@getollie/cli 0.0.1

package/library/multimedia_editing-video_production/android-soccer-video-top-down-view.json

@@ -0,0 +1,68 @@
+{
+  "index": 374,
+  "question": "You are a code expert, please use your professional knowledge to generate accurate and professional responses. Make sure the code you provide is executable for demonstration. Implement a Java solution for Android that loads local soccer video files and generates a top-down view (sandbox view). Please provide complete code that is error-free.",
+  "checklist": [
+    {
+      "id": 0,
+      "title": "Is the Android video loading mechanism fully implemented?",
+      "description": "Review whether the code correctly implements video file loading using MediaPlayer/ExoPlayer/VideoView with proper Android lifecycle management. Check if it includes file format validation (MP4/AVI/MOV), storage permission handling, and video metadata extraction. Score 0 if core video loading fails, 5 if only basic playback works without format validation, and 10 if all video formats are supported with proper error handling and metadata parsing.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 1,
+      "title": "Is the top-down view transformation algorithm correctly implemented?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the perspective transformation from standard soccer video to top-down sandbox view is mathematically accurate. Check if homography matrix calculation, field corner detection, and real-time frame processing are implemented. The algorithm should handle camera angle variations and field distortion correction. Deduct 5 points if transformation is inaccurate, 3 points if field boundaries are not properly detected. Full score requires smooth real-time processing at ≥24fps.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 2,
+      "title": "Is the computer vision processing pipeline optimized for Android?",
+      "description": "Check whether OpenCV or equivalent CV library integration is properly configured for Android with native NDK optimization. Evaluate if player/ball tracking, field line detection, and coordinate mapping are implemented efficiently. Verify GPU acceleration usage and memory management for video processing. Deduct 5 points if processing causes UI freezing, 3 points if memory leaks are detected during continuous playback.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 3,
+      "title": "Is the sandbox view rendering system complete?",
+      "description": "Assess whether the top-down field visualization includes accurate player position mapping, trajectory tracking, and field proportions. Check if the rendering uses Canvas/OpenGL ES with smooth animations and real-time updates synchronized with video playback. Verify if tactical overlays, player identification, and minimap functionality are implemented. Give 10 points for complete sandbox features, 5 for basic position mapping only.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 4,
+      "title": "Is the code robust?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the code can handle common abnormal situations (such as corrupted video files, insufficient memory, device orientation changes, app backgrounding, etc.) and provide friendly error prompts or recovery mechanisms. Code with strong robustness should effectively handle these edge cases and maintain stable performance across different Android devices, giving 10 points. If 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 tactical analysis overlay 2. Player heatmap generation 3. Speed/distance statistics 4. Multi-angle view synchronization 5. Gesture-controlled playback). Add 3 points for each practical innovative feature implemented that adds genuine value to soccer video analysis (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 decoders coexisting) 2. Function modules unrelated to soccer video analysis (e.g., built-in social media sharing) 3. Heavy processing that affects performance (e.g., unnecessary high-resolution transformations). Deduct 3 points for each redundancy found, and directly deduct 10 points if core video processing is interfered with by redundant code.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 7,
+      "title": "Does the code have engineering quality?",
+      "description": "Review Android-specific engineering practices: proper Activity/Fragment lifecycle management, AsyncTask/Executor usage for background processing, ProGuard configuration, and modular architecture (MVP/MVVM). Check memory leak prevention, proper resource disposal, and build.gradle optimization. Deduct 5 points if ANR risks are found; deduct 5 points if code duplication rate exceeds 30%; deduct 5 points if no proper threading architecture. Full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 8,
+      "title": "Does the interface vision meet professional design standards?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the Android UI follows Material Design principles: 1) Consistent color scheme following soccer field aesthetics (green field, white lines) 2) Proper touch target sizes (≥48dp) and spacing following 8dp grid 3) Professional typography using Roboto font family with readable sizes (≥14sp). Deduct 3 points for each crowded visual element, 5 points for non-Material Design patterns, and 5 points for poor contrast ratios affecting readability.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 9,
+      "title": "Is the dynamic interaction smooth and seamless?",
+      "description": "Judge whether the Android app interactions meet performance standards: 1) Touch response delay ≤100ms for all controls 2) Video seeking and transformation updates within 200ms 3) Smooth 60fps UI animations with proper motion curves 4) Intuitive gesture controls for zoom/pan in sandbox view. Deduct 5 points for each laggy interaction, 3 points for stuttering video playback, and 5 points for unresponsive touch controls during processing.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    }
+  ],
+  "class": "Multimedia Editing-Video Production",
+  "difficulty": "hard"
+}

package/library/multimedia_editing-video_production/animation-video-production-tool.json

@@ -0,0 +1,68 @@
+{
+  "index": 497,
+  "question": "You are a code expert, please use your professional knowledge to generate accurate and professional responses. Make sure the generated code is executable and can be demonstrated. ======== Role ========\nYou are an experienced code expert. Given a software development requirement description, you are required to generate project code based on the project requirements. Strictly follow the rules to help users generate complete project code that is thoroughly commented in simple, easy-to-understand language, without outputting 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, do not omit any code\n3. Before final output, carefully review and check all code, evaluating its executability. If the code cannot be executed or contains errors, it needs to be regenerated\n4. If the requirements involve external API access or the use of user data (images, videos, audio, etc.), please provide simulated data\n\n======== Project Requirements ========\nPlease create an animation video production tool where users can drag and drop animation elements (such as shapes, text, icons, etc.) onto a timeline, set animation effects (such as movement, scaling, rotation) and timing, and ultimately generate videos with animation effects.",
+  "checklist": [
+    {
+      "id": 0,
+      "title": "Is the animation timeline implementation complete?",
+      "description": "Review whether the code implements a functional timeline with proper time tracking, frames/keyframes, and playback control (play, pause, stop, seek). Check if the timeline supports multiple layers and tracks for different elements. Score 0 if the timeline is not implemented, 5 if basic timeline functionality exists but lacks advanced features, and 10 if it has complete timeline controls with visual representation and scrubbing capabilities.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 1,
+      "title": "Are the drag-and-drop animation elements fully implemented?",
+      "description": "Evaluate the implementation of the drag-and-drop system for animation elements. Check if users can drag shapes, text, icons, and other elements onto the canvas. Verify if the elements maintain their properties and can be selected, moved, and modified after placement. Score 0 if drag-and-drop is not implemented, 5 if basic functionality exists but with limitations, and 10 if the system is robust with multiple element types and intuitive interaction.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 2,
+      "title": "Are animation effects and property manipulations properly implemented?",
+      "description": "Check if the code supports essential animation effects (movement, scaling, rotation, opacity) with proper interpolation between keyframes. Verify if users can set timing functions (ease-in, ease-out, linear, etc.) and if property changes are properly calculated and displayed. Score 0 if animation effects are missing, 5 if basic effects are implemented but lack customization options, and 10 if comprehensive animation controls are available with preview capabilities.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 3,
+      "title": "Is the video export functionality fully implemented?",
+      "description": "Review the implementation of the video rendering and export pipeline. Check if the code can properly convert animation sequences into video frames and compile them into standard video formats (MP4, WebM). Verify if export settings (resolution, framerate, quality) can be configured. Score 0 if export functionality is missing, 5 if basic export exists but with format limitations, and 10 if comprehensive export options are available with progress feedback.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 4,
+      "title": "Is the code robust?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the code can handle common abnormal situations (such as invalid user inputs, resource loading failures, memory constraints with large projects, 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. Template library for quick animation creation 2. AI-assisted animation suggestions 3. Visual effects library with presets). 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 methods to achieve the same animation effect) 2. Function modules unrelated to animation creation (e.g., a built-in file manager) 3. Fancy effects that affect performance (e.g., excessive background animations in the UI). 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 animation engine/UI/rendering pipeline), 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) 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 scrubbing or preview, and 5 points for hard-to-find key function buttons. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    }
+  ],
+  "class": "Multimedia Editing-Video Production",
+  "difficulty": "hard"
+}

package/library/multimedia_editing-video_production/arsenal-players-promo-animation.json

@@ -0,0 +1,68 @@
+{
+  "index": 1378,
+  "question": "You are a code expert. Please use your professional knowledge to generate accurate and professional responses. Make sure the code you generate is executable for display. Help me create an animation promotional video code for Arsenal Football Club, requiring the visual representation of the team's players.",
+  "checklist": [
+    {
+      "id": 0,
+      "title": "Is the Arsenal FC theme and branding accurately implemented?",
+      "description": "Check whether the code properly incorporates Arsenal's official colors (red #EF0107, navy blue #063672, white #FFFFFF), logo, and typography. The animation should maintain Arsenal's brand identity throughout. Deduct 5 points if incorrect colors are used, 3 points if the logo is distorted or missing, and 2 points if typography doesn't match Arsenal's official fonts. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 1,
+      "title": "Are Arsenal players visually represented with accuracy?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether player representations (images, illustrations, or 3D models) are high quality, recognizable, and current (using active squad members). Player names and numbers should be accurate. Score 10 points for detailed, professional player representations; 5 points if players are generic or outdated; 0 points if players are unrecognizable or missing entirely.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 2,
+      "title": "Is the animation sequence professionally implemented?",
+      "description": "Review the animation framework implementation (CSS animations, Canvas, SVG animations, or WebGL). Check for smooth keyframes, proper easing functions, and synchronized timing. Deduct 3 points for jerky transitions, 4 points for frame rate drops below 30fps, and 3 points if the animation lacks proper sequencing. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 3,
+      "title": "Does the promotional video have a coherent narrative structure?",
+      "description": "Assess whether the animation tells a compelling story about Arsenal FC (team achievements, player highlights, upcoming matches, etc.). The narrative should have a clear beginning, middle, and end. Score 10 points for a complete narrative with logical flow; 5 points for basic narrative elements without cohesion; 0 points if the animation lacks any storytelling elements.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 4,
+      "title": "Is the code robust?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the code can handle common abnormal situations (such as image loading failures, browser compatibility issues, responsive layout problems, etc.) and provide fallback 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 player statistics on hover/click 2. Dynamic camera movements or 3D scene transitions 3. User-controlled playback options or interactive elements). 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 animation effects that overlap or conflict 2. Unnecessary code bloat unrelated to the Arsenal promotion 3. Heavy effects that severely impact performance without adding value. Deduct 3 points for each redundancy found, and directly deduct 10 points if the core promotional message is obscured by redundant elements.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 7,
+      "title": "Does the code have engineering quality?",
+      "description": "Review modular design (such as separating animation logic/assets/control layers), performance optimization techniques, and resource loading strategies. Deduct 5 points if global namespace pollution is found; deduct 5 points if the code lacks comments or documentation; deduct 5 points if resources aren't properly optimized for web delivery. 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) Arsenal's brand guidelines implementation 2) Proper visual hierarchy and focal points 3) Professional motion design principles (ease-in/out, proper timing). Deduct 3 points for each inconsistent visual element, 5 points for poor composition or framing, and 5 points for amateur motion design. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 9,
+      "title": "Is the dynamic interaction smooth and seamless?",
+      "description": "Judge whether the animation performs well across devices: 1) Consistent frame rate (60fps target) 2) Smooth transitions between scenes 3) Appropriate loading indicators and initialization. Deduct 5 points for stuttering animations, 3 points for long unoptimized loading times, and 5 points for lack of responsiveness across different screen sizes. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    }
+  ],
+  "class": "Multimedia Editing-Video Production",
+  "difficulty": "hard"
+}

package/library/multimedia_editing-video_production/audio-video-synchronization-tool.json

@@ -0,0 +1,68 @@
+{
+  "index": 501,
+  "question": "You are a code expert. Please use your professional knowledge to generate accurate and professional responses. Take care to ensure that the generated code is executable for demonstration. Implement an audio-video synchronization tool that allows users to upload video and audio files, adjust the starting point of audio playback to synchronize with the video, and finally merge them to generate a new video that supports downloading.",
+  "checklist": [
+    {
+      "id": 0,
+      "title": "Is the file upload and validation system properly implemented?",
+      "description": "Check whether the code implements a robust file upload mechanism with proper MIME type validation for video and audio files. Verify that it handles common video formats (MP4, WebM, MOV) and audio formats (MP3, WAV, AAC). Deduct 5 points if file size limitations are missing, 3 points if MIME validation is incomplete, and 5 points if there's no feedback during upload progress. Score 10 points for complete implementation with error handling.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 1,
+      "title": "Is the audio-video playback preview functionality working correctly?",
+      "description": "Assess whether the code implements proper HTML5 media elements or custom players for both video and audio preview. Check if the playback controls are intuitive and if time displays are accurate. Verify that preview works across major browsers. Score 0 if preview functionality is missing, 5 if basic playback works but has synchronization issues, and 10 if preview provides frame-accurate visualization with proper time indicators.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 2,
+      "title": "Is the audio synchronization adjustment mechanism implemented effectively?",
+      "description": "Review whether the code provides precise controls to adjust audio timing relative to video (frame-level accuracy). Check if the interface includes millisecond-level input options, visual waveform representation, or keyframe markers. Verify that changes in synchronization are immediately reflected in preview. Deduct 5 points if synchronization granularity exceeds 100ms, 3 points if no visual feedback is provided. Score 10 points for implementation with frame-accurate controls.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 3,
+      "title": "Is the final audio-video merging and download functionality implemented?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the code implements proper video processing using WebAssembly, server-side processing, or browser APIs (like MediaRecorder) for merging audio and video. Check if the solution handles different codecs and if progress indicators are provided during processing. Verify download functionality with proper file naming. Score 0 if merging is not implemented, 5 if basic merging works but quality is compromised, and 10 if high-quality output with proper metadata is produced.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 4,
+      "title": "Is the code robust?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the code can handle common abnormal situations (such as incompatible file formats, processing failures, browser inconsistencies, etc.) and provide friendly error prompts or recovery mechanisms. Code with strong robustness should effectively handle edge cases like interrupted uploads, memory limitations, and codec compatibility issues. Score 10 points if all exceptions are properly handled with recovery options, 5 points if basic error handling exists, and 0 points if exceptions crash the application.",
+      "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. Automatic audio beat detection for synchronization suggestions 2. Visual waveform representation aligned with video timeline 3. Batch processing multiple audio tracks). 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 loaded) 2. Function modules unrelated to audio-video synchronization (e.g., unnecessary social sharing buttons) 3. Fancy effects that affect performance (e.g., excessive animations that slow down 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 media handling/UI/processing 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 (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-Video Production",
+  "difficulty": "hard"
+}

package/library/multimedia_editing-video_production/browser-video-recorder-editor-tool.json

@@ -0,0 +1,68 @@
+{
+  "index": 523,
+  "question": "You are a code expert, please use your professional knowledge to generate accurate and professional responses. Be sure to ensure the code you provide is executable for demonstration. Develop a browser-based real-time video recording and editing tool that allows users to record video through their camera, perform basic editing (cutting, merging), add text and filters, preview editing effects in real-time, and export the recorded video.",
+  "checklist": [
+    {
+      "id": 0,
+      "title": "Is the video recording functionality properly implemented?",
+      "description": "Check if the code correctly implements the MediaStream API to access the user's camera, creates a robust MediaRecorder implementation for video capture, and handles permission requests gracefully. Score 0 if there's no video recording functionality, 5 if basic recording works but lacks error handling, and 10 if it includes proper permission handling, recording indicators, and fallback mechanisms for unsupported browsers.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 1,
+      "title": "Are the basic video editing features (cutting, merging) implemented?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the code properly implements video segment manipulation using techniques like Web Workers for processing or browser-native APIs. Check if it can accurately cut video at specified timestamps and merge multiple clips together. Deduct 5 points if the editing causes quality loss, 3 points if the editing operations aren't precise to the frame level, and 3 points if preview generation of edits is slow (>500ms). The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 2,
+      "title": "Is text overlay and filter application functionality effective?",
+      "description": "Review the implementation of text overlays (including font selection, positioning, timing control) and filter effects (using CSS filters, WebGL, or canvas-based processing). Assess if text can be styled, positioned, and timed properly, and if filters are applied efficiently without significant performance degradation. Deduct 3 points if text positioning is imprecise, 3 points if filter previews aren't real-time, and 4 points if there's no keyframe support for text/filter timing. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 3,
+      "title": "Does the solution provide real-time preview of all editing effects?",
+      "description": "Check if the implementation provides immediate visual feedback for all editing operations without significant lag (<100ms delay). Verify that the preview accurately represents the final output and updates dynamically as users make changes. Deduct 5 points if the preview isn't representative of the final export, 5 points if there's noticeable lag (>250ms) when applying complex effects, and 3 points if the preview doesn't update automatically with edits. 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 camera access denial, browser compatibility issues, memory limitations during processing, unexpected user interactions) 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. AI-assisted automatic cutting 2. Audio visualization overlays 3. Motion tracking for text/effects 4. One-click social media optimization). 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 filter systems coexisting) 2. Function modules unrelated to video editing (e.g., a built-in file manager) 3. Fancy effects that affect performance (e.g., excessive background 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 recording/editing/preview/export modules), memory management strategies for video processing, and error handling. Deduct 5 points if global state pollution is found or design patterns are not used; deduct 5 points if memory leaks are found when handling large videos; deduct 5 points if there's no structured error handling. 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 visual after-images during timeline scrubbing, and 5 points for difficult-to-access key editing tools. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    }
+  ],
+  "class": "Multimedia Editing-Video Production",
+  "difficulty": "hard"
+}

package/library/multimedia_editing-video_production/face-api-video-enhancement-webpage.json

@@ -0,0 +1,68 @@
+{
+  "index": 1428,
+  "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 for demonstration. Using JS, write a complete webpage that uses face-api.js to automatically enhance people in camera video, including face slimming, skin whitening, eye enlargement, makeup changing, outfit changing and other features. Display a final output video window that is complete, aesthetically pleasing, perfect, smooth, and seamless. Use the latest technology with complete usable source code. Pay attention to details, make the interface beautiful with a sci-fi style, at a product-grade level.",
+  "checklist": [
+    {
+      "id": 0,
+      "title": "Is face detection and tracking correctly implemented using face-api.js?",
+      "description": "Verify if the code correctly integrates face-api.js for robust face detection and tracking. Check if it loads the required models (SSD MobileNet, facial landmarks, etc.), handles multiple faces, and maintains tracking between frames. Score 0 if basic face detection is missing, 5 if only basic detection works, and 10 if detection includes accurate landmark tracking with proper error handling for lighting variations and partial face visibility.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 1,
+      "title": "Are all required beauty enhancement features fully implemented?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the code implements all requested beauty features (face slimming, skin whitening, eye enlargement, makeup changing, outfit changing). Check if each effect uses appropriate algorithms: face slimming should use mesh warping with landmark controls; skin whitening needs color correction with tone preservation; eye enlargement should use proportional landmark manipulation; makeup should utilize layer blending with alpha masks; outfit changing requires body segmentation and virtual try-on. Deduct 2 points for each missing feature or 1 point if poorly implemented. Full score requires all features with smooth transitions between them.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 2,
+      "title": "Is the real-time video processing optimized for performance?",
+      "description": "Assess whether the code employs optimization techniques for smooth real-time processing (target of 30+ FPS). Check for: worker thread utilization for computation-heavy tasks, WebGL/GPU acceleration for filters, downsampling during heavy processing, keyframe interval optimization, and proper memory management to prevent leaks. Score 10 if processing runs at 30+ FPS on mid-range hardware with negligible latency, 5 if noticeable but usable lag exists, and 0 if processing causes severe frame drops or browser crashes.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 3,
+      "title": "Does the application provide user controls for adjusting enhancement parameters?",
+      "description": "Check if the interface provides intuitive controls for users to adjust the intensity and parameters of each enhancement feature. Each effect should have at least a basic intensity slider, and advanced options where appropriate. Score 10 if controls include: real-time preview, presets, individual feature toggles, intensity sliders with numerical values, and ability to save custom settings. Deduct 2 points for each major control type missing, and 5 points if parameters can't be adjusted at all.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 4,
+      "title": "Is the code robust?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the code can handle common abnormal situations (such as camera access denial, unsupported browser, face not detected, poor lighting conditions, 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. AR accessories overlay 2. Expression-triggered effects 3. Background replacement/blurring 4. Beauty filter history/comparison). 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 filters (e.g., multiple skin smoothing algorithms running simultaneously) 2. Function modules unrelated to beauty enhancement (e.g., unrelated animations) 3. Fancy effects that affect performance (e.g., excessive particle effects that slow down 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 camera handling/face detection/effect rendering/UI layers), error handling coverage, and resource management. 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 resources are not properly managed (memory leaks, no cleanup on page unload). The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 8,
+      "title": "Does the interface vision meet sci-fi style and professional design standards?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the overall design follows modern sci-fi design principles: 1) Futuristic color scheme (neon blues, purples with high contrast) 2) Proper layout with holographic-style elements 3) Clean typography with technical feel (display fonts ≥ 16px, monospace for data). Deduct 3 points for each non-sci-fi visual element, 5 points for inconsistent visual language, and 5 points for cluttered/confusing interface. Check if the UI has sci-fi touches like particle effects, glowing elements, or digital distortion effects. 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) Video processing appears seamless with no visible 'jumps' when applying effects 2) UI transitions use appropriate animation duration (300-500ms) 3) Clear visual feedback when adjusting parameters. Deduct 5 points for each operation without feedback, 3 points for jarring transitions between beauty filter states, and 5 points for effects that create unnatural-looking results (e.g., uncanny valley face distortions). The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    }
+  ],
+  "class": "Multimedia Editing-Video Production",
+  "difficulty": "hard"
+}

package/library/multimedia_editing-video_production/flutter-media-player-frontend.json

@@ -0,0 +1,68 @@
+{
+  "index": 1212,
+  "question": "You are a code expert, please use your professional knowledge to generate accurate and professional responses. Make sure the code you generate is executable and can be demonstrated. Write a media player frontend using Flutter.",
+  "checklist": [
+    {
+      "id": 0,
+      "title": "Is the core media playback functionality implemented?",
+      "description": "Check whether the code uses Flutter's video_player or better_player packages correctly, implements basic controls (play/pause, seek, volume), and handles different media formats (mp4, mp3, etc.). Score 0 if core playback is missing, 5 if only basic playback works, and 10 if it handles multiple formats with proper state management.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 1,
+      "title": "Is the player UI responsive and adaptive?",
+      "description": "Evaluate if the UI adapts to different screen sizes and orientations (portrait/landscape). Check for proper handling of SafeArea, system UI overlays, and if it implements different layouts for phones, tablets, and desktop. Deduct 5 points if the UI breaks on orientation change, and 3 points if it doesn't adapt to different screen sizes. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 2,
+      "title": "Are advanced media features implemented?",
+      "description": "Check for implementation of features like playlist management, favorites, history, speed control, subtitle support, and picture-in-picture mode. Score 3 points for basic playlist, 5 points if it includes history/favorites, and 10 points if advanced features like subtitles and PIP are properly implemented.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 3,
+      "title": "Is state management properly implemented?",
+      "description": "Assess whether the code uses proper Flutter state management solutions (Provider, Bloc, Riverpod, etc.) to handle media state, buffering status, and UI updates. Check for separation between UI and business logic. Deduct 5 points for global state leaks, 3 points for excessive rebuilds, and 5 points if state management is inconsistent across the app. 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 failed network requests, codec errors, permission denials, 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. Custom gesture controls 2. Audio visualization effects 3. Smart recommendations based on viewing history). 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 volume control mechanisms coexisting) 2. Function modules unrelated to media playback (e.g., a built-in calculator) 3. Fancy effects that affect 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 UI/controllers/services), widget composition, code reusability, and proper use of Flutter architecture patterns. Deduct 5 points if widget trees are too deeply nested; deduct 5 points if the code duplication rate is too high (over 30%); deduct 5 points if there's no separation of concerns between layers. 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 Material Design or Cupertino principles: 1) Consistent theming (proper use of ThemeData) 2) Proper layout spacing (appropriate padding and margins) 3) Professional typography system (using TextTheme appropriately). Deduct 3 points for each inconsistent visual element, 5 points for clashing colors or themes, and 5 points for poor accessibility features (contrast, touch targets). The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 9,
+      "title": "Is the dynamic interaction smooth and seamless?",
+      "description": "Judge whether the animations and transitions conform to Flutter's design principles: 1) Smooth animations at 60fps 2) Proper use of Hero animations for transitions 3) Haptic feedback and visual responses to user input. Deduct 5 points for jank or stuttering during playback, 3 points for abrupt transitions between screens, and 5 points for unresponsive UI during media loading. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    }
+  ],
+  "class": "Multimedia Editing-Video Production",
+  "difficulty": "medium"
+}

package/library/multimedia_editing-video_production/frontend-tool-animated-video-elements.json

@@ -0,0 +1,68 @@
+{
+  "index": 504,
+  "question": "You are a code expert. Please use your professional knowledge to generate accurate and professional responses. Make sure the code you generate is executable and demonstrable. Implement a frontend tool for adding animated elements to videos, where users can upload videos, select different animated elements (such as twinkling stars, scrolling text, etc.) to add to the video, set the appearance time and duration of these animated elements, preview the effect, and then export the video.",
+  "checklist": [
+    {
+      "id": 0,
+      "title": "Is the video upload and processing functionality fully implemented?",
+      "description": "Check if the code implements a complete video upload system with proper file validation (format, size), progress indicators, and error handling. Verify if the uploaded video can be properly loaded into the editor canvas. Score 0 if upload functionality is missing, 5 if basic upload exists but lacks validation or proper error handling, and 10 if fully implemented with comprehensive validation and user feedback.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 1,
+      "title": "Is the animated elements library comprehensively implemented?",
+      "description": "Evaluate the variety and quality of animated elements provided (twinkling stars, scrolling text, particles, shapes, etc.). Check if each element has proper customization options (size, color, opacity, animation speed). Deduct 2 points for each major animation type missing, deduct 3 points if the animations are not smooth or have rendering issues. Give 10 points if at least 5 different animation categories with proper customization are available.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 2,
+      "title": "Is the timeline and keyframe editing system properly implemented?",
+      "description": "Assess whether users can precisely control when animated elements appear and disappear in the video. Check for the presence of a visual timeline interface, keyframe markers, ability to adjust duration, and precise timing controls. Deduct 5 points if only basic start/end time inputs are available without visual timeline, deduct 3 points if keyframe editing is clunky or imprecise. Give 10 points for a fully functional, intuitive timeline system.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 3,
+      "title": "Is the real-time preview and video export functionality implemented?",
+      "description": "Check if the tool provides real-time preview of the edited video with animations before export. Verify if the export function properly renders the final video with all added elements at the correct positions and times. Deduct 5 points if preview is severely lagging or inconsistent with the final export, deduct 8 points if export functionality is missing, deduct 3 points if export options (resolution, format) are limited. Give 10 points for smooth preview and high-quality export functionality.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 4,
+      "title": "Is the code robust?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the code can handle edge cases such as browser compatibility issues, large video files, concurrent animations, and user operation errors. Look for error boundaries, graceful degradation, and informative error messages. Code with strong robustness should be able to effectively handle these scenarios, giving 10 points. If the robustness is average, give 5 points, and if no error handling is implemented, 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. AI-assisted positioning of elements 2. Animation templates/presets library 3. Collaborative editing features 4. Audio-reactive animations). 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 animation controls 2. Function modules unrelated to video editing (e.g., a built-in image gallery unrelated to the animations) 3. Fancy effects that affect performance (e.g., unnecessary UI animations that slow down the editor). 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 video processing/animation logic/UI components), code reusability, performance optimization for video rendering, and proper state management. 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 optimization for video processing performance. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 8,
+      "title": "Does the interface vision meet professional design standards?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the UI follows professional video editing software conventions: 1) Clear workspace division (timeline, preview, controls panels) 2) Consistent color scheme appropriate for video editing (typically dark theme with accent colors) 3) Proper contrast for extended editing sessions. Deduct 3 points for cluttered interface elements, 5 points for poor workspace organization that hinders workflow, and 5 points for inappropriately bright colors that interfere with video content perception. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 9,
+      "title": "Is the dynamic interaction smooth and seamless?",
+      "description": "Judge whether the animation controls and editing interactions are intuitive and responsive: 1) Dragging elements responds instantly (<100ms) 2) Timeline scrubbing is smooth and accurate 3) Preview updates happen within 500ms of edits 4) Element selection and manipulation have clear visual feedback. Deduct 5 points for laggy timeline interactions, 3 points for delayed preview updates, and 5 points for confusing animation controls. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    }
+  ],
+  "class": "Multimedia Editing-Video Production",
+  "difficulty": "hard"
+}