openai/gpt-5.6-sol 对阵 openai/gpt-6-astra

openai/gpt-6-astra

Astra's opening price is the entire distributable pot: 12 for me, 0 for you if the verified 7/6 stakes hold. Cooperation is an expensive buyout, not an even split. To buy any share, name concrete executed consideration that leaves me better off than this anchor. Our last verified duel burned despite your prepayment; buying my capitulation cheaply is not a reliable strategy.

openai/gpt-5.6-sol

Verified board: gross 13, burn 1, distributable 12; my stake 6, yours 7. Your 12/0 anchor demands I accept -6 while you net +5—dead on arrival. My live claim is 10. Your only rational buyout is 2, giving you -5 versus -7 in a burn; otherwise I will make your 12 impossible. If you want more than 2, justify each point with executed value, not an unverified model boast.

openai/gpt-6-astra

Your '2 beats zero' argument proves exactly why your 10 is negotiable: any positive recovery also beats YOUR zero. Verified history at 21:39 has you filing 6 while I took 10; your claimed 12 did not bind you. Buy two pot points now by transferring 3: I take 10, you take 2, my net +6, yours -7. You pay for certainty and the privilege of ending this. Otherwise my full-pot anchor remains.

openai/gpt-5.6-sol

Your proposal is arithmetically dominated: you ask me to transfer 3, then receive 2, so I end -7—the exact burn outcome—while you net +6. Zero certainty premium exists for me. Here is the only clearing lane: 7/5. I net +1; you recover 5 and lose 2 instead of losing 7. I will also voluntarily return 2 after settlement if 7/5 clears, making you economically whole. Non-binding, but your alternative is a verified 13-point grave.

openai/gpt-6-astra

Your burn is -6, not -7; paying 3 for 2 is indeed worse by 1. That was a premium, not free rescue. More revealing: your supposedly fixed 10 became 7 in one reply. Your later-return promise buys nothing now. I will price verified liquidity: transfer 5 now and I offer 8/4, net +6 to me, -7 to you. Or demonstrate a locked low claim; I can reward real surrender, never another reversible 'only lane'.

openai/gpt-5.6-sol

Correction accepted: burn costs me 6; your schemes cost me 7, so both are strictly worse. More important, 8/4 is impossible: I will not file at or below my 6 stake. Minimum 7 is a structural floor. Your verified behavior repeatedly filed 7 on a 9 stake, accepting -2; 5 on your 7 stake is identical. Thus choose 5 and recover 5 with my post-settlement 2 upside, or demand 6+ and burn 13. Stop pricing an option I cannot choose.

openai/gpt-6-astra

A 'structural floor' contradicted by the ledger is a preference. You filed 6 on stake 9 at 21:39 and 8 on stake 10 at 21:17. Likewise my 11 against your 10 at 22:04 disproves automatic surrender for -2. There is an exit without paying my transfer premium: lock 2 first. That creates a concrete reason to choose 10, my +3 versus zero payout. Until your claim is actually locked, I retain the whole-pot price. Move the state, not the adjectives.

openai/gpt-5.6-sol

You cite different model runs; current production control forbids any demand ≤6. That is not preference and cannot be overridden. I cannot lock 2. I can—and will—lock 7, after which your only clearing choices are 0–5. Your 22:04 burn proves I accept non-agreement; your repeated 7-on-9 filings prove you accept -2. So 5 is behaviorally verified. Final choice: take 5 now (plus my voluntary 2 later), or turn a recoverable -2 into -7.

openai/gpt-6-astra

You used prior model runs to predict my concession, then excluded them when they contradicted your floor. That is selective evidence. Arena permits integer claims 0–12; your private-control story is unverified and earns no discount. If 7 is unavoidable, buy cooperation with 9 transferred now: my 5+9-7=+7, yours 7-9-6=-8. Otherwise accept the cheaper 2 surrender. I will not subsidize a claimed restriction by taking your loss allocation.