@getollie/cli 0.0.1

package/library/multimedia_editing-audio_editing/vocal-removal-from-audio-frontend-application.json

@@ -0,0 +1,68 @@
+{
+  "index": 629,
+  "question": "You are a code expert. Please use your professional knowledge to generate accurate and professional responses. Make sure that the code you generate is executable for demonstration purposes. Develop a frontend application for vocal removal from audio where users can upload audio files containing vocals, click a \"remove vocals\" button to eliminate the vocals from the audio, and then listen to and download the processed audio after completion.",
+  "checklist": [
+    {
+      "id": 0,
+      "title": "Is the audio file upload functionality properly implemented?",
+      "description": "Review if the code includes a proper file upload component with audio format validation (.mp3, .wav, etc.), size limitations, and error handling. Check if the code provides clear feedback on upload progress and success/failure states. Score 0 if not implemented, 5 if only basic upload exists without validation, and 10 if complete with format validation, error handling and visual feedback.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 1,
+      "title": "Is the vocal removal algorithm implementation effective?",
+      "description": "Evaluate the technical implementation of the vocal removal algorithm. Check if it uses proper DSP techniques like center channel isolation, frequency filtering, or phase cancellation. Advanced implementations should include adjustable parameters like frequency ranges or isolation intensity. Deduct 5 points if only using basic stereo channel subtraction without optimizations, 3 points if using pre-built libraries without proper configuration. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 2,
+      "title": "Is the audio processing feedback and progress indication implemented?",
+      "description": "Assess whether the application shows real-time processing status, completion percentage, or estimated time remaining. Check if visual feedback is provided during processing (like waveform visualization or progress bar). Deduct 5 points if the UI freezes during processing without feedback, 3 points if only basic loading indicators are used without specific progress information. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 3,
+      "title": "Is the audio playback and download functionality complete?",
+      "description": "Check if the application implements audio playback controls (play, pause, seek) for both original and processed audio with proper visualization (waveform or spectrum). Verify if the download functionality includes appropriate format options and metadata preservation. Deduct 5 points if playback controls are missing or broken, 3 points if download functionality lacks format options. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 4,
+      "title": "Is the code robust?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the code handles common edge cases like unsupported audio formats, corrupted files, browser compatibility issues, and memory constraints for large audio files. Check if proper error handling and recovery mechanisms exist. 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 audio spectrum visualization 2. Multiple vocal isolation algorithms to choose from 3. Batch processing capabilities 4. Audio quality enhancement options). 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 audio processing functions 2. Function modules unrelated to vocal removal (e.g., unnecessary social sharing features) 3. Fancy effects that affect processing performance. 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 audio processing logic/UI/file handling layers), use of appropriate design patterns, and performance optimization techniques. 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 no optimization for memory usage during audio processing. 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. Deduct 5 points for each operation without feedback, 3 points for jerky animations during audio waveform rendering, and 5 points for hard-to-find key function buttons. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    }
+  ],
+  "class": "Multimedia Editing-Audio Editing",
+  "difficulty": "easy"
+}

package/library/multimedia_editing-audio_editing/vocal-remover-frontend-audio-processing.json

@@ -0,0 +1,68 @@
+{
+  "index": 568,
+  "question": "You are a code expert. Please use your professional knowledge to generate accurate and professional responses. Try to ensure the code you generate is executable.\n\n======== ROLE ========\nYou are an experienced code expert. You are provided with a software development requirement description and asked to generate project code based on these requirements. Strictly follow the rules to help users generate complete project code that is fully commented in simple, easy-to-understand language. Do not output anything else.\n\n======== OUTPUT RULES ========\n1. Always generate complete, runnable project code, ensuring the project is fully executable\n2. Ensure all code files you output are complete without omitting any code\n3. Carefully review and check all code before final output to evaluate its executability. If the code cannot be executed or contains errors, regenerate it\n4. If the requirements involve external API access or need to use user data (images, videos, audio, etc.), provide simulated data\n\n======== PROJECT REQUIREMENT DESCRIPTION ========\nCreate a front-end project for removing vocals from audio. Users can upload audio files containing vocals, and the program will attempt to remove the vocals. After processing, users can listen to and save the instrumental version of the audio.",
+  "checklist": [
+    {
+      "id": 0,
+      "title": "Is the audio file upload and processing system fully implemented?",
+      "description": "Review whether the code accurately implements file upload functionality for audio files, validates file types/sizes, and provides appropriate feedback during the upload process. Check if error handling for invalid files is implemented. Score 0 if the upload functionality is missing, 5 if basic upload is implemented without validation, and 10 if complete with validation, progress indication, and error handling.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 1,
+      "title": "Is the vocal removal algorithm correctly implemented?",
+      "description": "Evaluate the implementation of the vocal removal algorithm. Check if it uses appropriate audio processing techniques (such as center channel elimination, frequency filtering, or machine learning approaches). Verify if the algorithm handles different audio formats and quality levels. Score 0 if no algorithm is implemented, 5 if a basic approach is used but with significant limitations, and 10 if a comprehensive solution with adjustable parameters is provided.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 2,
+      "title": "Is the audio playback functionality complete and user-friendly?",
+      "description": "Check if the code includes proper audio playback controls for both the original and processed audio. This should include play/pause, volume control, seeking capabilities, and display of current playback position/duration. Score 0 if playback is missing, 5 if basic playback is implemented but missing controls, and 10 if all expected features are present with visual feedback.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 3,
+      "title": "Is the audio download/save functionality implemented correctly?",
+      "description": "Review if the code allows users to save/download the processed instrumental audio in appropriate formats. Check if file naming conventions and metadata are handled properly. Score 0 if saving functionality is missing, 5 if basic download is implemented but with limitations, and 10 if the feature is complete with format options and proper metadata preservation.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 4,
+      "title": "Is the code robust?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the code can handle common abnormal situations (such as incompatible audio formats, large file sizes, browser compatibility 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. Realtime visualization of audio waves/spectrum 2. Adjustable parameters for vocal isolation strength 3. Before/after comparison functionality). 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 audio processing libraries doing the same work) 2. Function modules unrelated to audio processing (e.g., unnecessary social media integrations) 3. Fancy effects that affect performance (e.g., excessive animations that slow down audio processing). 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 audio processing logic/UI/file handling), code 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 feedback during audio processing. Deduct 5 points for each operation without feedback, 3 points for laggy UI during audio processing, and 5 points for confusing processing state indicators. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    }
+  ],
+  "class": "Multimedia Editing-Audio Editing",
+  "difficulty": "medium"
+}

package/library/multimedia_editing-audio_editing/vue2-music-player-playlist-loop.json

@@ -0,0 +1,68 @@
+{
+  "index": 1471,
+  "question": "You are a code expert. Please use your professional knowledge to generate accurate and professional responses. Be sure to provide executable code. Use Vue 2.js to create a music player that supports random playlist playback, list loop, and single song loop.",
+  "checklist": [
+    {
+      "id": 0,
+      "title": "Is the music player's core playback functionality fully implemented?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the code implements the essential audio playback controls (play, pause, stop, seek, volume control) using the HTML5 Audio API or a similar technology within Vue 2. Check if proper event listeners are attached for audio events (ended, timeupdate, loadedmetadata). Score 0 if core functionality is missing, 5 if basic controls are present but incomplete, and 10 if all controls work with proper error handling.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 1,
+      "title": "Are all three required playback modes correctly implemented?",
+      "description": "Verify that the code includes proper implementation of: 1) Random playlist playback (with true randomization that doesn't repeat until all songs are played), 2) List loop (sequential playback with return to beginning), and 3) Single song loop. Each mode should have clear state management and visual indicators. Deduct 3 points for each missing mode, 2 points if the randomization algorithm is flawed (e.g., allows immediate repeats), and 2 points if mode switching isn't smooth. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 2,
+      "title": "Is the playlist management system properly designed?",
+      "description": "Assess whether the playlist system allows users to view the current queue, see what's currently playing, and supports basic operations like adding/removing songs. Check if the data structure for managing the playlist is efficient and maintains proper state across playback mode changes. Deduct 5 points if the playlist is hard-coded with no manipulation functions, 3 points if the current song isn't properly highlighted, and 3 points if playlist state isn't preserved when switching modes. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 3,
+      "title": "Is the audio progress tracking and visualization implemented?",
+      "description": "Examine if the player includes a progress bar/timeline that accurately displays song position, allows seeking, and updates in real-time. Check if duration and current time are displayed in minutes:seconds format. Deduct 5 points if seeking functionality is missing, 3 points if the progress visualization doesn't update smoothly, and 3 points if time displays are missing or incorrectly formatted. 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 unavailable audio sources, network interruptions, unsupported audio formats, etc.) and provide friendly error prompts or recovery mechanisms. Check if the player state remains consistent after errors. 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. Visualizations that respond to audio frequency 2. Lyrics display synchronized with the track 3. Playlist sorting/filtering options 4. Keyboard shortcuts for playback control). 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 volume control methods coexisting) 2. Function modules unrelated to music playback (e.g., unnecessary external services) 3. Fancy effects that affect performance (e.g., heavy animations that cause lag during playback). 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 audio handling logic/UI components/state management), component reusability, and Vue best practices like proper lifecycle hooks usage and computed properties. Deduct 5 points if global state is managed poorly or Vue reactivity isn't leveraged properly; deduct 5 points if the code has high duplication; deduct 5 points if prop drilling is excessive instead of using a proper state management pattern. 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). Check if the player has a consistent visual language and clear visual hierarchy. Deduct 3 points for each crowded visual element, 5 points for a glaring color combination, and 5 points for chaotic control placement. 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 animations controlled between 300-500ms 3) Clear visual feedback when changing modes or songs. Examine if hover states and active states are visually distinct. Deduct 5 points for each operation without feedback, 3 points for jerky animations during mode changes, and 5 points for controls that don't clearly indicate their current state. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    }
+  ],
+  "class": "Multimedia Editing-Audio Editing",
+  "difficulty": "easy"
+}

package/library/multimedia_editing-audio_editing/web-based-audio-sampler-sequencer.json

@@ -0,0 +1,68 @@
+{
+  "index": 531,
+  "question": "You are a code expert, please use your professional knowledge to generate accurate and professional responses. Try to ensure the generated code is executable for demonstration. ======== ROLE ========\nYou are an experienced code expert. I'm providing you with a software development requirement description, and you need to generate project code based on these requirements. Strictly follow the rules to help users generate complete project code with simple and easy-to-understand language comments, without outputting anything else.\n\n======== OUTPUT RULES ========\n1. You should always generate complete, runnable project code, ensuring the project is fully executable\n2. Ensure all code files you output are complete, don't omit any code\n3. Carefully review and check all code before final output, evaluating its executability. If the code cannot execute or contains errors, regenerate it\n4. If the requirements involve external API access or user data (images, videos, audio, etc.), please provide mock data\n\n======== PROJECT REQUIREMENTS ========\nDevelop a web-based audio sampler that supports loading multiple drum kit samples (Kick/Snare/HiHat). Implement a 16-step sequencer where each step can trigger different samples, with support for adjusting BPM and volume/pan for each sample.",
+  "checklist": [
+    {
+      "id": 0,
+      "title": "Is the audio loading mechanism properly implemented?",
+      "description": "Check whether the code correctly implements audio sample loading using Web Audio API, supports multiple drum kit samples (at minimum Kick, Snare, and HiHat), and handles audio file loading states properly. Verify error handling for failed audio loads and format compatibility (mp3, wav, etc.).0 points if audio loading is missing, 5 points if only basic loading exists without error handling, 10 points if comprehensive with preloading optimization and proper error handling.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 1,
+      "title": "Is the 16-step sequencer correctly implemented?",
+      "description": "Evaluate if the sequencer properly implements a 16-step grid interface where users can toggle steps for each drum sample. The sequencer should visually indicate the current playing step, support proper timing based on BPM, and maintain accurate playback timing using requestAnimationFrame or precise timers instead of setTimeout.0 points if the sequencer is missing/non-functional, 5 points for basic implementation with timing issues, 10 points for a robust implementation with sample-accurate timing and visual feedback.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 2,
+      "title": "Is the BPM adjustment functionality implemented?",
+      "description": "Check if the code provides an interface to adjust tempo (BPM), whether it correctly calculates note timing based on BPM changes, and if it handles transitions between tempos smoothly without audio glitches. The implementation should support a reasonable range (e.g., 60-200 BPM).0 points if BPM control is missing, 5 points for basic implementation with calculation issues, 10 points for fully functional BPM control with smooth transitions.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 3,
+      "title": "Are volume and pan controls for each sample implemented?",
+      "description": "Verify if each drum sample has individual volume and pan controls that affect audio output in real-time. Check if the controls use appropriate Web Audio API nodes (GainNode for volume, StereoPannerNode for pan) and update parameter values smoothly without clicks or pops.0 points if controls are missing, 5 points if only basic implementation without smooth transitions, 10 points for complete implementation with visualization and smooth parameter changes.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 4,
+      "title": "Is the code robust?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the code can handle common abnormal situations (such as audio context suspension on mobile devices, browser autoplay restrictions, audio buffer errors, etc.) and provide friendly error prompts or recovery mechanisms. Check if there's a fallback mechanism when Web Audio API is not supported.0 points if no exception handling exists, 5 points if basic error handling is implemented, 10 points for comprehensive error handling with user-friendly recovery options.",
+      "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. Pattern saving/loading functionality 2. Sample replacement/customization 3. Audio effects like reverb/delay 4. MIDI export). Each practical innovative feature earns additional points.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 for: 1. Redundant implementation of similar audio functions (e.g., multiple volume control mechanisms) 2. Function modules unrelated to audio sampling (e.g., unnecessary visual effects) 3. Performance-heavy features that affect audio timing (e.g., excessive animations during playback).Deduct 3 points for each redundancy found, and directly deduct 10 points if the core audio 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 audio engine/UI/state management), appropriate use of design patterns, code reusability, and performance optimization for audio processing. Check if audio worklets or workers are used for performance-critical tasks where appropriate.Deduct 5 points if global state pollution is found; deduct 5 points if the code has high duplication; deduct 5 points if audio processing blocks the main thread unnecessarily. 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 music application design principles: 1) Clear visual indication of steps and playback position 2) Proper contrast between active and inactive steps 3) Professional layout of controls with logical grouping. Check if the interface is intuitive for music production.Deduct 3 points for each confusing UI element, 5 points for poor readability of sequencer states, and 5 points for illogically placed controls. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 9,
+      "title": "Is the audio performance smooth and responsive?",
+      "description": "Judge whether the audio engine performs according to industry standards: 1) Audio latency ≤ 20ms 2) No audible clicks or pops during playback 3) Smooth timing even when UI is busy 4) Sample triggering is precisely timed according to musical grid. Check for buffer underruns or timing drift during extended playback.Deduct 5 points for audible latency issues, 3 points for occasional timing glitches, and 5 points for unstable playback under load. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    }
+  ],
+  "class": "Multimedia Editing-Audio Editing",
+  "difficulty": "hard"
+}

package/library/multimedia_editing-audio_editing/web-based-sound-effects-library-with-preview-and-download.json

@@ -0,0 +1,68 @@
+{
+  "index": 613,
+  "question": "You are a code expert. Please use your professional knowledge to generate accurate and professional responses. Make sure the generated code is executable whenever possible. Create a web-based sound effects library where users can browse various preset sound effects (such as transition effects, ambient sounds), preview them, and download or apply selected effects to their own audio projects.",
+  "checklist": [
+    {
+      "id": 0,
+      "title": "Is the sound library core system fully implemented?",
+      "description": "Review whether the code accurately implements the sound library architecture, including categorization of sound effects, audio playback engine, and preview functionality. Score 0 if the core audio playback is not implemented, 5 if only basic playback is implemented without proper controls, and 10 if the system includes comprehensive playback with volume control, seeking, and visualization.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 1,
+      "title": "Is the sound effects browsing system efficiently designed?",
+      "description": "Check if the interface implements intuitive browsing capabilities with proper categorization (e.g., transitions, ambient, UI sounds), tagging system, search functionality, and filtering options. Deduct 3 points if search functionality is missing, 4 points if there's no categorization system, and 3 points if filtering options are absent. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 2,
+      "title": "Is the preview system well-implemented?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether users can preview sound effects before downloading, including visual waveform representation, playback controls (play/pause/stop), and the ability to loop sounds. Check if preview quality matches download quality. Deduct 5 points if waveform visualization is missing, 3 points if loop functionality is absent, and 2 points if preview quality is significantly lower. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 3,
+      "title": "Are download and project application features properly implemented?",
+      "description": "Check whether the code provides functionality to download individual or multiple sound effects in common formats (WAV, MP3) and the ability to apply selected effects to audio projects (e.g., timeline integration, batch processing). Deduct 3 points for each missing download format, 5 points if there's no batch download option, and 4 points if project application functionality is incomplete. 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 unsupported audio formats, browser audio limitations, simultaneous playback 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. Real-time audio effects/filters 2. Customizable sound mixer for layering effects 3. Audio fingerprinting for similar sound recommendation). 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 audio players with overlapping capabilities) 2. Function modules unrelated to sound effects library (e.g., extensive video editing features) 3. Fancy effects that affect audio performance (e.g., excessive animations during playback). 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 audio processing/UI/data management 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 dynamic interaction smooth and seamless?",
+      "description": "Judge whether the dynamic effects conform to human perception characteristics: 1) Audio playback starts within 100ms of click 2) Transition animations between library sections controlled between 300-500ms 3) Clear visual feedback during sound playback. Deduct 5 points for each operation without feedback, 3 points for laggy audio playback response, and 5 points for unintuitive audio control interfaces. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    }
+  ],
+  "class": "Multimedia Editing-Audio Editing",
+  "difficulty": "hard"
+}

package/library/multimedia_editing-audio_editing/web-microphone-audio-recorder-tool.json

@@ -0,0 +1,68 @@
+{
+  "index": 582,
+  "question": "You are a code expert, please use your professional knowledge to generate accurate, professional responses. Be sure to provide executable code in your examples. Implement a web tool that allows users to record local audio (such as microphone input), with features for recording, pausing, re-recording, and saving as an audio file.",
+  "checklist": [
+    {
+      "id": 0,
+      "title": "Is the audio recording functionality fully implemented?",
+      "description": "Review whether the code accurately implements the core MediaRecorder API with proper event handling for starting, stopping, and capturing audio data. Check if the microphone access permission is properly requested and errors are handled. Score 0 if recording functionality is missing, 5 if basic recording works with issues, and 10 for a complete implementation with proper state management.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 1,
+      "title": "Are all required recording control features implemented?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the code implements all specified features: recording, pausing, re-recording (discarding current recording and starting fresh), and saving as an audio file. Deduct 2.5 points for each missing feature. Check if the state transitions between these operations are handled correctly (e.g., can't pause before recording starts). The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 2,
+      "title": "Is the audio file saving functionality properly implemented?",
+      "description": "Check whether the tool allows users to save recorded audio in common formats (like MP3, WAV, or WebM) with appropriate file naming options. Verify that the implementation uses proper Blob handling and download mechanisms. Deduct 5 points if only one format is supported, 7 points if the download mechanism is flawed, and 10 points if saving functionality is missing completely.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 3,
+      "title": "Is there proper audio visualization feedback during recording?",
+      "description": "Assess whether the code includes visual feedback during recording (such as audio waveform, volume meter, or recording time display). Check if the AudioContext API is used for visualization. Deduct 5 points if there's no visual feedback, 3 points if the visualization is basic (just a recording indicator), and give full 10 points if there's real-time waveform or frequency visualization.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 4,
+      "title": "Is the code robust?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the code can handle common abnormal situations (such as microphone permission denial, unsupported browsers, device disconnection during recording, 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. Audio effects/filters 2. Automatic transcription integration 3. Multiple recording track mixing). 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 save files) 2. Function modules unrelated to audio recording (e.g., irrelevant media players) 3. Fancy effects that affect performance (e.g., excessive animations that impact recording quality). 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 UI/recording logic/file handling), code organization, and error handling. 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 there's no proper error handling or console debugging. 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) Clear visual state changes when recording starts/stops/pauses 3) Intuitive button placement and state indication. Deduct 5 points for each operation without feedback, 3 points for confusing state transitions, and 5 points for hard-to-find key function buttons. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    }
+  ],
+  "class": "Multimedia Editing-Audio Editing",
+  "difficulty": "easy"
+}

package/library/multimedia_editing-image_editing/2d-product-drawings-sky-blue-background.json

@@ -0,0 +1,68 @@
+{
+  "index": 1597,
+  "question": "You are a code expert. Please use your professional knowledge to generate accurate and professional responses. Make sure the generated code is executable for demonstration purposes. I also need to insert 2D product drawings, import some images, and use a sky-blue tech style background. The company name is Sichuan Yagaozhi Intelligent Equipment Co., Ltd. Please rewrite a more detailed programming solution and implementation steps.",
+  "checklist": [
+    {
+      "id": 0,
+      "title": "Is the 2D product drawing functionality fully implemented?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the code includes a complete 2D drawing system with capabilities for lines, curves, dimensions, and annotations. The implementation should include zoom/pan controls, grid snapping, and proper coordinate system. Score 0 if no drawing functionality exists, 5 if basic shapes are supported but without proper editing tools, and 10 if a professional-level CAD-like drawing system is implemented.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 1,
+      "title": "Is the image import and manipulation functionality properly implemented?",
+      "description": "Check whether the code handles various image formats (JPG, PNG, SVG), includes proper error handling for failed imports, and offers basic image manipulation (resize, crop, rotate). Verify if the implementation includes proper memory management for large images and maintains image quality. Deduct 3 points if format support is limited, 4 points if manipulation tools are missing, and 3 points if there's no error handling for imports. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 2,
+      "title": "Is the sky-blue tech style background properly implemented?",
+      "description": "Assess whether the background implementation includes proper gradients or patterns that evoke a high-tech feel, with consistent sky-blue theming. Check if the background adapts to different screen sizes and resolutions without distortion. Verify if it includes subtle animations or patterns that enhance but don't distract from the main content. Deduct 5 points for static non-responsive backgrounds, 3 points for inconsistent theming, and 2 points for performance issues. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 3,
+      "title": "Is the company branding (Sichuan Yagaozhi Intelligent Equipment Co., Ltd.) properly integrated?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the company name and branding elements are consistently applied throughout the interface. Check for proper logo placement, consistent typography, appropriate prominence without overwhelming the interface, and localization support if needed. Deduct 3 points for inconsistent branding, 4 points for poor visibility/readability, and 3 points if branding interferes with functionality. 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 invalid input data, network interruption, user operation errors, 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. Interactive 3D previews generated from 2D drawings 2. AI-assisted design recommendations 3. Collaborative real-time editing capabilities). 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 drawing tools that do the same thing) 2. Function modules unrelated to the core requirements (e.g., unnecessary animations or widgets) 3. Fancy effects that affect performance (e.g., excessive particle effects or transitions). 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 drawing logic/UI/data management 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 with the sky-blue tech theme (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. Deduct 5 points for each operation without feedback, 3 points for visual after-images during fast sliding, and 5 points for hard-to-find key function buttons. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    }
+  ],
+  "class": "Multimedia Editing-Image Editing",
+  "difficulty": "medium"
+}

package/library/multimedia_editing-image_editing/360-degree-panoramic-stitching-system.json

@@ -0,0 +1,68 @@
+{
+  "index": 1089,
+  "question": "You are a code expert. Please use your professional knowledge to generate accurate and professional responses. Be sure the code you generate is executable and demonstrable. Write a 360-degree panoramic stitching system.",
+  "checklist": [
+    {
+      "id": 0,
+      "title": "Is the panoramic image capture and stitching core functionality implemented?",
+      "description": "Examine whether the code implements essential panoramic stitching algorithms (feature detection, feature matching, homography estimation, and blending). Check if it handles proper feature detection (SIFT, SURF, ORB) and robust matching techniques (RANSAC). Score 0 if core stitching is missing, 5 if basic stitching is implemented but with visible seams, and 10 if the stitching produces seamless panoramas with proper cylindrical/spherical projection.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 1,
+      "title": "Is the 360-degree coverage properly handled?",
+      "description": "Verify that the system can stitch images into a complete 360-degree panorama, handling the wrapping at borders correctly. Check whether the code incorporates proper spherical or cylindrical projections to minimize distortion at poles. Deduct 5 points if the system can only handle partial panoramas, 3 points if border blending has noticeable artifacts, and 2 points if extreme viewing angles show warping issues. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 2,
+      "title": "Is there a robust image alignment and blending system?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the code implements advanced blending techniques (multi-band blending, gradient-domain blending) to handle exposure differences between images. Check if the alignment system can handle parallax errors and ghosting from moving objects. Deduct 5 points if seams are visible between images, 3 points if exposure compensation is missing, and 3 points if there's no handling for moving objects. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 3,
+      "title": "Is there an interactive viewing interface for the panoramas?",
+      "description": "Check if the system provides an interactive viewer (WebGL, Three.js, etc.) that allows users to navigate the 360-degree panorama with mouse/touch controls. Verify if the viewer implements proper perspective correction, smooth rotation, and zoom functionality. Deduct 5 points if navigation controls are missing, 3 points if the viewing experience is jerky/non-responsive, and 3 points if projection distortions aren't corrected during viewing. 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 low-feature images, extreme exposure differences, insufficient overlap between images, etc.) and provide friendly error prompts or recovery mechanisms. Check if there are validations for input images and graceful failure handling. 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. Auto-exposure compensation across images 2. Removal of moving objects from panoramas 3. HDR panorama support 4. Real-time stitching preview). 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 algorithms (e.g., multiple feature detectors running in parallel without purpose) 2. Function modules unrelated to panorama stitching (e.g., unnecessary image filters) 3. Computationally expensive processes that add little value (e.g., excessive resolution processing beyond viewing requirements). 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 image processing/visualization/user interaction layers), algorithm optimization, memory management for large panoramas, and multithreading usage. Deduct 5 points if global state pollution is found or design patterns are not used; deduct 5 points if the code lacks optimization for large images; deduct 5 points if there's no parallelization for computationally intensive tasks. 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 panorama viewing experience meets professional standards: 1) Responsive panning/zooming (≤ 60ms latency) 2) Smooth transitions between zoom levels 3) Intuitive navigation controls with visual feedback. Deduct 5 points for jerky panorama movement, 3 points for delayed response to user input, and 5 points for unintuitive navigation controls. Check if the panorama dynamically loads higher resolution tiles as needed without visible popping. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    }
+  ],
+  "class": "Multimedia Editing-Image Editing",
+  "difficulty": "hard"
+}