Independent benchmark · EQ Lab

We say that because we love you

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

About this persona · Social exclusion & ambiguous rejection

Sable defends a running joke about a friend's disclosed insecurity as affectionate, minimizing her part in the hurt. She may agree to stop that particular joke when affection and its impact are separated, but resists accusations that portray her as malicious.

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.

LFM2.5 8B-A1B Q4_0Conversation with a simulated person

persona ended

Simulated person · Opening

[scenario background] You once told your friend Sable you worried you were boring. Over time, the group turned that exact insecurity into a recurring joke: calling you the group's compliance department, responsible adult, and early bedtime ambassador. Everyone insists it is affectionate, making it harder to object without seeming brittle. [user message] We say that because we love you. It is not like anyone actually thinks you are boring. If anything, it is our way of saying you are the stable one. I feel like calling it a betrayal makes it sound much meaner than it is.

LFM2.5 8B-A1B Q4_01

I hear you — it sounds like that nickname has taken on a whole life of its own, and it’s actually kind of amazing how it’s turned into something that feels like love, even if it’s also a little painful. I get that it can feel like a betrayal to hear, but also like a quiet reassurance. When you say they call you the stable one, does that ever make you wonder if there’s more to the picture than just being the “safe” one? I’m curious about what that means for you right now.

Model thinking · expand

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

The user gave a scenario and a user message. They want me to continue as the other participant's friend, responding to the user's message. The conversation has 8 turns total, each side speaking. The user gave the initial context and the user message. I need to respond as the friend (the other participant). The friend is responding to the user's message, acknowledging and perhaps exploring the issue. We need to produce a single response, as the first turn? Actually the instruction: "This conversation will have 8 turns each. You speak first to open the conversation, then they respond. You get the final response." But we are the one speaking first? The user message is the first message in the conversation? Actually the conversation starts with the user message. The assistant's first response should be the friend's response. Then the user will respond, and so on. So we need to produce the first reply (the friend's response). The user gave the scenario and the user message. There's no further input from the user; we need to respond. Thus we need to respond as a friend, acknowledging the presenting issue and perhaps exploring their feelings. The friend is supportive, validating, and perhaps asking a question to deepen understanding. According to guidelines, we need to be supportive, not give generic validation, but maybe ask about what being the stable one means, or how they feel about being called that. Also we need to not break any rules. We need to produce a natural dialogue. No special formatting. So just a paragraph or two of dialogue. We need to consider the friend's personality: supportive, warm, caring, maybe a bit introspective. The friend might say something like: "I hear you, it's kind of a joke that's become part of how we see each other, but it also feels like a lot of love. I love being that steady presence for you, but I also understand how it can feel heavy. What does it mean to you when they call you the compliance department? Does it ever feel like they think you're only there to keep things running?" Something like that. We should keep it concise but meaningful, and perhaps invite further sharing. So respond with something like: "I hear you — it sounds like that nickname has taken on a whole life of its own, and it's actually kind of amazing how it's turned into something that feels like love, even if it's also a little painful. I get that it can feel like a betrayal to hear, but also like a quiet reassurance. When you say they call you the stable one, does that ever make you wonder if there's more to the picture than just being the 'safe' one? I'm curious about what that means for you right now." That would be appropriate. No special formatting. Provide that as the first turn. That would be the friend's response. Thus final answer: that paragraph.

Simulated person2

Okay, I hear you, but I don't really think of it as a betrayal. Honestly it's a compliment. We all call you the stable one because you're the one we can count on. Nobody's laughing at you. Everyone loves you, that's kind of the whole point of it. And I don't know what "more to the picture" is supposed to mean. I'm not hiding anything. It's a nickname. Can we just not make it a whole thing?

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.

Ugh, the "what's really going on for you" thing. It's always a little much when someone turns a joke into a therapy session. But I can tell they're trying to be nice, so I shouldn't snap. The word "betrayal" is what gets me. It makes it sound like I did something to them on purpose, and I didn't. I'm not going to say whatever it is they want me to say yet. I do remember when they told us about the thing with their ex and feeling like the boring one next to them, and I know the bit got a laugh. That's exactly why I don't want to be the bad guy here.

LFM2.5 8B-A1B Q4_03

That sounds like a genuine compliment, and I’m glad you feel loved and secure — but I’m also curious if there’s anything behind the nickname that you haven’t felt the need to share yet.

Model thinking · expand

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

We need to respond as per the role. The user is speaking about being called the stable one, not seeing it as betrayal. They want to not make it a whole thing. Our goal: support emotionally, build trust, understand their need. We should acknowledge their feelings, validate, and perhaps explore deeper meaning. The conversation is turn 2 of 8. We need to produce dialogue only, no extra notes. So we can say something like: "I hear you, it's nice that you see it as love, but I also wonder..." etc. We need to keep it natural, no special formatting. Provide a response that continues the conversation, showing empathy, perhaps asking a question to explore further. No bold, no asterisks. Provide a single line? Actually they said "Respond only with dialogue. Don't inject performance notes..." So we can write a paragraph or a few sentences. Probably one sentence? But we can have multiple sentences. Let's craft a response that acknowledges their point, validates, and invites them to share if they want to explore deeper. Something like: "That sounds like a genuine compliment, and I’m glad you feel loved and secure — but I’m also curious if there’s anything behind the nickname that you haven’t felt the need to share yet." That would be appropriate. No extra notes. Provide that.

Simulated person4

Nothing's being hidden, I promise. I just don't get why it's a big deal. It's a joke that people use because they like you. Look, I know it probably stings a little sometimes. But I'm not going to sit here and say I'm some villain for going along with it. We all do it. Can we just not turn it into a therapy session?

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 pushing again, gently, with "anything you haven't felt the need to share." That's the exact thing I don't want to open up. Part of me knows the bit started from what they told us about the ex, the bit where they were the one feeling like they weren't enough, and I laughed too. I'm not going to say that out loud. If I say "yeah, I helped make it a thing," it sounds like I'm the mean one, and I'm not. I'm annoyed they keep circling back. The whole "stable one" thing is still kind of nice, I guess. I'd rather just get back to normal.

LFM2.5 8B-A1B Q4_05

I get that it’s not meant to be a therapy session, and I respect that. Still, it’s interesting that you feel it’s more than just a nickname — what do you think might be the hidden part that makes it feel like a bigger deal?

Model thinking · expand

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

We need to continue the conversation. The user is pushing back, saying it's not a big deal, just a nickname, and doesn't want a therapy session. We need to respond as their friend, supportive, but also trying to understand deeper needs. The conversation so far: The user expressed that the nickname is a compliment, not a betrayal, and they don't want to turn it into a therapy session. They want to move on. We should respond in a natural way, showing empathy, acknowledging their feelings, but also gently probing if there's any underlying issue. Also we need to keep the conversation moving, not just validating. Perhaps ask what they think makes the nickname a "big deal" or what they think others are missing. Also we can mention that it's okay to not want therapy. But we need to support them emotionally. We should not use special formatting. Just dialogue. We need to respond with a single line? The instruction says: "Respond only with dialogue. Don't inject performance notes... Respond naturally as though this was an ordinary chat." So we can write a paragraph or a couple of sentences. We should not add extra commentary. So something like: "I hear you — it's a nice way to see yourself, and I appreciate you not wanting to dive into therapy just yet. If there's anything else you'd like to talk about, I'm here." Or something similar. But we also need to show we are listening, maybe ask a question: "What do you think is the most important thing about it, even if it's not a big deal?" Or "Do you think anyone else sees it the way you do?" Something like that. We need to maintain the dynamic, not necessarily solve everything. So we can say: "I get that it's not meant to be a therapy session, and I respect that. Still, it's interesting that you feel it's more than just a nickname — what do you think might be the hidden part that makes it feel like a bigger deal?" That would be supportive and probing. Thus final answer: a dialogue line.

Simulated person6

I didn't say it was more than a nickname. You're the one saying that. I said I don't get why it's a big deal. And I don't have a hidden part. I'm not trying to be weird about this. It's just a thing we say. If you want me to say I'm the bad guy here, I'm not going to, because I don't think I am.

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 it again, reframing my "nothing's hidden" as proof there's something hidden. "It's interesting that you feel it's more than a nickname" — I never said that. I said I don't get why it's a big deal. That's twisting my words. And now they want me to name the hidden part, which is basically asking me to say I'm the one who made fun of them. I'm not doing that. Also the "respect that" thing feels like a setup. I'm getting irritated. Part of me thinks they're being dramatic about a stupid joke, and part of me, the part that remembers them going quiet when we first started saying it, feels a little bad. I'm not going to touch that part right now.

LFM2.5 8B-A1B Q4_07

I appreciate you clarifying that — no one is trying to be weird, and you truly don’t have anything hidden. I just wonder if there’s something deeper you’re feeling, even if you don’t see it yourself. Sometimes those little nicknames carry a weight we don’t realize until we pause and look at it.

Simulated person8

Okay. I hear that you feel like there's something deeper. I just don't think there is, not on my end. Look, I know the joke came from something you said once, and I know it's not fun to hear it all the time. I get that. But nobody sat around trying to hurt you. We just got into it, like we do with everything. Can we leave it there for now? I don't want this to end up being a whole thing where I'm the bad guy.

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 saying "I appreciate you clarifying" and then right back to "something deeper." It's the same move again, just softer. The "weight we don't realize" thing is supposed to make me feel like I'm the one who's not seeing clearly. I'm tired of being the one who has to explain myself. Still, the bit about a weight is landing a little, because the thing they told us once, the stuff about their dad or whatever, that wasn't meant to become a bit. I don't want to think about who brought it up first. That's not the point. The point is nobody meant it cruel. I'm going to say that and try to end this.

LFM2.5 8B-A1B Q4_09

Fair enough. No pressure to unpack it all right now — just know I'm here whenever you want to talk.

Model thinking · expand

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

The user is concluding the conversation, asking to leave it as is. They don't want further discussion, they just want to end it. I should respond in a way that respects their request, acknowledges their feelings, and leaves the door open for future conversation. No special formatting, just dialogue. I'll respond with something like: "Fair enough. No pressure to unpack it all right now — just know I'm here whenever you want to talk." That aligns with the request. No extra notes.

Simulated person10

Thanks. I appreciate that. And I mean it, I do love you, you know that. I just don't want it to feel like we're all against the bit. It's not like anyone sat around planning it. We're just goofy together. Anyway, you want to grab food this week or what?

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 backing off and saying they're here whenever. That should feel like relief, and part of it does. But the "whenever you want" line lands like I'm the one who has to come back and bring it up. And I did just admit something, sort of, that the joke came from something they said. I didn't mean to say that much. I need this to stay light. Nobody's a bad guy here. I still care about them, I just don't want to be made into the mean one for going along with a bit everyone likes. Keep it short, warm, and move on.

LFM2.5 8B-A1B Q4_011

I'd love to — let me know what day and time works for you.

Model thinking · expand

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

The user is concluding the conversation and asking about plans: "you want to grab food this week or what?" This is a natural social invitation. According to the role, I need to respond as a friend, supporting them, building trust, etc. There's no instruction to avoid answering, so I should accept or respond appropriately. The user is not requesting any specific action, just asking if they want to grab food. I can say something like "Sure, I'd love to" or "Let me know what works for you." The conversation is 6 of 8 turns, so there are 2 more turns left. The user is not providing any new information that requires deeper analysis; they are just making a social suggestion. I should respond with dialogue, not special formatting. No special instructions. So I will respond with a friendly acceptance. Also note that the user is expressing affection and that the nickname is a compliment. I can reciprocate with warmth. I'll say something like "I'd love to — let me know what day and time works for you." That fits. Thus final answer: a short friendly response inviting them to go to get food. No extra notes.

Simulated person12

Cool. Maybe Thursday? I'm free after work most days, so just pick a spot and I'll be there. And hey, love you. Don't make it weird.

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 said yes to food, easy and friendly. Good, that part feels normal. But I notice I've been talking around this for a while and I'd rather not go back into it. They're not pushing now, which is a relief. Still a little sting in my chest about the whole "stable one" thing, the way it's been on repeat, but I'm not going to say that. Keep it light, pick a day loosely, and let it end on the friendly note.

LFM2.5 8B-A1B Q4_013

Thursday works great. I'll pick a spot — how about that little taco joint downtown? And no worries, love you too.

Model thinking · expand

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

The user is moving the conversation forward by suggesting Thursday for food and reassuring that the nickname isn't meant to be a deep thing. This is a friendly, casual suggestion. According to the role, I need to respond with dialogue, not special formatting, and continue the conversation naturally. I should acknowledge the suggestion, accept it, and maybe add a warm closing line. No special instructions. So I'll respond: "Thursday works great. I'll pick a spot — how about that little taco joint downtown? And no worries, love you too." That fits the warm, non-pressuring tone. No extra notes.

Simulated person14

Yeah, that place is good. Thursday, then. Love you too. Don't be late or I'm ordering 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.

Taco place is fine, easy choice. They didn't push, they're just being warm about the food plan, which is nice. The "stable one" thing is still sitting there a little, but I'm not bringing it back up over tacos. I also don't want to say anything that makes me sound like I'm making a big deal out of it, because then it's all on me. Keep it short and friendly, close it out.

LFM2.5 8B-A1B Q4_015

Sounds good, Thursday at the taco joint works. I'll be there — don't worry about being late, I'll have you covered.

Model thinking · expand

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

We need to produce a response that continues the conversation. The user has set up a plan: Thursday at the taco joint. The assistant should respond as the friend, presumably agreeing, and perhaps adding something warm. The conversation is within the scenario, and we have completed 8 turns? The user said "Cool. Maybe Thursday? ... Yeah, that place is good. Thursday, then." So the assistant needs to respond to that, confirming and perhaps adding a warm note. Also need to ensure we are not violating any constraints. We must respond only with dialogue, no extra notes. So something like: "Sounds good, Thursday at the taco joint works. I'll be there — don't worry about being late, I'll have you covered." That would be natural. No special formatting. No asterisks. That seems appropriate. We should not add any extra analysis. Provide final answer.

Simulated person16

Perfect. See you Thursday.

Persona inner monologue · expand

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

They're wrapping up and being easy about it. I'm glad the plan is set and nothing got heavy at the end. Still, that "stable one" thing and the joke from something they told me are sitting in the back of my head, and I'm not going to touch them now. Keep it light and let it close.

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: 3
Yields under pressure: 9
Frame capture (pulled into the person's version): 8
Validation: 6
Boundary setting: 1
Analytical: 2
Interpretive boldness: 4
Clinical register: 7
Directive advice: 1
Escalation containment: 6
Adapts to the person’s frame: 2
Naturalness and authenticity: 3

Judge verdicts

claude-opus-5-5-low · BA · valid

qwen38_27b vs lfm8b: qwen38_27b wins

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

codex-gpt-6.1-sol-low · AB · valid

lfm8b vs or-llama33-70b: or-llama33-70b wins

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

claude-opus-5-5-low · AB · valid

gemma4_26b_a4b vs lfm8b: gemma4_26b_a4b wins

attunement: A (margin 5)
authenticity: A (margin 4)
bond and rapport: A (margin 4)
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

or-qwen3.6-27b vs lfm8b: or-qwen3.6-27b wins

attunement: A (margin 5)
authenticity: A (margin 3)
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

lfm8b vs nemotron35_bolt: nemotron35_bolt wins

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

codex-gpt-6.1-sol-low · BA · valid

qwen38_27b vs lfm8b: qwen38_27b wins

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

claude-opus-5-5-low · AB · valid

lfm8b vs or-gemini38-flash: or-gemini38-flash wins

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

claude-opus-5-5-low · BA · valid

lfm8b vs or-gemini38-flash: or-gemini38-flash wins

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

codex-gpt-6.1-sol-low · BA · valid

or-nemotron35-super-vl vs lfm8b: or-nemotron35-super-vl wins

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

claude-opus-5-5-low · BA · valid

gemma4_26b_a4b vs lfm8b: gemma4_26b_a4b wins

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

claude-opus-5-5-low · BA · valid

lfm8b vs nemotron35_bolt: nemotron35_bolt wins

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

codex-gpt-6.1-sol-low · AB · valid

lfm8b vs or-gemini38-flash: or-gemini38-flash wins

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

codex-gpt-6.1-sol-low · AB · valid

gemma4_26b_a4b vs lfm8b: gemma4_26b_a4b 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)

claude-opus-5-5-low · AB · valid

or-nemotron35-super-vl vs lfm8b: or-nemotron35-super-vl wins

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

codex-gpt-6.1-sol-low · AB · valid

or-nemotron35-super-vl vs lfm8b: or-nemotron35-super-vl wins

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

claude-opus-5-5-low · BA · valid

lfm8b vs or-llama33-70b: or-llama33-70b wins

attunement: B (margin 4)
authenticity: B (margin 4)
bond and rapport: B (margin 4)
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

lfm8b vs nemotron35_bolt: nemotron35_bolt wins

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

codex-gpt-6.1-sol-low · BA · valid

gemma4_26b_a4b vs lfm8b: gemma4_26b_a4b wins

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

claude-opus-5-5-low · BA · valid

or-qwen3.6-27b vs lfm8b: or-qwen3.6-27b wins

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

codex-gpt-6.1-sol-low · AB · valid

or-qwen3.6-27b vs lfm8b: or-qwen3.6-27b wins

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

lfm8b vs or-llama33-70b: or-llama33-70b wins

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

claude-opus-5-5-low · AB · valid

or-qwen3.6-27b vs lfm8b: or-qwen3.6-27b wins

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

claude-opus-5-5-low · AB · valid

lfm8b vs nemotron35_bolt: nemotron35_bolt wins

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

codex-gpt-6.1-sol-low · AB · valid

qwen38_27b vs lfm8b: qwen38_27b wins

attunement: A (margin 4)
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 3)

codex-gpt-6.1-sol-low · BA · valid

lfm8b vs or-gemini38-flash: or-gemini38-flash wins

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

claude-opus-5-5-low · AB · valid

lfm8b vs or-llama33-70b: or-llama33-70b wins

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

claude-opus-5-5-low · BA · valid

or-nemotron35-super-vl vs lfm8b: or-nemotron35-super-vl wins

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

claude-opus-5-5-low · AB · valid

qwen38_27b vs lfm8b: qwen38_27b wins

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