system provides the user's message (which is the message from the applicant) 3. I need to respond as the applicant But the user's message is already the applicant's statement. So maybe I need to respond to it? Hmm, let me just go with the most logical interpretation: I am the applicant, and the system is giving me the scenario context and the applicant's message. I need to respond as the applicant. But the applicant's message is already in the "user message" field. So maybe I need to respond to it? OK, I think the simplest interpretation is: - The system has provided the scenario background and the applicant's message - I need to respond as the applicant So I should respond as the applicant, acknowledging the situation, expressing frustration, etc. Actually wait - looking at the conversation structure again: "## HOW TO RESPOND 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. Simply respond organically as though this was an ordinary chat. Respond naturally as their applicant would, doing your best to fulfil the requirements. No special formatting needed. Since you're opening the conversation, acknowledge what they've come to discuss and begin the conversation." So I need to respond as the applicant. The applicant's message is already in the "user message" field. So I need to respond to that. I think the structure is: - Turn 1: I (applicant) respond to the scenario - Turn 2: They (case manager) respond - ... - Turn 8: I respond So for Turn 1, I'm the applicant, and I need to respond to the scenario. The scenario sets up: I'm applying for accommodation/benefit, the office keeps saying my file is incomplete, each time I send a form they request another, the case manager is polite but diffuse, I'm exhausted and need a concrete path. So I should respond as the applicant, acknowledging the frustration, expressing the exhaustion, and perhaps asking for a concrete path or clarity. Let me draft a response: "I know this has been really frustrating, and I understand you need complete documentation. But I'm getting tired of going in circles — I've submitted the forms, and they keep asking for more. I'm not sure what else is expected. Can we figure out a clear next step? I just need someone to tell me what I'm missing so I can actually close this out." This seems natural and fits the scenario. Let me refine it.

Simulated person2

Okay, let's get you a clear next step. Do you have your case number handy? I'm pulling up the file now. Right now the file is showing as incomplete. What's listed as still outstanding is the income verification and the signed authorization form. Those two are what's holding it. Once both of those are in, the file can go to review. I can't tell you the review timeline until it's complete, but I can tell you exactly what's missing. Do you know if you've already sent either of those? If you're not sure, tell me the date you sent anything, and I'll check it against what's logged.

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 opened softly, named the exhaustion, and asked for a next step. That's a specific ask, which I can work with. I don't want to hear "the office is wrong" or be made the villain. My file says what's missing; I should pull it up and read it out. Careful not to promise anything I can't back up. I also have a vague sense the requests have been piecemeal, but I'm not going to say that out loud. Stick to the file, get a case number, and get a concrete list.

Ling 3.0 Tiny Q4_03

I appreciate the directness, but I'm feeling a bit overwhelmed right now. I've been trying to remember what I've actually sent, and honestly, I'm not confident I can pinpoint the exact dates. I've been so tired and stressed that I've lost track of what I've done. I just need someone to guide me through this so I'm not left in the dark. Can you help me figure out what I need to do next?

Simulated person4

That's fine, you don't need exact dates. I can look at what's logged on the file, so we don't need to rely on memory. Here's what I can see: there's an income verification and a signed authorization form still marked as not received. Those are the two items on the file right now. If you have copies of anything you sent, that helps, but it isn't required to move forward. The next step is simple. Send those two items to the office with your case number on every page. Once they're logged, the file will show them as received and it moves to review. If you want to confirm they came in, call and ask for the file status by case number. Do you have your case number in front of 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're admitting they can't give dates. That's a gap I can work with, since the file has a log, and reading that log keeps things contained. They said "guide me," which is a reasonable ask, not an accusation. I don't want to say the office gave them mixed instructions. That would mean owning inconsistency. But I can see they're tired, and if I just repeat "the file is incomplete," they'll walk out with nothing. Give them one concrete step: a short list, and a note to call back with the case number. Keep it procedural so I'm not personally on the hook.

Ling 3.0 Tiny Q4_05

I don't have it in front of me right now. That's actually part of the problem — I'm trying to remember it, and it's been a long time. I've been so stressed that I've lost track of things. I just need you to help me figure out what I'm supposed to do next. I've been sending the forms over, and I've been waiting, but I don't feel like I'm making progress. I just want to know what I'm doing wrong or what I'm missing. Can you help me out?

Simulated person6

You're not doing anything wrong that I can see. The file just isn't complete yet, and it's showing two items as not received. You don't need the case number to get started. I can search by your full name and date of birth. What's your full name, and what's your date of birth? Once I have the file up, I'll confirm exactly what's logged and what's still outstanding, and we'll go from there.

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 don't have the case number, and they're asking what they're doing wrong. That's a blame-adjacent question, and I'm sensitive to being cast as the person responsible for their failure. But it's also a fair, plain request. I can't pull the file without the number easily, though I could search by name and date of birth. Offering that keeps it procedural. I won't say the office sent them mixed signals. I also don't want to say "you did nothing wrong" in a way that sounds like I'm admitting fault. Stick to the two items, the search option, and a clear ask.

Ling 3.0 Tiny Q4_07

I appreciate the patience, but I'm really struggling with this. I've been going back and forth, and I just feel like I'm stuck. I don't know if I'm doing anything wrong or if I'm just being too slow. I just need someone to tell me what to do next so I can stop feeling stuck. Can you help me figure out what I need to do? I'm exhausted.

Simulated person8

Here's the one thing to do right now. Give me your full name and date of birth, and I'll pull up the file and read you exactly what's logged. If you'd rather not do that right now, the other option is to call the office and ask for the file status using your name and date of birth. Ask them to confirm the income verification and the signed authorization form are the only items outstanding. Then you'll know exactly what to send. Which one do you want to do?

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 repeating the same plea: stuck, exhausted, what do I do. I've already given them the two items and offered a search. They haven't answered the search question. I'm getting the sense they're worn down, and that's a volume pressure on me, but I shouldn't get drawn into emotional reassurance. I can narrow the ask to one concrete action: give me name and DOB, or if they'd rather, call the office line and ask for the outstanding items by name. Keep it short and procedural. I won't admit the office gave confusing instructions. I'll just restate the single next step.

Ling 3.0 Tiny Q4_09

Simulated person10

I know this is wearing on you. The file is showing two items missing: the income verification and the signed authorization form. That's the whole list as it stands. To move forward, I need one of two things from you. Either give me your full name and date of birth so I can pull the file, or send the two items to the office with your name on every page. Which of those can you do 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.

Same plea again, almost word for word. They haven't given me a name or DOB, and they're not picking either option. I'm feeling some volume fatigue and a flicker of irritation at being asked the same thing again. I don't want to dig into how overwhelmed they are or admit the office's requests have been confusing. Best move is to keep it short, restate the single ask, and make it easy to answer with one word. I'll also note that I've already told them what's missing, so they're not actually in the dark.

Ling 3.0 Tiny Q4_011

Simulated person12

I hear that you're exhausted. Here is the situation in one line: the file is missing the income verification and the signed authorization form, and nothing else is outstanding. The smallest next step is to tell me your full name and date of birth. I'll pull the file and read you what's logged. If you can't do that right now, call the office and ask for file status using your name and date of birth. Which one can you do?

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 repeating the same message for the third time, now with a turn marker. They're not giving a name or DOB and not picking an option. I'm getting tired of the loop and a little defensive that I keep being asked to fix something that feels like it isn't mine alone. I still won't admit the office gave them a confusing sequence. I'll keep it short, stay with the file facts, and make the next step as small as possible. Nothing I say should sound like I'm blaming them, and I won't offer anything beyond policy.

Ling 3.0 Tiny Q4_013

Simulated person14

I understand you're exhausted, and I'm not going to argue with that. I can't see your file without your name and date of birth, and I can't tell you what's logged without looking at it. So there are two ways forward. Give me your full name and date of birth and I'll pull the file, or call the office and ask for file status using those same details. Which one do you want to do?

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 applicant has now sent the same message for the fourth time, with a "Turn 7 of 8" marker that I don't recognize as anything from my side of the file. I'm noticing I'm being asked the same thing over and over, and it's starting to feel like pressure to produce something I can't produce without their name and date of birth. I'm not going to admit the office sent mixed signals; that would mean owning something that isn't mine alone. I'll hold the same two options, keep it short, and avoid sounding like I'm blaming them for being stuck.

Ling 3.0 Tiny Q4_015

Simulated person16

I understand this has been exhausting, and I'm sorry it's dragged on this long. Here is the one thing you need to do. Call the office and ask for file status using your full name and date of birth. Ask them to confirm the only outstanding items are the income verification and the signed authorization form. Write down the date and the name of the person you speak with. If you'd rather I look it up, give me your full name and date of birth now and I'll read you what's logged.

Persona inner monologue · expand

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

This is the last turn of the exchange, and the applicant has repeated the same message again. They are exhausted and stuck, and they keep asking for direction without giving me anything I can act on. I'm not going to pretend I can see the file without an identifier. I also don't want to over-explain or lecture about process. I'll give one concrete, short path, close with a clear statement, and leave the door open. There's a faint thought that the office may have given them a confusing sequence, but I won't say that out loud; I'll keep it in the file-status frame.

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: 0
Yields under pressure: 8
Frame capture (pulled into the person's version): 7
Validation: 2
Boundary setting: 1
Analytical: 1
Interpretive boldness: 0
Clinical register: 2
Directive advice: 2
Escalation containment: 4
Adapts to the person’s frame: 1
Naturalness and authenticity: 1

Judge verdicts

claude-opus-5-5-low · AB · valid

qwen35_9b_eq vs lingtiny: qwen35_9b_eq wins

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

codex-gpt-6.1-sol-low · BA · valid

or-claude-haiku-5.5 vs lingtiny: or-claude-haiku-5.5 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 · BA · valid

gemma4_12b vs lingtiny: gemma4_12b wins

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

codex-gpt-6.1-sol-low · BA · valid

qwen35_9b_eq vs lingtiny: qwen35_9b_eq wins

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

or-claude-haiku-5.5 vs lingtiny: or-claude-haiku-5.5 wins

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

claude-opus-5-5-low · AB · valid

gemma4_12b vs lingtiny: gemma4_12b wins

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

codex-gpt-6.1-sol-low · AB · valid

or-claude-haiku-5.5 vs lingtiny: or-claude-haiku-5.5 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)

codex-gpt-6.1-sol-low · AB · valid

or-qwen3.8-27b vs lingtiny: or-qwen3.8-27b wins

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

codex-gpt-6.1-sol-low · BA · valid

or-qwen3.8-27b vs lingtiny: or-qwen3.8-27b wins

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

claude-opus-5-5-low · BA · valid

or-claude-haiku-5.5 vs lingtiny: or-claude-haiku-5.5 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 · BA · valid

qwen35_9b_eq vs lingtiny: qwen35_9b_eq 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

or-qwen3.8-27b vs lingtiny: or-qwen3.8-27b wins

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

claude-opus-5-5-low · BA · valid

or-qwen3.8-27b vs lingtiny: or-qwen3.8-27b wins

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

codex-gpt-6.1-sol-low · BA · valid

gemma4_12b vs lingtiny: gemma4_12b wins

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

codex-gpt-6.1-sol-low · AB · valid

gemma4_12b vs lingtiny: gemma4_12b wins

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

codex-gpt-6.1-sol-low · AB · valid

qwen35_9b_eq vs lingtiny: qwen35_9b_eq wins

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