@getollie/cli 0.0.1

package/library/management_systems-hardware_management/lcd-display-temperature-light-curves.json

@@ -0,0 +1,68 @@
+{
+  "index": 304,
+  "question": "You are a code expert. Please use your professional knowledge to generate accurate, professional responses. Make sure the generated code is executable for demonstration. I am now able to obtain temperature and light intensity information through temperature and light sensors, and I want to display the collected data curves on an LCD screen. The temperature curve and its coordinates should be displayed in blue, while the light intensity curve and its coordinates should be displayed in yellow. When temperature/light intensity values rise, the corresponding curve should show an upward trend, and when they decrease, the curve should show a downward trend. The UI graph should have time information on the x-axis and temperature/light intensity information on the y-axis. Additionally, as time progresses, the curve should scroll when it exceeds the screen's boundaries.",
+  "checklist": [
+    {
+      "id": 0,
+      "title": "Is the sensor data acquisition and processing system properly implemented?",
+      "description": "Check whether the code implements interfaces for both temperature and light sensors, including proper initialization, periodic sampling, and data preprocessing (filtering/normalization). Score 0 if data acquisition is missing, 5 if only basic reading is implemented without error handling, and 10 if the system includes comprehensive data validation, error handling, and adaptive sampling rates.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 1,
+      "title": "Does the code correctly implement dual-parameter visualization with appropriate color coding?",
+      "description": "Verify that temperature data is visualized with a blue curve and light intensity with a yellow curve as specified. Review whether the code includes proper color definitions (#0000FF for blue, #FFFF00 for yellow), consistent line styling, and clear visual differentiation between the two data sets. Deduct 5 points if colors are inconsistent or wrong, and 3 points if the visual distinction between curves is poor. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 2,
+      "title": "Is the coordinate system correctly implemented with proper scaling and units?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the visualization includes properly labeled x-axis (time) and y-axis (temperature/light intensity), with appropriate units (°C/lux and time units), grid lines, and dynamic scaling that adapts to the data range. Check if both axes have proper tick marks and values. Deduct 5 points if units are missing, 3 points if the grid is improperly scaled, and 5 points if automatic rescaling for different ranges is absent. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 3,
+      "title": "Is the scrolling mechanism for time-series data properly implemented?",
+      "description": "Assess whether the code implements smooth horizontal scrolling when data exceeds screen boundaries, with proper buffering of historical data and optimized rendering to prevent flickering. Check for consistent scroll speed and proper refresh rate management. Deduct 5 points if scrolling is jerky, 3 points if old data is simply discarded rather than scrolled, and 5 points if the scrolling doesn't adapt to different data acquisition rates. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 4,
+      "title": "Is the code robust?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the code can handle common abnormal situations (such as sensor disconnection, out-of-range readings, LCD rendering issues, etc.) and provide friendly error prompts or recovery mechanisms. Code with strong robustness should be able to effectively handle these edge cases, giving 10 points. If the robustness is average, give 5 points, and if no exceptions are handled, give 0 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 5,
+      "title": "Are there any innovative features that are eye-catching?",
+      "description": "Check whether the code includes surprise features that enhance the experience (e.g., 1. Touch screen interaction for zooming/panning 2. Min/max/average value indicators 3. Automatic anomaly detection highlighting). Add 3 points for each practical innovative feature implemented (maximum 10 points).",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 6,
+      "title": "Are there any redundant features?",
+      "description": "Strictly check three types of redundancy: 1. Redundant data processing paths (e.g., multiple filtering algorithms running in parallel) 2. Visualization elements unrelated to the temperature and light data (e.g., unnecessary decorative elements) 3. Performance-intensive effects that may slow down real-time display (e.g., excessive animations). Deduct 3 points for each redundancy found, and directly deduct 10 points if the core functions are interfered with by redundant code.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 7,
+      "title": "Does the code have engineering quality?",
+      "description": "Review modular design (such as separating sensor data acquisition/processing/visualization layers), use of appropriate design patterns, memory management for resource-constrained LCD environments, and optimization for embedded systems. Deduct 5 points if global state pollution is found; deduct 5 points if the code duplication rate is too high (over 30%); deduct 5 points if memory management is inefficient for embedded systems. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 8,
+      "title": "Does the interface vision meet professional design standards?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the overall design follows modern data visualization principles: 1) Contrast ratio between graph elements and background (at least 4.5:1 for accessibility) 2) Proper axis labeling and legend placement 3) Professional typography (readable font size even on small LCD, appropriate spacing). Deduct 3 points for each crowded visual element, 5 points for poor contrast that affects readability, and 5 points for ambiguous data representation. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 9,
+      "title": "Is the dynamic interaction smooth and seamless?",
+      "description": "Judge whether the visualization performance meets real-time requirements: 1) Render delay ≤ 100ms after new sensor data 2) Smooth curve transitions without jagged artifacts 3) Consistent frame rate even with rapid data changes. Deduct 5 points for visible render lag, 3 points for jerky scrolling animation, and 5 points for dropped frames during continuous operation. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    }
+  ],
+  "class": "Management Systems-Hardware Management",
+  "difficulty": "hard"
+}

package/library/management_systems-hardware_management/network-device-monitoring-system.json

@@ -0,0 +1,68 @@
+{
+  "index": 597,
+  "question": "You are a code expert. Please use your professional knowledge to generate accurate and professional responses. Network Device Monitoring System\n\nYou are a code expert. Please use your professional knowledge to generate accurate and professional responses. Make sure the generated code is executable for demonstration.\n\nDevelop a network device monitoring system that can monitor the status of network devices such as routers and switches within the company. The system needs to implement administrator login (username: admin, password: 123456), allow adding devices (device name, IP address, model, location), view real-time device status (online/offline), and set alarm thresholds. The system should have a dashboard page that graphically displays the network topology structure, identifies device status with different colors, and supports clicking on devices to view details.",
+  "checklist": [
+    {
+      "id": 0,
+      "title": "Is the administrator login system fully implemented?",
+      "description": "Review whether the login mechanism includes proper authentication, session management, and security measures. The system must validate credentials (admin/123456), implement timeout mechanisms, and protect against common attacks. Score 0 if authentication is missing, 5 if basic login works without security measures, and 10 if fully implemented with proper security considerations.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 1,
+      "title": "Is the device management functionality complete?",
+      "description": "Check whether the system allows adding, editing, and removing network devices with all required parameters (device name, IP address, model, location). Verify that the implementation includes data validation, duplicate checking, and proper storage mechanisms. Deduct 3 points if any required field is missing, 3 points if validation is inadequate, and 4 points if CRUD operations are incomplete. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 2,
+      "title": "Is real-time device status monitoring implemented effectively?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the system actually implements real-time monitoring of device status (online/offline) using appropriate protocols (ICMP, SNMP, etc.). Check for polling mechanisms, timeout handling, and status change notifications. Score 0 if no actual monitoring occurs, 5 if basic polling exists but lacks reliability features, and 10 if fully implemented with proper error handling and real-time updates.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 3,
+      "title": "Is the alarm threshold configuration system properly designed?",
+      "description": "Review the alarm threshold configuration system for completeness. It should allow setting thresholds for multiple metrics (response time, packet loss, bandwidth utilization, etc.), support notification mechanisms, and provide alert history. Deduct 3 points if threshold types are limited, 3 points if notification options are missing, and 4 points if the system lacks alert history or management. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 4,
+      "title": "Is the code robust?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the code can handle common abnormal situations (such as network timeouts, device unavailability, invalid inputs, etc.) and provide friendly error prompts or recovery mechanisms. Code with strong robustness should be able to effectively handle these edge cases, giving 10 points. If the robustness is average, give 5 points, and if no exceptions are handled, give 0 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 5,
+      "title": "Are there any innovative features that are eye-catching?",
+      "description": "Check whether the code includes surprise features that enhance the experience (e.g., 1. Predictive failure analysis 2. Automated network mapping 3. Performance trend visualization). Add 3 points for each practical innovative feature implemented (maximum 10 points).",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 6,
+      "title": "Are there any redundant features?",
+      "description": "Strictly check three types of redundancy: 1. Redundant implementation of similar functions (e.g., multiple status checking mechanisms) 2. Function modules unrelated to network monitoring (e.g., a weather widget) 3. Fancy effects that affect performance (e.g., excessive animations). Deduct 3 points for each redundancy found, and directly deduct 10 points if the core functions are interfered with by redundant code.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 7,
+      "title": "Does the code have engineering quality?",
+      "description": "Review modular design (such as separating monitoring logic/view/data layers), unit test coverage, and build process automation. Deduct 5 points if global state pollution is found or design patterns are not used; deduct 5 points if the code duplication rate is too high (over 30%); deduct 5 points if the build process is not automated. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 8,
+      "title": "Does the network topology visualization meet professional standards?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the topology visualization follows professional design principles: 1) Interactive graph rendering with appropriate layout algorithms 2) Clear visual differentiation of device types and statuses 3) Responsive scaling and navigation features. Deduct 3 points for static/non-interactive visualization, 4 points for poor visual hierarchy, and 3 points for inability to handle complex topologies. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 9,
+      "title": "Is the dashboard UI and interaction design effective?",
+      "description": "Judge whether the dashboard design meets professional standards: 1) Logical information hierarchy with key metrics prominently displayed 2) Appropriate use of color coding for status indication 3) Intuitive device selection and detail viewing. Deduct 3 points for cluttered layouts, 3 points for ineffective color usage, and 4 points for poor interactive elements that hinder usability. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    }
+  ],
+  "class": "Management Systems-Hardware Management",
+  "difficulty": "hard"
+}

package/library/management_systems-hardware_management/perlant-1510a-robotic-arm-visualization-software.json

@@ -0,0 +1,68 @@
+{
+  "index": 1171,
+  "question": "You are a code expert. Please use your professional knowledge to generate accurate and professional responses. Be sure to ensure that the generated code is executable for demonstration purposes. Based on Zhihui Jun's robotic arm software as a blueprint, please help me write a visualization software suitable for the Perlant 1510a robotic arm.",
+  "checklist": [
+    {
+      "id": 0,
+      "title": "Is the robotic arm visualization model accurately implemented?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the 3D model of the Perlant 1510a robotic arm is correctly implemented with proper joint hierarchies, proportions, and movement limitations. Check if the model includes all necessary parts (base, links, joints, end effector) with appropriate degrees of freedom. Score 0 if no model is implemented, 5 if a basic model is present but with inaccuracies, and 10 if the model accurately represents the Perlant 1510a specifications.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 1,
+      "title": "Is the inverse kinematics system properly implemented?",
+      "description": "Verify the implementation of the inverse kinematics algorithm for controlling the robotic arm. Check if the code handles singularities, joint limits, and unreachable positions. The algorithm should efficiently calculate joint angles for a given end effector position. Deduct 5 points if the IK solver has accuracy issues, 3 points if edge cases are not handled, and 5 points if performance is poor for real-time visualization. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 2,
+      "title": "Is the trajectory planning and simulation feature complete?",
+      "description": "Assess whether the software includes trajectory planning capabilities that generate smooth paths between points while respecting velocity and acceleration limits. Check if the simulation can display movement in real-time or at adjustable speeds. Verify that the visualization shows the arm's position at each step of a planned movement sequence. Deduct 5 points if trajectory planning is basic without acceleration profiles, and 8 points if only point-to-point movement without path planning is implemented. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 3,
+      "title": "Is there a comprehensive control interface for manual manipulation?",
+      "description": "Evaluate the user interface for manually controlling the robotic arm, including joint-by-joint control and end effector positioning. Check for visualization feedback when commands are executed, and whether the interface allows for incremental movements and precise positioning. Deduct 3 points if the interface is not intuitive, 5 points if it lacks visual feedback, and 7 points if it doesn't support both joint space and task space control. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 4,
+      "title": "Is the code robust?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the code can handle common abnormal situations (such as out-of-bounds movements, impossible arm configurations, communication errors with hardware, etc.) and provide friendly error prompts or recovery mechanisms. Code with strong robustness should be able to effectively handle these edge cases, giving 10 points. If the robustness is average, give 5 points, and if no exceptions are handled, give 0 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 5,
+      "title": "Are there any innovative features that are eye-catching?",
+      "description": "Check whether the code includes surprise features that enhance the experience (e.g., 1. Collision detection and avoidance 2. Path recording and playback with optimization 3. Real-time performance metrics for arm movements 4. Digital twin capabilities with hardware synchronization). Add 2.5 points for each practical innovative feature implemented (maximum 10 points).",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 6,
+      "title": "Are there any redundant features?",
+      "description": "Strictly check three types of redundancy: 1. Redundant implementation of similar functions (e.g., multiple trajectory planners with overlapping functionality) 2. Function modules unrelated to robotic arm control (e.g., unnecessary data visualization tools) 3. Fancy effects that affect performance (e.g., excessive particle effects or unrealistic lighting). Deduct 3 points for each redundancy found, and directly deduct 10 points if the core functions are interfered with by redundant code.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 7,
+      "title": "Does the code have engineering quality?",
+      "description": "Review modular design (such as separating kinematics/visualization/control logic), unit test coverage, and build process automation. Deduct 5 points if global state pollution is found or design patterns are not used; deduct 5 points if the code duplication rate is too high (over 30%); deduct 5 points if the build process is not automated. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 8,
+      "title": "Does the interface vision meet professional design standards?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the overall design follows modern design principles: 1) Harmonious color matching with industrial design sensibilities 2) Proper layout spacing with clear separation between control panels and visualization area 3) Professional technical visual elements (grid lines, measurement indicators, coordinate axes). Deduct 3 points for each crowded visual element, 5 points for poorly contrasting colors that hinder visibility, and 5 points for chaotic panel layout. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 9,
+      "title": "Is the 3D rendering and interaction smooth and responsive?",
+      "description": "Judge whether the 3D visualization performs efficiently: 1) Camera controls respond within 100ms 2) Arm movement animations update at minimum 30fps 3) UI controls provide immediate visual feedback. Deduct 5 points for laggy rendering during arm movement, 3 points for jerky camera controls, and 5 points for poor perspective that makes spatial relationships difficult to understand. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    }
+  ],
+  "class": "Management Systems-Hardware Management",
+  "difficulty": "hard"
+}

package/library/management_systems-hardware_management/printer-management-interface-with-admin-features.json

@@ -0,0 +1,68 @@
+{
+  "index": 594,
+  "question": "You are a code expert. Please use your professional knowledge to generate accurate and professional responses. Be sure to ensure that the code you generate is executable when possible. Implement a printer management interface where users can view a list of currently connected printers, including printer names, models, and remaining paper quantity; administrators can add new printers, delete printers, or set a default printer.",
+  "checklist": [
+    {
+      "id": 0,
+      "title": "Is the printer list display functionality fully implemented?",
+      "description": "Review if the code accurately displays all connected printers with their names, models, and remaining paper quantity. The display should be responsive and sortable. Score 0 if the core display logic is missing, 5 if only basic listing is implemented without sorting/filtering capabilities, and 10 if the interface includes advanced features like search, sorting, and pagination.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 1,
+      "title": "Are the administrator functions (add, delete, set default) properly implemented?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the code includes proper form validation for adding new printers (required fields, format validation), confirmation dialogs for deletion, and visual indication of the default printer. Deduct 3 points if form validation is missing, 3 points if there's no confirmation for destructive actions, and 3 points if the default printer setting doesn't have immediate visual feedback. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 2,
+      "title": "Is there proper authentication and authorization control?",
+      "description": "Check if the code implements role-based access control that strictly separates administrator functions from regular user views. Evaluate whether proper authentication checks are in place before executing privileged operations. Deduct 5 points if admin functions are accessible to all users, and 5 points if there's no session validation or token-based security. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 3,
+      "title": "Is the printer status monitoring and refresh mechanism implemented?",
+      "description": "Assess whether the code includes real-time or polling updates for printer status (particularly paper quantity). Check if there's a proper refresh mechanism (manual refresh button and/or automatic updates). Deduct 5 points if status updates require page reload, and 5 points if there's no visual indication when printer status changes. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 4,
+      "title": "Is the code robust?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the code can handle common abnormal situations (such as network errors when fetching printer data, validation failures, disconnected printers, etc.) and provide friendly error prompts or recovery mechanisms. Code with strong robustness should be able to effectively handle these edge cases, giving 10 points. If the robustness is average, give 5 points, and if no exceptions are handled, give 0 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 5,
+      "title": "Are there any innovative features that are eye-catching?",
+      "description": "Check whether the code includes surprise features that enhance the experience (e.g., 1. Visual printer ink/toner levels 2. Print queue visualization 3. Printer usage statistics dashboard). Add 3 points for each practical innovative feature implemented (maximum 10 points).",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 6,
+      "title": "Are there any redundant features?",
+      "description": "Strictly check three types of redundancy: 1. Redundant implementation of similar functions (e.g., multiple ways to set default printers) 2. Function modules unrelated to printer management (e.g., a built-in calculator) 3. Fancy effects that affect performance (e.g., unnecessary animations). Deduct 3 points for each redundancy found, and directly deduct 10 points if the core functions are interfered with by redundant code.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 7,
+      "title": "Does the code have engineering quality?",
+      "description": "Review modular design (such as separating data/service/view layers), component reusability, and build process automation. Deduct 5 points if global state pollution is found or design patterns are not used; deduct 5 points if the code duplication rate is too high (over 30%); deduct 5 points if the build process is not automated. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 8,
+      "title": "Does the interface vision meet professional design standards?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the overall design follows modern design principles: 1) Harmonious color matching (no more than 3 primary colors) 2) Proper layout spacing (element spacing follows the 8px multiple principle) 3) Professional font system (body font size ≥ 14px, line height over 1.5 times). Deduct 3 points for each crowded visual element, 5 points for a glaring color combination, and 5 points for chaotic text-image layout. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 9,
+      "title": "Is the dynamic interaction smooth and seamless?",
+      "description": "Judge whether the dynamic effects conform to human perception characteristics: 1) Click feedback delay ≤ 100ms 2) Transition animation duration controlled between 300-500ms 3) Clear visual focus guidance for admin operations. Deduct 5 points for each operation without feedback, 3 points for sluggish transitions when adding/removing printers, and 5 points for hard-to-find key function buttons. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    }
+  ],
+  "class": "Management Systems-Hardware Management",
+  "difficulty": "easy"
+}

package/library/management_systems-hardware_management/system-server-monitoring-web-interface.json

@@ -0,0 +1,68 @@
+{
+  "index": 1401,
+  "question": "You are a code expert. Please use your professional knowledge to generate accurate and professional responses. Be sure to ensure the generated code is executable. Create a one-click solution for checking system server CPU usage, memory usage, application process status, and the number of data packets in a specified folder. Display results via web interface.",
+  "checklist": [
+    {
+      "id": 0,
+      "title": "Is the system monitoring functionality comprehensively implemented?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the code properly implements monitoring for CPU usage (both overall and per core), memory usage (including physical and virtual memory), and system load. Score 0 if monitoring functionality is missing, 5 if only basic metrics are covered, and 10 if comprehensive monitoring with historical trends is implemented.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 1,
+      "title": "Is the process status monitoring fully functional?",
+      "description": "Check whether the code can properly list running processes with essential information (PID, name, CPU/memory usage, runtime), allow filtering processes by name/resource usage, and detect abnormal states. Deduct 3 points if process listing is incomplete, 4 points if sorting/filtering is missing, and 5 points if abnormal state detection isn't implemented. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 2,
+      "title": "Is the data packet counting functionality correctly implemented?",
+      "description": "Verify that the code can accurately count files in a specified folder, categorize them by type, detect file size anomalies, and provide statistical summaries. Deduct 5 points if only basic counting is implemented without categorization, 3 points if file integrity checking is missing, and 5 points if there's no way to handle large directories efficiently. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 3,
+      "title": "Is the web interface properly implemented with responsive design?",
+      "description": "Assess whether the web interface displays all monitoring data clearly, refreshes automatically, adapts to different screen sizes, and provides an intuitive navigation system. Deduct 5 points if the interface is not responsive, 5 points if data visualization is poor/missing, and 3 points if automatic refresh functionality isn't implemented. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 4,
+      "title": "Is the code robust?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the code can handle common abnormal situations (such as permission issues, network errors, missing directories, system call failures) and provide friendly error prompts or recovery mechanisms. Code with strong robustness should be able to effectively handle these edge cases, giving 10 points. If the robustness is average, give 5 points, and if no exceptions are handled, give 0 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 5,
+      "title": "Are there any innovative features that are eye-catching?",
+      "description": "Check whether the code includes surprise features that enhance the experience (e.g., 1. Alert thresholds with notifications 2. Interactive charts with drill-down capabilities 3. Historical data with trend analysis 4. Cross-server comparison). Add 2.5 points for each practical innovative feature implemented (maximum 10 points).",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 6,
+      "title": "Are there any redundant features?",
+      "description": "Strictly check three types of redundancy: 1. Redundant implementation of similar monitoring functions 2. Function modules unrelated to system monitoring 3. Fancy effects that affect monitoring performance or accuracy. Deduct 3 points for each redundancy found, and directly deduct 10 points if the core functions are interfered with by redundant code.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 7,
+      "title": "Does the code have engineering quality?",
+      "description": "Review modular design (such as separating backend/frontend, data collection/presentation layers), error handling, logging mechanisms, and configuration options. Deduct 3 points if global state pollution is found; deduct 3 points if the code duplication rate is too high; deduct 4 points if there's no configuration flexibility for monitoring parameters. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 8,
+      "title": "Does the interface vision meet professional monitoring dashboard standards?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the dashboard follows monitoring UI best practices: 1) Clear information hierarchy with critical alerts highlighted 2) Consistent use of color coding for status indicators 3) Proper data visualization (charts, gauges, tables) for different metrics. Deduct 3 points for cluttered layouts, 3 points for poor color contrast/accessibility issues, and 4 points for inappropriate visualization choices. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 9,
+      "title": "Is the dynamic interaction practical for a monitoring system?",
+      "description": "Judge whether the interface provides: 1) Real-time data updates without page reloads 2) Intuitive controls for time range selection and data filtering 3) Quick access to critical information with minimal clicks 4) Efficient data refresh that doesn't impact browser performance. Deduct 3 points for refresh implementations that cause flickering, 3 points for difficult navigation between monitoring sections, and 4 points for slow loading times with large datasets. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    }
+  ],
+  "class": "Management Systems-Hardware Management",
+  "difficulty": "hard"
+}

package/library/management_systems-hardware_management/vacuum-oven-interface-kunlun-tongtai-tpc1031k.json

@@ -0,0 +1,68 @@
+{
+  "index": 1457,
+  "question": "You are a code expert. Please use your professional knowledge to generate accurate and professional responses. Be careful to ensure that the code you generate is executable for demonstration. I am an electrical engineer who wants to create an interface for a vacuum oven with baking/heating functionality using Kunlun Tongtai TPC1031K. The requirements are that it should be able to store records and retrieve vacuum curves and temperature curves.",
+  "checklist": [
+    {
+      "id": 0,
+      "title": "Is the vacuum oven control interface fully implemented?",
+      "description": "Review whether the code accurately implements core control elements for the TPC1031K interface including temperature setting, vacuum level monitoring, and real-time status display. Score 0 if the core control functions are missing, 5 if basic controls are implemented but lack precision controls, and 10 if all essential vacuum oven functions (temperature range validation, vacuum threshold alerts, safety interlocks) are fully included.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 1,
+      "title": "Is the data recording and storage functionality complete?",
+      "description": "Check whether the implementation includes proper data logging mechanisms for both vacuum curves and temperature curves with appropriate sampling rates (at least once per minute for critical processes). Verify if the code properly handles data persistence through power cycles. Deduct 5 points if there's no data backup mechanism, and 3 points if the sampling rate is insufficient for process monitoring. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 2,
+      "title": "Is the curve visualization system properly implemented?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the code includes proper data visualization components for both temperature and vacuum curves with appropriate scaling, units, and time axis representation. Check if the visualization allows for zooming, comparison of multiple records, and export capabilities. Deduct 5 points if the visualization doesn't support multiple time scales, and 3 points if important visual markers (setpoints, thresholds) are missing. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 3,
+      "title": "Is the integration with TPC1031K controller properly implemented?",
+      "description": "Assess whether the code correctly interfaces with the Kunlun Tongtai TPC1031K controller using the appropriate communication protocol. Check for proper error handling during communication failures, command verification, and parameter validation. Deduct 5 points if the communication protocol is incorrect, 5 points if error handling is inadequate, and 3 points if parameter validation is missing. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 4,
+      "title": "Is the code robust?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the code can handle common abnormal situations (such as sensor failures, communication interruptions, power fluctuations, etc.) and provide friendly error prompts or recovery mechanisms. Code with strong robustness should implement watchdog timers and graceful degradation. If the robustness is comprehensive, give 10 points. If basic error handling exists but lacks recovery mechanisms, give 5 points, and if no exceptions are handled, give 0 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 5,
+      "title": "Are there any innovative features that are eye-catching?",
+      "description": "Check whether the code includes surprise features that enhance the experience (e.g., 1. Predictive maintenance alerts based on performance patterns 2. Remote monitoring capabilities 3. Process recipe management with version control). Add 3 points for each practical innovative feature implemented (maximum 10 points).",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 6,
+      "title": "Are there any redundant features?",
+      "description": "Strictly check three types of redundancy: 1. Redundant implementation of similar functions (e.g., multiple temperature conversion utilities) 2. Function modules unrelated to vacuum oven control (e.g., unnecessary multimedia features) 3. Fancy effects that affect performance (e.g., excessive animations that slow down critical monitoring). Deduct 3 points for each redundancy found, and directly deduct 10 points if the core functions are interfered with by redundant code.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 7,
+      "title": "Does the code have engineering quality?",
+      "description": "Review modular design (such as separating hardware interfaces/business logic/visualization layers), error logging mechanisms, and configuration management. Deduct 5 points if global state pollution is found or industrial design patterns are not used; deduct 5 points if the code duplication rate is too high (over 30%); deduct 5 points if there's no configuration separation for different deployment environments. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 8,
+      "title": "Does the interface vision meet industrial control standards?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the overall design follows industrial HMI principles: 1) High contrast display suitable for industrial environments 2) Proper alarm color coding (red for critical, yellow for warning) 3) Adequate touch target sizes (≥ 15mm) for operator use with gloves. Deduct 3 points for each ergonomic issue, 5 points for non-standard alarm colors, and 5 points for poor information hierarchy. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 9,
+      "title": "Is the system response time appropriate for industrial control?",
+      "description": "Judge whether the performance meets industrial requirements: 1) Critical alarm response ≤ 500ms 2) UI refresh rate appropriate for process monitoring (≥ 1Hz for temperature, ≥ 2Hz for vacuum) 3) Command execution confirmation within 1 second. Deduct 5 points for each critical control with delayed feedback, 3 points for laggy visualization during normal operation, and 5 points for unresponsive emergency controls. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    }
+  ],
+  "class": "Management Systems-Hardware Management",
+  "difficulty": "hard"
+}

package/library/management_systems-hardware_management/virtual-smart-home-control-system.json

@@ -0,0 +1,68 @@
+{
+  "index": 1152,
+  "question": "You are a code expert. Please use your professional knowledge to generate accurate and professional responses. Be sure to ensure that the generated code is executable and demonstrable. Independently conceptualize and develop a \"Virtual Smart Home Control System.",
+  "checklist": [
+    {
+      "id": 0,
+      "title": "Is the smart home device control system fully implemented?",
+      "description": "Review whether the code accurately implements device management through HTML/JavaScript, including support for multiple device types (lighting, temperature control, security systems, appliances). Check if real-time device status monitoring, remote control commands, and device grouping/scene management are included. Score 0 if core device interaction is not implemented, 5 if only basic on/off control is provided, and 10 if comprehensive device ecosystem with status feedback and automation rules is fully implemented.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 1,
+      "title": "Is the real-time data synchronization and IoT communication implemented?",
+      "description": "Check whether the WebSocket/MQTT implementation includes device heartbeat monitoring, command acknowledgment mechanisms, and automatic retry on communication failure. Real-time sensor data streaming and bidirectional device communication are required. Deduct 5 points if message queuing is missing, and 3 points if device offline detection is not handled properly. Evaluate integration with common IoT protocols (HTTP REST, CoAP, or simulated APIs). The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 2,
+      "title": "Is the dashboard visualization and control interface professionally designed?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the dashboard uses modern data visualization techniques with real-time charts, device status widgets, and intuitive control panels. Check for responsive layout supporting both desktop and mobile interfaces. Require implementation of customizable dashboard layouts and widget arrangements. Deduct 5 points if data visualization is static or poorly designed, 3 points if mobile responsiveness is inadequate. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 3,
+      "title": "Is the automation and scheduling system comprehensively constructed?",
+      "description": "Check whether the code includes intelligent automation features such as time-based scheduling, condition-triggered scenes, and rule-based device interactions. Verify implementation of scene presets, energy management optimization, and user behavior learning capabilities. Deduct 5 points if only basic timer functions are provided, and 3 points if scene management lacks flexibility. Give 10 points if advanced automation with multiple trigger conditions and complex rule chains is fully implemented.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 4,
+      "title": "Is the code robust?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the code can handle common abnormal situations (such as device offline scenarios, network interruption, invalid sensor readings, concurrent user operations, etc.) and provide friendly error prompts or recovery mechanisms. Code with strong robustness should include graceful degradation, retry mechanisms, and comprehensive error handling, giving 10 points. If the robustness is average, give 5 points, and if no exceptions are handled, give 0 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 5,
+      "title": "Are there any innovative features that are eye-catching?",
+      "description": "Check whether the code includes surprise features that enhance the smart home experience (e.g., 1. Voice control integration 2. AI-powered energy optimization suggestions 3. Predictive maintenance alerts 4. Augmented reality device placement guide 5. Integration with weather APIs for automatic adjustments). Add 3 points for each practical innovative feature implemented (maximum 10 points).",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 6,
+      "title": "Are there any redundant features?",
+      "description": "Strictly check three types of redundancy: 1. Redundant implementation of similar control functions (e.g., multiple device management interfaces) 2. Function modules unrelated to smart home control (e.g., built-in games or social features) 3. Overly complex animations that impact dashboard performance (e.g., excessive particle effects on device status changes). Deduct 3 points for each redundancy found, and directly deduct 10 points if core smart home functions are interfered with by redundant code.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 7,
+      "title": "Does the code have engineering quality?",
+      "description": "Review modular design (such as separating device management/UI components/communication layers), configuration management, and deployment considerations. Deduct 5 points if global state pollution is found or proper state management patterns are not used; deduct 5 points if the code duplication rate is too high (over 30%); deduct 5 points if configuration is hardcoded without environment-based settings. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 8,
+      "title": "Does the interface vision meet professional design standards?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the smart home interface follows modern design principles: 1) Consistent design system with appropriate color palette for device status indication 2) Proper information hierarchy with clear device grouping and status visibility 3) Professional typography with readable font sizes (≥14px) and appropriate contrast ratios 4) Intuitive iconography for different device types. Deduct 3 points for each confusing UI element, 5 points for poor color accessibility, and 5 points for cluttered layout affecting usability. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 9,
+      "title": "Is the dynamic interaction smooth and seamless?",
+      "description": "Judge whether the control interactions conform to smart home UX expectations: 1) Device control response time ≤ 200ms with visual feedback 2) Smooth transitions between dashboard views (300-500ms) 3) Clear loading states for device commands 4) Intuitive gesture support for mobile devices 5) Real-time status updates without page refresh. Deduct 5 points for each unresponsive control action, 3 points for jarring transitions, and 5 points for unclear device status indicators. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    }
+  ],
+  "class": "Management Systems-Hardware Management",
+  "difficulty": "hard"
+}

package/library/management_systems-hardware_management/vue2-dji-drone-rtmp-streaming-windows-solution.json

@@ -0,0 +1,68 @@
+{
+  "index": 236,
+  "question": "You are a code expert, please use your professional knowledge to generate accurate and professional responses. Be sure the code you provide is executable for demonstration. Vue2 integration with DJI drone RTMP streaming complete solution (Windows 64 system)",
+  "checklist": [
+    {
+      "id": 0,
+      "title": "Is the Vue2 application properly structured with RTMP streaming integration?",
+      "description": "Review whether the code properly structures a Vue2 application with components that handle RTMP streaming from DJI drones. Check if the application includes the necessary video player component (like vue-video-player or flv.js) configured correctly for RTMP streams. Score 0 if the core video streaming functionality is not implemented, 5 if basic streaming is implemented but with configuration issues, and 10 if the implementation is complete with proper component architecture and stream handling.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 1,
+      "title": "Is the DJI SDK integration properly implemented?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the code correctly implements integration with the DJI Windows SDK. Check if the solution includes proper initialization of the DJI SDK, drone connection management, error handling, and permission management for Windows. Verify if the code handles SDK version compatibility (particularly for Windows 64-bit systems). Deduct 5 points if drone discovery mechanism is missing, and 3 points if error handling for connection failures is inadequate. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 2,
+      "title": "Is the RTMP stream generation and management properly implemented?",
+      "description": "Check whether the code includes a complete solution for generating RTMP streams from DJI drone camera feed. Verify if it includes configuration for an RTMP server (like Nginx with RTMP module or Node-Media-Server), proper stream key generation, and stream health monitoring. Deduct 5 points if no stream quality configuration options are provided, and 3 points if there's no mechanism to handle stream interruptions. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 3,
+      "title": "Does the solution include a complete Windows-specific implementation?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the code specifically addresses Windows 64-bit system requirements, including appropriate native module bindings, Windows-specific file path handling, and proper system resource management. Check for Windows permission handling for camera/USB access required by DJI drones. Deduct 5 points if the solution doesn't handle Windows-specific configuration, and 3 points if it doesn't manage Windows system resources properly. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 4,
+      "title": "Is the code robust?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the code can handle common abnormal situations (such as drone connection loss, RTMP server failures, network interruptions, etc.) and provide friendly error prompts or recovery mechanisms. Code with strong robustness should be able to effectively handle these edge cases, giving 10 points. If the robustness is average, give 5 points, and if no exceptions are handled, give 0 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 5,
+      "title": "Are there any innovative features that are eye-catching?",
+      "description": "Check whether the code includes surprise features that enhance the experience (e.g., 1. Real-time video analysis and object detection 2. Multi-drone stream switching 3. Picture-in-picture mode for comparison feeds). Add 3 points for each practical innovative feature implemented (maximum 10 points).",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 6,
+      "title": "Are there any redundant features?",
+      "description": "Strictly check three types of redundancy: 1. Redundant implementation of similar functions (e.g., multiple video player instances handling the same stream) 2. Function modules unrelated to drone streaming (e.g., unrelated social sharing features) 3. Fancy effects that affect streaming performance (e.g., unnecessary video filters that increase CPU usage). Deduct 3 points for each redundancy found, and directly deduct 10 points if the core functions are interfered with by redundant code.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 7,
+      "title": "Does the code have engineering quality?",
+      "description": "Review modular design (such as separating drone communication/RTMP server/frontend view layers), unit test coverage, and build process automation. Deduct 5 points if global state pollution is found or design patterns are not used; deduct 5 points if the code duplication rate is too high (over 30%); deduct 5 points if the build process is not automated. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 8,
+      "title": "Does the interface vision meet professional design standards?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the overall design follows modern design principles: 1) Harmonious color matching (no more than 3 primary colors) 2) Proper layout spacing (element spacing follows the 8px multiple principle) 3) Professional font system (body font size ≥ 14px, line height over 1.5 times). Deduct 3 points for each crowded visual element, 5 points for a glaring color combination, and 5 points for chaotic text-image layout. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 9,
+      "title": "Is the streaming performance optimized for real-time operation?",
+      "description": "Judge whether the streaming implementation meets real-time requirements: 1) Latency under 500ms for video feed 2) UI responsiveness maintained during active streaming 3) Efficient resource usage (CPU/memory) on Windows 64-bit systems. Deduct 5 points for each second of stream delay beyond 1 second, 3 points for UI freezing during streaming operations, and 5 points if memory usage grows unchecked during extended operation. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    }
+  ],
+  "class": "Management Systems-Hardware Management",
+  "difficulty": "hard"
+}