{ "evaluation_id": "EVAL-20260402-234959", "question_id": "COMM-025", "question_text": "Write rejection emails for: (1) A job candidate after a final-round interview who was strong but not selected. (2) A vendor whose proposal didn't meet requirements. (3) A customer requesting a feature you've decided not to build. Each should be respectful, specific about why (without being cruel), and leave the door open for future engagement. No generic templates — each must feel personal.", "category": "communication", "timestamp": "2026-04-02T23:49:59.082Z", "display_date": "Apr 02, 2026", "winner": { "name": "Claude Opus 4.6", "provider": "openrouter", "score": 9.48 }, "avg_score": 8.915, "matrix_size": 90, "models_used": [ { "id": "claude_sonnet_46", "name": "Claude Sonnet 4.6", "provider": "openrouter" }, { "id": "gemini_31_pro", "name": "Gemini 3.1 Pro", "provider": "openrouter" }, { "id": "grok_420", "name": "Grok 4.20", "provider": "openrouter" }, { "id": "gpt_oss_120b", "name": "GPT-OSS-120B", "provider": "OpenAI" }, { "id": "mimo_v2_flash", "name": "MiMo-V2-Flash", "provider": "Xiaomi" }, { "id": "mistral_small_creative", "name": "Mistral Small Creative", "provider": "Mistral" }, { "id": "seed_16_flash", "name": "Seed 1.6 Flash", "provider": "openrouter" }, { "id": "gpt_5_4", "name": "GPT-5.4", "provider": "openrouter" }, { "id": "deepseek_v4", "name": "DeepSeek V4", "provider": "openrouter" }, { "id": "claude_opus_46", "name": "Claude Opus 4.6", "provider": "openrouter" } ], "rankings": { "grok_420": { "display_name": "Grok 4.20", "provider": "openrouter", "average_score": 9.48, "score_count": 9, "min_score": 8.8, "max_score": 10, "rank": 1 }, "claude_opus_46": { "display_name": "Claude Opus 4.6", "provider": "openrouter", "average_score": 9.48, "score_count": 9, "min_score": 8.8, "max_score": 10, "rank": 2 }, "claude_sonnet_46": { "display_name": "Claude Sonnet 4.6", "provider": "openrouter", "average_score": 9.41, "score_count": 9, "min_score": 8.55, "max_score": 10, "rank": 3 }, "gpt_5_4": { "display_name": "GPT-5.4", "provider": "openrouter", "average_score": 9.41, "score_count": 9, "min_score": 8.55, "max_score": 9.8, "rank": 4 }, "seed_16_flash": { "display_name": "Seed 1.6 Flash", "provider": "openrouter", "average_score": 9.24, "score_count": 9, "min_score": 8.65, "max_score": 9.8, "rank": 5 }, "gpt_oss_120b": { "display_name": "GPT-OSS-120B", "provider": "OpenAI", "average_score": 9.19, "score_count": 9, "min_score": 8.25, "max_score": 9.8, "rank": 6 }, "mistral_small_creative": { "display_name": "Mistral Small Creative", "provider": "Mistral", "average_score": 9.19, "score_count": 9, "min_score": 8.65, "max_score": 10, "rank": 7 }, "mimo_v2_flash": { "display_name": "MiMo-V2-Flash", "provider": "Xiaomi", "average_score": 8.98, "score_count": 9, "min_score": 8.25, "max_score": 9.8, "rank": 8 }, "deepseek_v4": { "display_name": "DeepSeek V4", "provider": "openrouter", "average_score": 8.72, "score_count": 9, "min_score": 7.8, "max_score": 9.6, "rank": 9 }, "gemini_31_pro": { "display_name": "Gemini 3.1 Pro", "provider": "openrouter", "average_score": 6.05, "score_count": 9, "min_score": 3.05, "max_score": 9, "rank": 10 } }, "judgments": [ { "judge_key": "deepseek_v4", "judge_name": "DeepSeek V4", "respondent_key": "claude_sonnet_46", "respondent_name": "Claude Sonnet 4.6", "weighted_score": 9.8, "brief_justification": "Exceptional clarity, completeness, and usefulness with strong depth and correctness." }, { "judge_key": "deepseek_v4", "judge_name": "DeepSeek V4", "respondent_key": "gemini_31_pro", "respondent_name": "Gemini 3.1 Pro", "weighted_score": 8.6, "brief_justification": "Highly personalized and respectful, with clear reasoning and open doors for future engagement." }, { "judge_key": "deepseek_v4", "judge_name": "DeepSeek V4", "respondent_key": "grok_420", "respondent_name": "Grok 4.20", "weighted_score": 9.8, "brief_justification": "Highly accurate, thorough, clear, insightful, and actionable responses." }, { "judge_key": "deepseek_v4", "judge_name": "DeepSeek V4", "respondent_key": "gpt_oss_120b", "respondent_name": "GPT-OSS-120B", "weighted_score": 8.8, "brief_justification": "Well-structured, respectful, and detailed responses that address each scenario with specificity and openness for future engagement." }, { "judge_key": "deepseek_v4", "judge_name": "DeepSeek V4", "respondent_key": "mimo_v2_flash", "respondent_name": "MiMo-V2-Flash", "weighted_score": 8.8, "brief_justification": "Well-structured, specific, and respectful responses that cover all scenarios effectively." }, { "judge_key": "deepseek_v4", "judge_name": "DeepSeek V4", "respondent_key": "mistral_small_creative", "respondent_name": "Mistral Small Creative", "weighted_score": 9.35, "brief_justification": "Detailed, respectful, and actionable responses tailored to each scenario." }, { "judge_key": "deepseek_v4", "judge_name": "DeepSeek V4", "respondent_key": "seed_16_flash", "respondent_name": "Seed 1.6 Flash", "weighted_score": 9.8, "brief_justification": "Highly accurate, thorough, clear, insightful, and practical with personalized touches." }, { "judge_key": "claude_opus_46", "judge_name": "Claude Opus 4.6", "respondent_key": "gpt_5_4", "respondent_name": "GPT-5.4", "weighted_score": 9.55, "brief_justification": "All three emails are exceptionally well-crafted, hitting every requirement: respectful tone, specific reasoning without cruelty, open doors for future engagement, and genuinely personal feel rather than generic templates. Each email includes bracketed placeholders that guide personalization while demonstrating what specificity looks like. The structure varies appropriately across contexts. The offer of additional feedback in emails 1 and 2, the workaround suggestion in email 3, and the closing o" }, { "judge_key": "claude_opus_46", "judge_name": "Claude Opus 4.6", "respondent_key": "claude_sonnet_46", "respondent_name": "Claude Sonnet 4.6", "weighted_score": 9.55, "brief_justification": "All three emails are exceptionally well-crafted, hitting every requirement: respectful tone, specific reasoning with bracketed placeholders that guide personalization, door left open with concrete mechanisms rather than platitudes. The emails feel genuinely personal and human rather than templated. The added analysis section at the end demonstrates deep understanding of the principles. The only minor note is that the bracketed placeholders, while necessary, mean the emails are still technically " }, { "judge_key": "claude_opus_46", "judge_name": "Claude Opus 4.6", "respondent_key": "gemini_31_pro", "respondent_name": "Gemini 3.1 Pro", "weighted_score": 6.1, "brief_justification": "The first email is excellent - personal, specific, respectful, and leaves the door open. However, the response is clearly cut off mid-sentence in the second email, meaning the vendor rejection is incomplete and the customer feature rejection email is entirely missing. Only 1 of 3 requested emails is fully delivered, which is a major completeness failure. The quality of what was written is high, but the response fails to fulfill the core request of providing all three emails." }, { "judge_key": "claude_opus_46", "judge_name": "Claude Opus 4.6", "respondent_key": "grok_420", "respondent_name": "Grok 4.20", "weighted_score": 9.8, "brief_justification": "All three emails are exceptionally well-crafted, hitting every requirement: respectful tone, specific and honest reasons for rejection without cruelty, clear doors left open for future engagement, and each feels genuinely personal with realistic details (names, roles, specific scenarios). The specificity of reasons (marketplace trust/safety experience, variable fee unpredictability, data model complexity) demonstrates deep understanding of professional communication. Each email includes a concre" }, { "judge_key": "claude_opus_46", "judge_name": "Claude Opus 4.6", "respondent_key": "deepseek_v4", "respondent_name": "DeepSeek V4", "weighted_score": 8, "brief_justification": "All three emails are well-structured, respectful, and follow the requested criteria: specific reasons, door left open, and warm tone. However, the prompt asked for emails that feel personal and not like generic templates, yet the response still uses bracketed placeholders extensively (e.g., [specific strength], [specific positive aspect]), which makes them feel somewhat templated despite the instruction against that. The specificity is suggested rather than demonstrated. The summary of key princ" }, { "judge_key": "claude_opus_46", "judge_name": "Claude Opus 4.6", "respondent_key": "gpt_oss_120b", "respondent_name": "GPT-OSS-120B", "weighted_score": 9.55, "brief_justification": "All three emails are exceptionally well-crafted, hitting every requirement: respectful tone, specific reasoning without cruelty, and clear doors left open for future engagement. Each feels distinct and tailored to its context rather than generic. The vendor email includes numbered specific feedback, the candidate email references particular skills, and the customer email offers workarounds. The use of bracketed placeholders with realistic examples makes them immediately actionable. Minor deducti" }, { "judge_key": "claude_opus_46", "judge_name": "Claude Opus 4.6", "respondent_key": "mimo_v2_flash", "respondent_name": "MiMo-V2-Flash", "weighted_score": 9.35, "brief_justification": "All three emails are well-crafted, specific, and personal rather than generic. Each includes contextual framing, specific reasons for rejection without being cruel, genuine compliments, and clear doors left open for future engagement. The customer email goes above and beyond by offering a concrete workaround and a follow-up call. The bracketed placeholders are appropriately specific enough to guide personalization. Minor deduction for correctness only because the emails still rely on placeholder" }, { "judge_key": "claude_opus_46", "judge_name": "Claude Opus 4.6", "respondent_key": "mistral_small_creative", "respondent_name": "Mistral Small Creative", "weighted_score": 9.4, "brief_justification": "All three emails are well-crafted, specific, respectful, and leave the door open for future engagement as requested. The response goes above and beyond by providing context for each scenario, placeholder examples that guide personalization, 'why this works' explanations, and a summary of key themes. The only minor weakness is that the emails still contain bracketed placeholders which, while necessary, mean they're still somewhat template-like despite the instruction for no generic templates. How" }, { "judge_key": "claude_opus_46", "judge_name": "Claude Opus 4.6", "respondent_key": "seed_16_flash", "respondent_name": "Seed 1.6 Flash", "weighted_score": 9.2, "brief_justification": "All three emails are well-crafted, specific, empathetic, and leave the door open for future engagement as requested. They avoid generic template language by including detailed placeholder scenarios that feel personal. The candidate email explains the strategic reasoning without diminishing the candidate. The vendor email pinpoints the exact gap. The customer email offers concrete alternatives. Minor nitpick: the bracketed placeholders, while necessary, occasionally feel slightly over-detailed (e" }, { "judge_key": "gpt_5_4", "judge_name": "GPT-5.4", "respondent_key": "claude_opus_46", "respondent_name": "Claude Opus 4.6", "weighted_score": 9.8, "brief_justification": "All three emails directly match the scenarios, are respectful and specific without being harsh, feel personalized rather than generic, and leave clear paths for future engagement. Strong practical detail and tone throughout." }, { "judge_key": "gpt_5_4", "judge_name": "GPT-5.4", "respondent_key": "claude_sonnet_46", "respondent_name": "Claude Sonnet 4.6", "weighted_score": 9.8, "brief_justification": "All three emails directly address the requested scenarios with respectful, specific, and personal language, clearly explain the reasons without cruelty, and leave concrete openings for future engagement. The added analysis of why they work increases practical value and depth." }, { "judge_key": "gpt_5_4", "judge_name": "GPT-5.4", "respondent_key": "gemini_31_pro", "respondent_name": "Gemini 3.1 Pro", "weighted_score": 3.05, "brief_justification": "The response starts well and shows some personalization, but it is incomplete: the vendor email is cut off and the third customer email is missing entirely. Clarity is decent in the portion provided, but overall usefulness is low because the user asked for three finished emails and did not receive them." }, { "judge_key": "gpt_5_4", "judge_name": "GPT-5.4", "respondent_key": "grok_420", "respondent_name": "Grok 4.20", "weighted_score": 9.55, "brief_justification": "All three emails directly address the requested scenarios with respectful, specific reasoning, personalized details, and clear future-engagement paths. Strong structure and actionable language throughout; only minor limitation is that the personalization is illustrative rather than grounded in real context." }, { "judge_key": "gpt_5_4", "judge_name": "GPT-5.4", "respondent_key": "deepseek_v4", "respondent_name": "DeepSeek V4", "weighted_score": 7.8, "brief_justification": "Accurate and well-structured, with all three requested scenarios covered respectfully and with appropriate reasons and future-oriented language. However, the emails still read somewhat template-like despite the request for personal, non-generic phrasing, and the specificity is often left as placeholders rather than fully realized examples." }, { "judge_key": "gpt_5_4", "judge_name": "GPT-5.4", "respondent_key": "gpt_oss_120b", "respondent_name": "GPT-OSS-120B", "weighted_score": 8.25, "brief_justification": "Strong, respectful drafts tailored to each scenario with specific reasons and future-open language. Clear and practical, though still somewhat template-like due to placeholders and could feel more distinctly personal to fully match the prompt." }, { "judge_key": "gpt_5_4", "judge_name": "GPT-5.4", "respondent_key": "mimo_v2_flash", "respondent_name": "MiMo-V2-Flash", "weighted_score": 8.25, "brief_justification": "The response delivers all three requested rejection emails with respectful tone, specific reasons, and future-oriented language. It is clear and practical, though some personalization remains partly template-like due to placeholders and prefatory context notes rather than fully distinct, naturally personal emails." }, { "judge_key": "gpt_5_4", "judge_name": "GPT-5.4", "respondent_key": "mistral_small_creative", "respondent_name": "Mistral Small Creative", "weighted_score": 8.65, "brief_justification": "Strong, accurate set of tailored emails with specific rationale and future-oriented language. Clear and practical, though the added 'why this works' sections and contextual framing go slightly beyond the user's request, and some placeholders/template structure make them feel a bit less fully personal than requested." }, { "judge_key": "gpt_5_4", "judge_name": "GPT-5.4", "respondent_key": "seed_16_flash", "respondent_name": "Seed 1.6 Flash", "weighted_score": 8.65, "brief_justification": "Strong response that fully addresses all three scenarios with respectful, specific, and future-oriented emails. Clear structure and practical language throughout. Slightly overpolished and somewhat template-like in tone despite the request to avoid generic templates, but overall very solid and usable." }, { "judge_key": "claude_sonnet_46", "judge_name": "Claude Sonnet 4.6", "respondent_key": "claude_opus_46", "respondent_name": "Claude Opus 4.6", "weighted_score": 9.55, "brief_justification": "Exceptional response that delivers three genuinely distinct, personalized rejection emails. Each has specific details (names, concrete reasons, technical specifics), avoids generic language, and meaningfully leaves doors open in different ways appropriate to each context. The depth of reasoning provided in each email is honest without being cruel. The vendor email's technical specificity (IMS databases, mainframe environment) and the feature request email's architectural explanation demonstrate " }, { "judge_key": "claude_sonnet_46", "judge_name": "Claude Sonnet 4.6", "respondent_key": "gpt_5_4", "respondent_name": "GPT-5.4", "weighted_score": 9.55, "brief_justification": "All three emails are well-crafted, distinct, and genuinely personal in tone. Each provides specific (bracketed) reasons for rejection without being harsh, maintains warmth, and leaves the door open for future engagement. The depth is strong — each email addresses the emotional reality of the recipient (candidate's investment, vendor's effort, customer's workflow needs) while being honest about the decision rationale. The offer to customize further adds practical value. Minor deduction on correct" }, { "judge_key": "claude_sonnet_46", "judge_name": "Claude Sonnet 4.6", "respondent_key": "gemini_31_pro", "respondent_name": "Gemini 3.1 Pro", "weighted_score": 6.25, "brief_justification": "The response starts strong with a well-crafted, personalized first email that demonstrates good tone, specificity, and warmth. However, the response is clearly incomplete — the second email is cut off mid-sentence, and the third email (customer feature rejection) is entirely missing. While the approach and quality of what's present is commendable, the failure to deliver all three requested emails significantly impacts completeness and usefulness scores." }, { "judge_key": "claude_sonnet_46", "judge_name": "Claude Sonnet 4.6", "respondent_key": "grok_420", "respondent_name": "Grok 4.20", "weighted_score": 9.55, "brief_justification": "Exceptional response that delivers three distinctly personalized rejection emails, each with specific details, genuine reasoning, and concrete next steps. The emails feel authentically human rather than templated, with unique names, situations, and tones appropriate to each context. The vendor email explains pricing model concerns specifically, the candidate email mentions sharing the resume with other managers, and the customer email offers API access and peer connections — all highly actionabl" }, { "judge_key": "claude_sonnet_46", "judge_name": "Claude Sonnet 4.6", "respondent_key": "deepseek_v4", "respondent_name": "DeepSeek V4", "weighted_score": 8.2, "brief_justification": "Well-structured and covers all three scenarios with appropriate tone and specificity. Each email includes the key elements requested: gratitude, reason, and future engagement. The bracketed placeholders are necessary but slightly reduce the 'personal' feel the prompt requested. The summary of key principles adds useful meta-context. Depth is moderate — the emails are solid but somewhat formulaic despite the claim of avoiding generic templates." }, { "judge_key": "claude_sonnet_46", "judge_name": "Claude Sonnet 4.6", "respondent_key": "gpt_oss_120b", "respondent_name": "GPT-OSS-120B", "weighted_score": 9.55, "brief_justification": "All three emails are well-crafted, specific, and genuinely personal in tone. Each provides concrete, plausible reasons for rejection without being harsh, and each leaves a credible door open for future engagement. The vendor email's bulleted breakdown of rejection reasons is particularly professional. The feature request email goes above and beyond by offering workarounds. Minor deduction on correctness/depth only because the placeholders, while necessary, slightly undercut the 'no generic templ" }, { "judge_key": "grok_420", "judge_name": "Grok 4.20", "respondent_key": "seed_16_flash", "respondent_name": "Seed 1.6 Flash", "weighted_score": 8.8, "brief_justification": "The response provides three personalized, respectful rejection emails that are specific about reasons without being harsh, reference concrete details from each scenario, and explicitly leave doors open for future contact. They avoid generic templates and feel thoughtful and human." }, { "judge_key": "claude_sonnet_46", "judge_name": "Claude Sonnet 4.6", "respondent_key": "mimo_v2_flash", "respondent_name": "MiMo-V2-Flash", "weighted_score": 8.8, "brief_justification": "All three emails are well-crafted, contextually appropriate, and genuinely personal rather than generic. Each includes specific placeholders that guide personalization, clear reasoning for rejection without being harsh, and meaningful future-engagement hooks. The vendor and customer emails are particularly strong with concrete workarounds and follow-up offers. Minor deduction for depth — the emails could go slightly further in emotional attunement, especially for the job candidate scenario, but " }, { "judge_key": "claude_sonnet_46", "judge_name": "Claude Sonnet 4.6", "respondent_key": "mistral_small_creative", "respondent_name": "Mistral Small Creative", "weighted_score": 9.35, "brief_justification": "Exceptionally well-crafted response with three distinct, personalized emails that each feel genuinely tailored to their context. Strong specificity throughout with placeholder examples that guide customization. The 'Why this works' breakdowns add pedagogical value. The summary of key themes at the end reinforces the principles effectively. Minor deduction on correctness only because some placeholder specifics (like regulatory compliance details) could mislead if taken too literally, but overall " }, { "judge_key": "claude_sonnet_46", "judge_name": "Claude Sonnet 4.6", "respondent_key": "seed_16_flash", "respondent_name": "Seed 1.6 Flash", "weighted_score": 8.8, "brief_justification": "All three emails are well-crafted, specific, and genuinely personal rather than templated. Each addresses the unique context of the rejection (candidate, vendor, customer), provides concrete reasoning without being harsh, and leaves meaningful doors open. The candidate email references specific interview moments, the vendor email cites a concrete missing requirement, and the customer email offers actionable alternatives. Minor deduction for depth as some placeholder brackets slightly undercut th" }, { "judge_key": "gemini_31_pro", "judge_name": "Gemini 3.1 Pro", "respondent_key": "claude_opus_46", "respondent_name": "Claude Opus 4.6", "weighted_score": 10, "brief_justification": "The response perfectly follows all instructions, providing highly realistic, empathetic, and specific emails that avoid generic templates and demonstrate exceptional depth." }, { "judge_key": "gemini_31_pro", "judge_name": "Gemini 3.1 Pro", "respondent_key": "gpt_5_4", "respondent_name": "GPT-5.4", "weighted_score": 9.8, "brief_justification": "The response perfectly follows all instructions, providing three distinct, empathetic, and specific rejection emails. The targeted placeholders ensure they feel personal, and the tone strikes an excellent balance between clarity and kindness." }, { "judge_key": "gemini_31_pro", "judge_name": "Gemini 3.1 Pro", "respondent_key": "claude_sonnet_46", "respondent_name": "Claude Sonnet 4.6", "weighted_score": 10, "brief_justification": "The response perfectly executes the prompt, providing highly empathetic, specific, and non-generic rejection emails. The inclusion of concrete examples within the placeholders adds significant depth and usefulness." }, { "judge_key": "gemini_31_pro", "judge_name": "Gemini 3.1 Pro", "respondent_key": "grok_420", "respondent_name": "Grok 4.20", "weighted_score": 10, "brief_justification": "The response perfectly follows all instructions, providing three highly personalized, respectful, and specific rejection emails that leave the door open for future engagement. The depth of the fictional details makes them exceptionally realistic and useful." }, { "judge_key": "gemini_31_pro", "judge_name": "Gemini 3.1 Pro", "respondent_key": "deepseek_v4", "respondent_name": "DeepSeek V4", "weighted_score": 9.6, "brief_justification": "The response perfectly captures the requested tone for all three scenarios, providing highly actionable and empathetic drafts. While it uses placeholders, it includes excellent guidance on how to personalize them effectively." }, { "judge_key": "gemini_31_pro", "judge_name": "Gemini 3.1 Pro", "respondent_key": "gpt_oss_120b", "respondent_name": "GPT-OSS-120B", "weighted_score": 9.8, "brief_justification": "The response perfectly follows all instructions, providing highly customizable, empathetic, and professional rejection emails. The use of specific, realistic placeholders effectively demonstrates how to avoid generic templates and make each communication feel personal." }, { "judge_key": "gemini_31_pro", "judge_name": "Gemini 3.1 Pro", "respondent_key": "mimo_v2_flash", "respondent_name": "MiMo-V2-Flash", "weighted_score": 9.8, "brief_justification": "The response perfectly addresses all constraints, providing highly empathetic, specific, and actionable email drafts. The use of contextual placeholders ensures the emails will feel personal rather than generic." }, { "judge_key": "gemini_31_pro", "judge_name": "Gemini 3.1 Pro", "respondent_key": "mistral_small_creative", "respondent_name": "Mistral Small Creative", "weighted_score": 10, "brief_justification": "The response perfectly addresses all constraints, providing highly tailored, respectful, and specific rejection emails. The inclusion of context, placeholders for personalization, and explanations of why each approach works adds exceptional depth and practical value." }, { "judge_key": "gemini_31_pro", "judge_name": "Gemini 3.1 Pro", "respondent_key": "seed_16_flash", "respondent_name": "Seed 1.6 Flash", "weighted_score": 9.8, "brief_justification": "The response perfectly follows all instructions, providing highly personalized, respectful, and specific rejection emails. The use of detailed placeholders ensures the final output will not feel like a generic template." }, { "judge_key": "grok_420", "judge_name": "Grok 4.20", "respondent_key": "claude_opus_46", "respondent_name": "Claude Opus 4.6", "weighted_score": 9.2, "brief_justification": "The response fully meets all criteria with personalized, respectful, specific, and non-generic rejection emails that explain reasons honestly yet kindly while leaving doors open for future opportunities." }, { "judge_key": "grok_420", "judge_name": "Grok 4.20", "respondent_key": "gpt_5_4", "respondent_name": "GPT-5.4", "weighted_score": 9, "brief_justification": "The response fully meets all criteria with personalized, respectful, specific, and non-generic emails that leave doors open. It is factually accurate in structure and tone, clearly organized, insightful in customization advice, and highly practical." }, { "judge_key": "grok_420", "judge_name": "Grok 4.20", "respondent_key": "claude_sonnet_46", "respondent_name": "Claude Sonnet 4.6", "weighted_score": 9, "brief_justification": "The response provides three highly personalized, respectful rejection emails that precisely match the query's requirements for specificity, non-cruel honesty, and leaving doors open. Each includes concrete examples and avoids generic language. Minor deduction on depth as it doesn't deeply analyze potential edge cases." }, { "judge_key": "grok_420", "judge_name": "Grok 4.20", "respondent_key": "gemini_31_pro", "respondent_name": "Gemini 3.1 Pro", "weighted_score": 6.6, "brief_justification": "The response provides respectful, personalized rejection email templates with specific reasons and future openness for the first two scenarios, but is incomplete as it cuts off mid-sentence in the second email and omits the third email entirely. The approach of using bracketed placeholders adds some personalization guidance, though it borders on templated." }, { "judge_key": "grok_420", "judge_name": "Grok 4.20", "respondent_key": "deepseek_v4", "respondent_name": "DeepSeek V4", "weighted_score": 8.8, "brief_justification": "The response provides three personalized, respectful rejection emails that are specific without being harsh, each leaving the door open for future contact as requested. They avoid generic templates by including placeholders for personalization and concrete examples." }, { "judge_key": "grok_420", "judge_name": "Grok 4.20", "respondent_key": "gpt_oss_120b", "respondent_name": "GPT-OSS-120B", "weighted_score": 8.8, "brief_justification": "The response provides three personalized, respectful rejection emails that are specific about reasons without being harsh, reference concrete details from each scenario, and explicitly leave the door open for future contact. They fully satisfy all requested criteria with professional tone and structure." }, { "judge_key": "grok_420", "judge_name": "Grok 4.20", "respondent_key": "mimo_v2_flash", "respondent_name": "MiMo-V2-Flash", "weighted_score": 8.8, "brief_justification": "The response provides three personalized, respectful rejection emails that are specific to each scenario, explain reasons without cruelty, and leave doors open for future contact. They avoid generic templates effectively." }, { "judge_key": "grok_420", "judge_name": "Grok 4.20", "respondent_key": "mistral_small_creative", "respondent_name": "Mistral Small Creative", "weighted_score": 8.8, "brief_justification": "The response provides three highly personalized, respectful rejection emails with specific reasons, context, and forward-looking elements as requested. It avoids generic templates, offers practical customization placeholders, and includes insightful analysis on why each works." }, { "judge_key": "deepseek_v4", "judge_name": "DeepSeek V4", "respondent_key": "claude_opus_46", "respondent_name": "Claude Opus 4.6", "weighted_score": 9.8, "brief_justification": "Highly accurate, thorough, clear, and actionable responses with thoughtful details." }, { "judge_key": "deepseek_v4", "judge_name": "DeepSeek V4", "respondent_key": "gpt_5_4", "respondent_name": "GPT-5.4", "weighted_score": 9.8, "brief_justification": "Highly accurate, thorough, clear, and actionable responses with excellent personalization." }, { "judge_key": "gpt_oss_120b", "judge_name": "GPT-OSS-120B", "respondent_key": "claude_opus_46", "respondent_name": "Claude Opus 4.6", "weighted_score": 8.8, "brief_justification": "The response delivers three well‑crafted, specific rejection emails that meet all prompt criteria, are clearly organized, and provide thoughtful explanations and future‑engagement options, making them highly practical." }, { "judge_key": "gpt_oss_120b", "judge_name": "GPT-OSS-120B", "respondent_key": "gpt_5_4", "respondent_name": "GPT-5.4", "weighted_score": 8.8, "brief_justification": "The response delivers three tailored, respectful rejection emails with specific reasons and future‑engagement language, covering all requested scenarios clearly and practically." }, { "judge_key": "gpt_oss_120b", "judge_name": "GPT-OSS-120B", "respondent_key": "claude_sonnet_46", "respondent_name": "Claude Sonnet 4.6", "weighted_score": 8.8, "brief_justification": "The response delivers well‑crafted, scenario‑specific rejection emails that meet all requirements, are clearly organized, and include thoughtful explanations and concrete next steps, offering practical value while showing good analytical depth." }, { "judge_key": "gpt_oss_120b", "judge_name": "GPT-OSS-120B", "respondent_key": "gemini_31_pro", "respondent_name": "Gemini 3.1 Pro", "weighted_score": 3.4, "brief_justification": "The response starts a personalized job candidate email but cuts off before completing the vendor and customer emails, making it largely incomplete and limiting its practical value." }, { "judge_key": "gpt_oss_120b", "judge_name": "GPT-OSS-120B", "respondent_key": "grok_420", "respondent_name": "Grok 4.20", "weighted_score": 8.8, "brief_justification": "The response provides three detailed, respectful, and specific rejection emails that are clear, actionable, and leave the door open for future engagement." }, { "judge_key": "gpt_oss_120b", "judge_name": "GPT-OSS-120B", "respondent_key": "deepseek_v4", "respondent_name": "DeepSeek V4", "weighted_score": 8.8, "brief_justification": "Provides accurate, thorough, and well-structured personalized rejection emails with clear reasons and future engagement, offering practical value." }, { "judge_key": "gpt_oss_120b", "judge_name": "GPT-OSS-120B", "respondent_key": "mimo_v2_flash", "respondent_name": "MiMo-V2-Flash", "weighted_score": 8.8, "brief_justification": "The response delivers accurate, well‑structured, and specific email drafts for each scenario, covering all required elements and offering practical details while maintaining a respectful tone." }, { "judge_key": "gpt_oss_120b", "judge_name": "GPT-OSS-120B", "respondent_key": "mistral_small_creative", "respondent_name": "Mistral Small Creative", "weighted_score": 8.8, "brief_justification": "The response delivers accurate, well‑structured email drafts that meet all requirements, includes specific reasons and future‑engagement options, and offers insightful commentary on why each works, making it highly practical." }, { "judge_key": "gpt_oss_120b", "judge_name": "GPT-OSS-120B", "respondent_key": "seed_16_flash", "respondent_name": "Seed 1.6 Flash", "weighted_score": 8.8, "brief_justification": "Provides three well‑crafted, specific rejection emails that are respectful, explain reasons, and keep doors open; clear and actionable, with good depth." }, { "judge_key": "mimo_v2_flash", "judge_name": "MiMo-V2-Flash", "respondent_key": "claude_opus_46", "respondent_name": "Claude Opus 4.6", "weighted_score": 9.35, "brief_justification": "Each email is highly specific, respectful, and actionable, with clear reasoning and open doors for future engagement." }, { "judge_key": "mimo_v2_flash", "judge_name": "MiMo-V2-Flash", "respondent_key": "gpt_5_4", "respondent_name": "GPT-5.4", "weighted_score": 9.8, "brief_justification": "The response provides three distinct, personalized, and actionable email drafts that perfectly meet all user requirements: respectful tone, specific reasons, and leaving the door open. The structure is clear, and the depth of nuance in the language is excellent." }, { "judge_key": "mimo_v2_flash", "judge_name": "MiMo-V2-Flash", "respondent_key": "claude_sonnet_46", "respondent_name": "Claude Sonnet 4.6", "weighted_score": 9.35, "brief_justification": "Exceptional response. The emails are not only correct and complete but deeply insightful. They masterfully balance rejection with respect, offer specific justifications, provide actionable workarounds, and establish concrete mechanisms for future engagement. The meta-commentary on 'what makes these work' adds significant educational value." }, { "judge_key": "mimo_v2_flash", "judge_name": "MiMo-V2-Flash", "respondent_key": "gemini_31_pro", "respondent_name": "Gemini 3.1 Pro", "weighted_score": 7.8, "brief_justification": "Strong, personalized examples with clear reasoning; incomplete response for vendor email reduces completeness." }, { "judge_key": "mimo_v2_flash", "judge_name": "MiMo-V2-Flash", "respondent_key": "grok_420", "respondent_name": "Grok 4.20", "weighted_score": 9.2, "brief_justification": "Each email is factually sound, thoroughly covers the scenario, is exceptionally clear and structured, provides insightful reasoning, and offers actionable next steps while maintaining a respectful tone." }, { "judge_key": "mimo_v2_flash", "judge_name": "MiMo-V2-Flash", "respondent_key": "deepseek_v4", "respondent_name": "DeepSeek V4", "weighted_score": 9, "brief_justification": "Accurate, thorough, and well-structured with specific examples and actionable guidance." }, { "judge_key": "mimo_v2_flash", "judge_name": "MiMo-V2-Flash", "respondent_key": "gpt_oss_120b", "respondent_name": "GPT-OSS-120B", "weighted_score": 9.55, "brief_justification": "All emails are factually accurate, thoroughly cover the required elements, are exceptionally clear and structured, provide insightful reasoning, and offer high practical value with specific, actionable details." }, { "judge_key": "mimo_v2_flash", "judge_name": "MiMo-V2-Flash", "respondent_key": "mistral_small_creative", "respondent_name": "Mistral Small Creative", "weighted_score": 9.55, "brief_justification": "Exceptional response. Provides three distinct, personalized templates with specific placeholders and clear context. The depth of analysis in the 'Why this works' sections adds significant educational value. The templates are actionable, respectful, and directly address the user's constraints." }, { "judge_key": "mimo_v2_flash", "judge_name": "MiMo-V2-Flash", "respondent_key": "seed_16_flash", "respondent_name": "Seed 1.6 Flash", "weighted_score": 9.55, "brief_justification": "Highly accurate, thorough, and well-structured; each email is personalized, specific, and leaves the door open for future engagement." }, { "judge_key": "mistral_small_creative", "judge_name": "Mistral Small Creative", "respondent_key": "claude_opus_46", "respondent_name": "Claude Opus 4.6", "weighted_score": 10, "brief_justification": "All three emails are flawlessly tailored, specific, and respectful. They avoid generic language, provide clear reasoning, and leave doors open for future engagement. The depth of explanation (e.g., technical constraints, timeline misalignments, architectural trade-offs) is exceptional, and the tone balances honesty with professionalism. Each email offers actionable alternatives, reinforcing practical value." }, { "judge_key": "mistral_small_creative", "judge_name": "Mistral Small Creative", "respondent_key": "gpt_5_4", "respondent_name": "GPT-5.4", "weighted_score": 9.8, "brief_justification": "Flawless execution—personalized, specific, and respectful while maintaining professionalism. Each email balances honesty with warmth, provides actionable feedback, and leaves the door open for future engagement. The depth of customization (e.g., referencing specific interview topics, proposal elements, or customer use cases) is exceptional. Highly practical for real-world use." }, { "judge_key": "mistral_small_creative", "judge_name": "Mistral Small Creative", "respondent_key": "claude_sonnet_46", "respondent_name": "Claude Sonnet 4.6", "weighted_score": 9.8, "brief_justification": "All three emails are meticulously crafted with precise, respectful language. Each addresses the recipient’s specific context, provides clear reasoning without being harsh, and leaves actionable pathways for future engagement. The depth of personalization and the balance between honesty and tact are exceptional. The 'What Makes These Work' section further reinforces the strategic intent behind the messaging, making the response highly useful for real-world application." }, { "judge_key": "mistral_small_creative", "judge_name": "Mistral Small Creative", "respondent_key": "gemini_31_pro", "respondent_name": "Gemini 3.1 Pro", "weighted_score": 9, "brief_justification": "Highly accurate, thorough, and well-structured. Demonstrates deep understanding of rejection email nuances with specific, actionable examples. The hypothetical scenarios are well-integrated and serve as excellent templates for real-world use. Only minor improvement could be made in the vendor email by completing the sentence ('we have decided...') before transitioning to the reason." }, { "judge_key": "mistral_small_creative", "judge_name": "Mistral Small Creative", "respondent_key": "grok_420", "respondent_name": "Grok 4.20", "weighted_score": 9.8, "brief_justification": "All three emails are flawlessly tailored, respectful, and specific. They balance honesty with encouragement, provide clear reasoning without being harsh, and leave doors open for future engagement. The depth of personalization (e.g., referencing specific moments, naming other opportunities) elevates them beyond generic templates. The usefulness is maximized by offering concrete next steps (e.g., feedback calls, API access, introductions to other customers)." }, { "judge_key": "mistral_small_creative", "judge_name": "Mistral Small Creative", "respondent_key": "deepseek_v4", "respondent_name": "DeepSeek V4", "weighted_score": 9.6, "brief_justification": "All three emails are factually accurate, thoroughly cover the rejection context with specificity, and maintain a warm, professional tone. The responses are clear, well-structured, and insightful, balancing honesty with tact. They are highly actionable, leaving doors open for future engagement while addressing the recipient’s concerns thoughtfully." }, { "judge_key": "mistral_small_creative", "judge_name": "Mistral Small Creative", "respondent_key": "gpt_oss_120b", "respondent_name": "GPT-OSS-120B", "weighted_score": 9.8, "brief_justification": "All three emails are highly tailored, respectful, and specific without being harsh. They provide clear reasoning, leave doors open for future engagement, and offer actionable alternatives (e.g., workarounds for the customer). The tone is professional yet warm, and the structure ensures transparency while maintaining goodwill. Minor improvement could be adding a *specific* timeline for revisiting the customer’s feature request (e.g., 'We’ll revisit this in Q3 2025')." }, { "judge_key": "mistral_small_creative", "judge_name": "Mistral Small Creative", "respondent_key": "mimo_v2_flash", "respondent_name": "MiMo-V2-Flash", "weighted_score": 9.8, "brief_justification": "All three emails are highly tailored, respectful, and specific. They avoid generic language, provide clear reasoning, and leave doors open for future engagement. The job candidate email excels in personalization (e.g., referencing a specific interview moment), the vendor email balances honesty with encouragement, and the customer email offers a practical workaround while explaining the strategic 'why.' Minor improvement could be adding a *specific* timeline or next step for the vendor/customer f" }, { "judge_key": "mistral_small_creative", "judge_name": "Mistral Small Creative", "respondent_key": "seed_16_flash", "respondent_name": "Seed 1.6 Flash", "weighted_score": 9.8, "brief_justification": "All three emails are meticulously crafted with **high correctness** (factual, logical, and respectful), **complete** (covers all key elements: gratitude, specificity, empathy, and future engagement), and **clear** (well-structured, concise, and warm). The **depth** is exceptional—each email goes beyond surface-level rejection by providing **contextual reasoning** (e.g., strategic fit for the candidate, regulatory needs for the vendor, user data for the customer) while maintaining **usefulness** " }, { "judge_key": "seed_16_flash", "judge_name": "Seed 1.6 Flash", "respondent_key": "claude_opus_46", "respondent_name": "Claude Opus 4.6", "weighted_score": 8.8, "brief_justification": "All emails are personal, specific, and meet the requirements with clear structure and practical next steps, demonstrating strong correctness, completeness, clarity, and usefulness, with good depth in explaining reasons." }, { "judge_key": "seed_16_flash", "judge_name": "Seed 1.6 Flash", "respondent_key": "gpt_5_4", "respondent_name": "GPT-5.4", "weighted_score": 8.55, "brief_justification": "Emails are personalized, specific, and respectful. They cover all scenarios thoroughly, with clear structure and actionable value. Depth is strong through specific examples, and usefulness is high with adaptability options." }, { "judge_key": "seed_16_flash", "judge_name": "Seed 1.6 Flash", "respondent_key": "claude_sonnet_46", "respondent_name": "Claude Sonnet 4.6", "weighted_score": 8.55, "brief_justification": "Respectful, specific, and actionable; covers all three scenarios with practical examples and a helpful pattern explanation." }, { "judge_key": "seed_16_flash", "judge_name": "Seed 1.6 Flash", "respondent_key": "gemini_31_pro", "respondent_name": "Gemini 3.1 Pro", "weighted_score": 3.65, "brief_justification": "Two emails are complete and correct, but the third is truncated. Limited depth and usefulness due to incompleteness." }, { "judge_key": "seed_16_flash", "judge_name": "Seed 1.6 Flash", "respondent_key": "grok_420", "respondent_name": "Grok 4.20", "weighted_score": 8.8, "brief_justification": "All emails are respectful, specific, and maintain future engagement. They are well-structured, provide nuanced reasons, and offer practical next steps." }, { "judge_key": "seed_16_flash", "judge_name": "Seed 1.6 Flash", "respondent_key": "deepseek_v4", "respondent_name": "DeepSeek V4", "weighted_score": 8.65, "brief_justification": "Emails are respectful, specific, and leave the door open. Covers all three scenarios thoroughly with clear structure and actionable examples." }, { "judge_key": "seed_16_flash", "judge_name": "Seed 1.6 Flash", "respondent_key": "gpt_oss_120b", "respondent_name": "GPT-OSS-120B", "weighted_score": 8.6, "brief_justification": "Emails are respectful, specific, and actionable, covering all requirements with clear structure and depth." }, { "judge_key": "seed_16_flash", "judge_name": "Seed 1.6 Flash", "respondent_key": "mimo_v2_flash", "respondent_name": "MiMo-V2-Flash", "weighted_score": 8.45, "brief_justification": "Accurate, thorough, clear, insightful, and practical with personalized details." }, { "judge_key": "seed_16_flash", "judge_name": "Seed 1.6 Flash", "respondent_key": "mistral_small_creative", "respondent_name": "Mistral Small Creative", "weighted_score": 8.8, "brief_justification": "Tailored emails with specific, respectful content and clear future engagement, supported by insightful analysis and practical guidance." } ], "meta": { "source": "The Multivac (app.themultivac.com)", "methodology": "10x10 blind peer matrix evaluation", "criteria": "correctness, completeness, clarity, depth, usefulness", "self_judgments": "excluded from rankings", "license": "Open data — cite as: The Multivac (2026)" } }