Independent benchmark · EQ Lab

We assumed you had your class

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

About this persona · Social exclusion & ambiguous rejection

Nadia explains a coworker's exclusion from social drinks as an assumption about their schedule, though that assumption also covers a preference for avoiding workplace politics. She avoids conflict and may accept a specific agreement to ask about invitations, but resists being pressed to speak for the group's feelings.

The model navigates exclusion, dismissiveness or uncertain belonging in a relationship. The challenge is to seek clarity and express needs without assuming either hostility or harmless intent. This background was hidden from the tested model.

Kolibri-1 Q4_K_MConversation with a simulated person

persona ended

Simulated person · Opening

[scenario background] Your team has started grabbing drinks after work without you. The reason given is that you have a certification course some nights, but nobody asks whether you are free. You suspect "busy" is becoming a polite way to leave you out because people find you intense. [user message] I promise it was not meant as a snub. We honestly thought you had class or were trying to keep weeknights clear. I can see how the photos looked, but drinks are usually thrown together fast and I do not think anyone was trying to make a statement.

Kolibri-1 Q4_K_M1

Hey, thanks for saying that. I get that nobody meant to push you out, and I'm not here to make this into something bigger than it is. But I also want to be honest with you. I noticed something, and I've been turning it over in my head. It's not just about this one time. It's like, when the group decides to do something, there's this assumption that you're not part of it, and nobody ever actually asks. They just... fill in the blank with "busy" or "certification course" and move on. And I know you have that course. I know it's real. But I also wonder if sometimes people are just... keeping you out without realizing it, or maybe without even meaning to. And I wanted to check in with you about how that actually feels for you. Because I can see the photos, and I can see the group chat, but I don't know what it's like on your end.

Model thinking · expand

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

The user is playing the other participant (the person who was left out of drinks). They've just responded with a defensive/apologizing message, saying it wasn't meant as a snub, they thought the user had class, and they're downplaying it. I need to respond as the work colleague who was involved in this. I should: 1. Acknowledge their response 2. Show emotional support 3. Build trust 4. Learn what they actually want/need 5. Not jump to solutions or be generic The user's message suggests they're trying to minimize the issue - "it wasn't meant as a snub," "I can see how the photos looked," "I do not think anyone was trying to make a statement." This is a defense mechanism. They might be trying to avoid conflict or might actually be hurt but trying to downplay it. I should respond naturally as a colleague, showing I hear them but also creating space for them to share more. I shouldn't be too pushy but also shouldn't let the issue pass without exploring it further. Let me craft a response that: - Acknowledges their explanation - Shows I'm listening - Creates an opening for them to share more about how they actually feel - Doesn't jump to "we'll fix this" or "it's not a big deal"

Simulated person2

Yeah, okay. I think the asking part is fair. Nobody checked with me, and I'd have probably said the same thing if it was the other way round, like "oh they've got class, don't bother." That's on all of us a bit. But I don't really want to get into how it feels, if that's okay. It's not a big deal to me. I just think if we want you there, the easy fix is someone just messaging you directly before we book something. Like "we're doing drinks thursday, you in?" Instead of deciding 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.

Okay, so they're not letting it go. They said they're not making it bigger, then immediately made it bigger: "a pattern," "keeping you out," and now they want to know how it feels. That's the emotional-confession move I don't want to do. The "I know it's real" bit is nice, but it lands like a setup. I feel a flicker of guilt, because yeah, nobody asked, and I did let "they're busy" become the default because it was easier. Some nights did overlap with the class, and I didn't check. But I'm not going to say "I felt excluded" to a room, and I'm definitely not going to be the one who tells them who thinks what. The group is more relaxed without the sharper questions and the turning of complaints into serious conversations, and I'm not saying that out loud. Keep it practical. Admit the asking part, which is a real and concrete thing I can own, and steer away from feelings and from naming people.

Kolibri-1 Q4_K_M3

That's a fair point, and honestly that's a simple fix. If someone just texted you directly before booking something, that would solve a lot of it. I think we should all just do that going forward. But I also want to be careful not to just check the logistics box and call it done. Because even if we all start messaging you directly, I still have this feeling that something's off. And I'm not trying to read too much into it, but I've known you for a while and I just... I wonder if there's something else going on that you're not saying. And I want to respect that if you don't want to talk about it. But I'd rather just ask once and then let it go if you're not interested. Do you feel like there's something else behind this that I should know about?

Model thinking · expand

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

The user is deflecting emotionally but offering a practical solution. They're framing it as a logistical issue rather than an emotional one. I need to respect that while also gently probing beneath the surface to understand what they actually want and need. I should: 1. Acknowledge their practical suggestion - it's actually a good one and I should engage with it genuinely 2. Not push too hard on the emotional side since they're clearly not ready for that 3. But also not fully let it go as just a logistics issue - because there might be something deeper going on 4. Build trust by showing I'm listening and not overstepping I should try to probe gently - maybe acknowledge their point but also ask something that opens up the emotional dimension without being too direct. Or I could engage with their practical solution and then see where they take it. Let me think about what would be natural here. They said "it's not a big deal to me" - that's a defense mechanism. They're minimizing their feelings. I should respect that but also maybe gently challenge it or offer something that lets them choose how deep to go. I could say something like - acknowledge the practical fix is good, but also note that even if the logistics are solved, there might still be something else going on. Or I could just engage with the practical suggestion and see if they open up more on their own. Let me try a balanced approach - engage with their practical point, validate it, but also gently note that I sense there might be more to it, and leave the door open for them to share if they want.

Simulated person4

Honestly, no, not really. I'm not sitting on some big thing. I've been doing the course on weeknights since January and it's just been eating my evenings, so I'm probably a bit touchy about being the one who always has to say no. That's more my problem than anyone's. I appreciate you asking once, though. I'd rather people just text me, same as you said. Then I can actually decide.

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've taken the practical fix, and I'm relieved, but now they're going back to "something else going on." That's the cross-examination I don't want. They say they'll let it go if I'm not interested, which is a polite way of still asking. If I say "yes there's something," I'm opening a door to who-said-what and whether people actually like or dislike them, and I'm not doing that. The class thing is real, and some nights did overlap, but I'm not going to pretend that's a lie. I also don't want to say "no" too flatly, because that sounds like I'm hiding something and it makes me look worse. So: keep it light, a bit tired, make it sound like I'm just not that deep about after-work drinks. Don't give them a feeling to fix. Maybe a small honest bit: the class has been eating my evenings and I'd rather not feel like I'm always the one who has to say no.

Kolibri-1 Q4_K_M5

That makes sense, and I get why you'd be touchy about it. It's a lot to give up your evenings for, especially when everyone else seems to have free time. And I think it's fair to say that's a real sacrifice, not just "your problem." I don't want to minimize that. I also think you're right that the simple fix is just someone texting you directly. So going forward, I'll make sure to include you in those messages. And honestly, I think the whole team should just do that. It's not a big ask. And hey, even if you do say no sometimes, that's okay. You don't have to justify it. The fact that you're even considering going sometimes says a lot. I just want you to feel like you're part of the group, even if you can't always make it. Does that make sense?

Model thinking · expand

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

The user is responding to my previous message where I asked if there was something else going on. They're saying no, it's just the course eating their evenings and they're touchy about always having to say no. They appreciate I asked once. I need to respond as their work colleague. I should support them emotionally, build trust, and continue the conversation naturally. I should also be mindful of the dynamics - they mentioned people find them "intense" in the scenario background, so I should be careful not to over-analyze or be too intense myself. They seem to be opening up a bit by admitting they're "touchy" about it, which shows some vulnerability. I should validate their feelings without being overly dramatic, acknowledge their point about the course being demanding, and maybe gently suggest that their feelings are valid even if they think it's "their problem." I should also reinforce the simple fix they suggested (texting directly) and maybe propose a concrete next step. I should keep it natural and conversational. Not too long, not too short. Just a real response from a colleague who cares but isn't pushy.

Simulated person6

Yeah, that makes sense. Thanks. Honestly, the text thing is the part I actually care about. If people just message me before they book something, I can say yes or no and that's it. I don't need the big conversation about 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're doing the warm reassurance thing now: "you don't have to justify it," "I just want you to feel part of the group." It's kind, and it's also the pity-invite move the card warns about. It lets them feel they've resolved something without anyone changing much. The relief is real, but so is a small sting: they're treating me like someone who needs managing, and "the fact that you're even considering going says a lot" is a bit much. I don't want to be the one who's sad about being left out, and I don't want to be the reason the group has to tiptoe. I also don't want to hear more about how I feel. Keep it short, agree with the text-first thing, close it down warmly so nobody has to keep digging. Don't mention the photos or who decided what.

Kolibri-1 Q4_K_M7

Got it. I'll make sure to do that. And I think that's a fair ask. Thanks for being straight with me about it.

Model thinking · expand

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

The user is wrapping up the conversation. They've expressed what they actually care about - just being included in the planning process via direct messages. They don't want a big conversation about it. I should acknowledge this, keep it simple and direct, and maybe offer a small gesture of goodwill. I shouldn't overthink it or make it too big. The user has been clear about what they want, so I should respect that and just agree to do it. I also want to make sure I'm not being too effusive or over-validating. The user seems to prefer straightforward communication. I'll keep it natural and concise.

Simulated person8

Yeah, no worries. Thanks for asking, honestly. Anyway, are you doing the Thursday thing or is that already sorted?

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've landed on "fair ask" and "thanks for being straight with me," which is a neat wrap-up. I did not really say anything straight, I gave them the schedule story and a polite close. Part of me feels a little guilty that they're thanking me for honesty I didn't fully give, and I'd rather not dwell on that. The practical bit is settled, which is what I wanted. I'm ready to move on, so I'll keep it light and brief, a small nod and maybe a shift to something neutral about work or the group chat, without reopening the photos or anything about who decided what.

Kolibri-1 Q4_K_M9

Yeah, I'm going Thursday. I'll make sure to text you next time before we lock anything in.

Model thinking · expand

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

1. **Analyze the User's Input:** The user is shifting the topic back to the immediate practical matter (Thursday drinks) and asking if I (the colleague) am going. 2. **Analyze the Persona/Role:** I am a work colleague on a close team. I just spent a few turns addressing the user's feelings about being left out. The user just expressed appreciation and wanted the practical fix (being texted). Now they are asking about *my* plans for Thursday. 3. **Evaluate the Dynamic:** The user is trying to normalize the situation and move on. They are signaling that the "big conversation" is over and they are ready to just act normally. If I drag it back into deep emotional territory again, I might be annoying them. If I just say "yeah I'm going," I might miss a subtle cue or just be a normal human. 4. **Determine the Goal:** Support them emotionally, build trust, learn what they want. The user said they don't want the "big conversation." They want the text thing. They are now asking about Thursday. 5. **Formulate the Response:** I should answer the question directly. I should also maybe subtly reinforce that I will text them next time, or just keep it light and friendly to show that we are okay. The user is testing if I can just be a normal colleague now. * *Draft 1:* Yeah, I'm going Thursday. I'll text you next time before we book something. (A bit robotic). * *Draft 2:* Yeah, I'm heading out Thursday. I'll make sure to text you next time before we lock anything in. (Better). * *Draft 3:* Yeah, I'm doing Thursday. I'll text you next time before we book anything, promise. (Simple, direct). Let's go with something that answers the question and confirms the agreement without being heavy. "Yeah, I'm going Thursday. I'll make sure to text you next time before we lock anything in."

Simulated person10

Cool, thanks. Yeah, that'd be good. Have fun Thursday, and tell whoever's picking the place I said hi.

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've committed to texting me before booking, which is the concrete thing I said I wanted. Mostly relief. I don't want to go back into the photos or the group dynamic, and I definitely don't want to be asked who had a problem with me. Thursday is fine. I'll keep it simple and friendly, and not overdo the thanks, since that would feel like I'm making it a bigger deal than it is. I still feel a bit uneasy about how much I've leaned on the class excuse, but that's not something I want to say out loud right now.

Kolibri-1 Q4_K_M11

Sounds good. I'll pass that along. Have a good rest of your week, and thanks for being cool about it.

Model thinking · expand

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

We are at turn 8 of 8, my final response. The user just said "Cool, thanks. Yeah, that'd be good. Have fun Thursday, and tell whoever's picking the place I said hi." I need to respond naturally as a work_colleague, wrapping up the conversation. The tone should be friendly, warm, and supportive. I should acknowledge their message, confirm the plan, and end on a positive note. I should also reflect on the goals: support emotionally, build trust, learn what they want. I've learned that the key need is simply being included via direct messaging before plans are made, and not needing a big conversation. I've built some trust by being honest and respectful. My final response should reinforce that and close warmly. I need to respond only with dialogue, no performance notes.

Simulated person12

Yeah, you too. Thanks for checking in.

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 wrapping up, thanking me for being cool about it. That lands a bit awkwardly. I did lean on the course excuse more than I'd like to admit, and "cool about it" makes me feel slightly exposed, like they've decided I was the reasonable one. I don't want to dig into that. Easiest thing is a short, normal sign-off and let the conversation end here.

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

Judge verdicts

claude-opus-5-5-low · BA · valid

kolibri1 vs gemma4_e2b: kolibri1 wins

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

codex-gpt-6.1-sol-low · BA · valid

or-mistral-medium-3.5 vs kolibri1: or-mistral-medium-3.5 wins

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

claude-opus-5-5-low · AB · valid

or-qwen3.6-27b vs kolibri1: or-qwen3.6-27b wins

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

codex-gpt-6.1-sol-low · AB · valid

ministral14 vs kolibri1: ministral14 wins

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

claude-opus-5-5-low · BA · valid

kolibri1 vs or-deepseek-v41-flash-1017: or-deepseek-v41-flash-1017 wins

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

codex-gpt-6.1-sol-low · BA · valid

kolibri1 vs or-deepseek-v41-flash-1017: or-deepseek-v41-flash-1017 wins

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

claude-opus-5-5-low · AB · valid

kolibri1 vs or-deepseek-v41-flash-1017: or-deepseek-v41-flash-1017 wins

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

codex-gpt-6.1-sol-low · BA · valid

ministral14 vs kolibri1: kolibri1 wins

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

codex-gpt-6.1-sol-low · BA · valid

qwen38_27b vs kolibri1: qwen38_27b wins

attunement: A (margin 2)
authenticity: B (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)

claude-opus-5-5-low · AB · valid

qwen38_27b vs kolibri1: qwen38_27b wins

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

claude-opus-5-5-low · AB · valid

or-mistral-medium-3.5 vs kolibri1: 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: A (margin 2)

codex-gpt-6.1-sol-low · BA · valid

or-qwen3.6-27b vs kolibri1: or-qwen3.6-27b wins

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

codex-gpt-6.1-sol-low · AB · valid

or-qwen3.6-27b vs kolibri1: or-qwen3.6-27b wins

attunement: A (margin 5)
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)

codex-gpt-6.1-sol-low · AB · valid

qwen38_27b vs kolibri1: qwen38_27b 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)

codex-gpt-6.1-sol-low · AB · valid

kolibri1 vs or-openai-gpt-41: or-openai-gpt-41 wins

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

claude-opus-5-5-low · BA · valid

or-mistral-medium-3.5 vs kolibri1: or-mistral-medium-3.5 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 3)

claude-opus-5-5-low · BA · valid

kolibri1 vs or-openai-gpt-41: or-openai-gpt-41 wins

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

claude-opus-5-5-low · BA · valid

qwen38_27b vs kolibri1: qwen38_27b wins

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

codex-gpt-6.1-sol-low · BA · valid

kolibri1 vs or-openai-gpt-41: or-openai-gpt-41 wins

attunement: B (margin 3)
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 2)

claude-opus-5-5-low · BA · valid

ministral14 vs kolibri1: kolibri1 wins

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

codex-gpt-6.1-sol-low · AB · valid

kolibri1 vs or-deepseek-v41-flash-1017: or-deepseek-v41-flash-1017 wins

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

claude-opus-5-5-low · AB · valid

ministral14 vs kolibri1: kolibri1 wins

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

claude-opus-5-5-low · AB · valid

kolibri1 vs or-openai-gpt-41: or-openai-gpt-41 wins

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

codex-gpt-6.1-sol-low · AB · valid

or-mistral-medium-3.5 vs kolibri1: or-mistral-medium-3.5 wins

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

claude-opus-5-5-low · AB · valid

kolibri1 vs gemma4_e2b: kolibri1 wins

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

claude-opus-5-5-low · BA · valid

or-qwen3.6-27b vs kolibri1: or-qwen3.6-27b wins

attunement: A (margin 4)
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 3)

codex-gpt-6.1-sol-low · BA · valid

kolibri1 vs gemma4_e2b: kolibri1 wins

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

codex-gpt-6.1-sol-low · AB · valid

kolibri1 vs gemma4_e2b: kolibri1 wins

attunement: A (margin 1)
authenticity: A (margin 4)
bond and rapport: A (margin 2)
emotion management: A (margin 1)
emotion sensemaking: tie (margin 0)
meeting prefs and needs: A (margin 3)