@getollie/cli 0.0.1

package/library/data_science-data_visualization_dashboards/vue-realtime-3d-warehouse-visualization.json

@@ -0,0 +1,68 @@
+{
+  "index": 739,
+  "question": "You are a code expert. Please use your professional knowledge to generate accurate and expert responses. Take care to ensure that the code you generate is executable and ready for display. Implement a Vue solution for a real-time dynamic large screen visualization of a three-dimensional warehouse facility.",
+  "checklist": [
+    {
+      "id": 0,
+      "title": "Is a complete 3D warehouse visualization implemented?",
+      "description": "Review whether the code accurately implements a three-dimensional warehouse model using appropriate visualization libraries (Three.js, Babylon.js, etc.). Check if the warehouse structure includes essential elements such as shelves, goods, transport paths, and loading/unloading areas. Score 0 if only a basic skeleton is implemented, 5 if warehouse components are present but not fully interactive, and 10 if the model is comprehensive with accurate scale and proportions.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 1,
+      "title": "Is real-time data visualization properly implemented?",
+      "description": "Verify if the code implements real-time data updates using WebSocket, SSE, or polling mechanisms. Evaluate if the data refresh rate is appropriate for a dashboard visualization (preferably under 5 seconds). Check if there's proper handling of connection errors and recovery mechanisms. Deduct 5 points if data visualization is static or only supports manual refresh, and 3 points if update notifications are missing. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 2,
+      "title": "Is the Vue component architecture well-designed?",
+      "description": "Assess the Vue component architecture including proper use of Vue 3 features (Composition API, reactive states, etc.). Check if components are logically separated with clear responsibilities (visualization components, data-handling components, control panels). Examine if props, emits, and state management (Vuex/Pinia) are properly used. Deduct 5 points for monolithic components, 3 points for prop drilling beyond 3 levels. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 3,
+      "title": "Are large screen visualization best practices followed?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the code implements large screen visualization best practices: responsive design that adapts to different aspect ratios (16:9, 21:9), scalable graphics that maintain quality at 4K resolution, and proper component arrangement for distant viewing. Check if the visualization provides navigation controls for zooming/panning. Deduct 5 points if the layout breaks at different resolutions, and 3 points if user controls are too small for distant 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 data loading failures, WebGL rendering errors, resource loading timeouts, 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. Heat maps showing warehouse activity 2. Predictive analytics visualization for inventory management 3. Custom camera paths for automatic tours of the warehouse). 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 rendering passes that affect performance 2. Overlapping visualization elements that create visual noise 3. Unnecessary 3D effects that don't convey meaningful information. Deduct 3 points for each redundancy found, and directly deduct 10 points if the core visualization 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 3D rendering/data processing/UI components), performance optimization techniques (e.g., object pooling, frustum culling, level of detail), 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 doesn't implement rendering optimizations; deduct 5 points if the build process is not optimized for large-screen deployment. 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 dashboard design principles: 1) Consistent color coding for data categories 2) Clear visual hierarchy with primary and secondary information properly distinguished 3) Information density appropriate for large-screen viewing distance. Deduct 3 points for each cluttered visualization area, 5 points for poor color contrast that affects readability, and 5 points for excessive use of 3D effects that obscure data. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 9,
+      "title": "Is the dynamic interaction smooth and seamless?",
+      "description": "Judge whether the 3D visualization performance meets standards: 1) Maintains at least 30 FPS during camera movements 2) Smooth transitions between different warehouse views/levels 3) Clear visual feedback for selection and interaction. Deduct 5 points for frame drops below 20 FPS during normal operation, 3 points for jerky transitions, and 5 points for confusing or delayed interaction feedback. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    }
+  ],
+  "class": "Data Science-Data Visualization Dashboards",
+  "difficulty": "medium"
+}

package/library/data_science-data_visualization_dashboards/vue2-d3-pure-tone-audiometry-chart.json

@@ -0,0 +1,68 @@
+{
+  "index": 914,
+  "question": "You are a code expert, please use your professional knowledge to generate accurate and professional responses. Be sure to ensure that the code generated is executable for demonstration. I now want to develop a pure tone audiometry software using Vue2 and JavaScript, and need to use d3.js to draw a line chart to achieve this effect.",
+  "checklist": [
+    {
+      "id": 0,
+      "title": "Is the audiometry tone generation system properly implemented?",
+      "description": "Review whether the code accurately implements pure tone generation using Web Audio API, with precise frequency control (20Hz-20kHz range), amplitude modulation, and both continuous and pulsed tone options. Check if the code includes calibration functions for different output devices. Score 0 if tone generation is not implemented, 5 if only basic frequency generation is implemented, and 10 if full audiometric functionality (including masking capabilities) is included.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 1,
+      "title": "Is the d3.js line chart visualization complete and accurate?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the d3.js implementation creates a proper audiogram with standard audiometric conventions: frequency (Hz) on x-axis (logarithmic scale), hearing level (dB HL) on y-axis, and proper symbols for ear and conduction type. Look for proper axis scaling, grid lines at standard testing frequencies (250, 500, 1000, 2000, 4000, 8000 Hz), and correct plotting of audiometric data points. Deduct 5 points if the chart lacks standard audiometric symbols, 3 points if the scales are incorrectly implemented, and 5 points if the chart doesn't update dynamically with test results.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 2,
+      "title": "Is the audiometry testing protocol implementation complete?",
+      "description": "Check whether the code implements standard audiometric testing protocols like Hughson-Westlake method (descending approach) or automated methods with proper threshold determination. Evaluate if the system properly tracks and records responses, calculates thresholds, and manages test sequences. Deduct 5 points if the protocol doesn't follow clinical standards, 5 points if it lacks proper threshold determination logic, and 3 points if it doesn't support both manual and automated testing modes.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 3,
+      "title": "Is the Vue2 component architecture well-designed for the audiometry application?",
+      "description": "Assess whether the Vue2 implementation follows proper component design principles, with clear separation between the audiometry engine, testing interface, results visualization, and patient data management. Check for proper use of props, events, Vuex for state management, and responsive design principles. Deduct 5 points if components are tightly coupled, 3 points if state management is inconsistent, and 5 points if the architecture doesn't separate concerns between audio processing and UI rendering.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 4,
+      "title": "Is the code robust?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the code can handle common abnormal situations (such as browser audio API limitations, unsupported hardware, user interruptions, etc.) and provide friendly error prompts or recovery mechanisms. Code with strong robustness should be able to effectively handle these edge cases, giving 10 points. If the robustness is average, give 5 points, and if no exceptions are handled, give 0 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 5,
+      "title": "Are there any innovative features that are eye-catching?",
+      "description": "Check whether the code includes surprise features that enhance the experience (e.g., 1. Real-time calibration with reference tones 2. Multiple audiogram comparison overlay 3. Interactive touchscreen/keyboard controls for patients). 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 generation methods coexisting without purpose) 2. Function modules unrelated to audiometry (e.g., unrelated visualizations) 3. Fancy effects that affect performance (e.g., excessive animations that could interfere with precise timing). 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 logic/visualization/test protocol layers), unit test coverage (especially for critical frequency and amplitude calculations), 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 clinical standards?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the overall design follows medical/clinical design principles: 1) Neutral color matching suitable for clinical settings 2) Clear contrast for visibility in various lighting conditions 3) Professional medical-grade font system (legible at distance, distinguishes between similar characters like 6/8). Deduct 3 points for each distracting visual element, 5 points for non-standard audiogram color schemes, and 5 points for text-image layout that doesn't follow clinical conventions. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 9,
+      "title": "Is the audiometric testing interaction smooth and responsive?",
+      "description": "Judge whether the interaction conforms to clinical testing requirements: 1) Precise timing between tone presentation and response recording (≤ 50ms latency) 2) Smooth transitions between test frequencies 3) Clear visual indicators of test progress and patient responses. Deduct 5 points for audible artifacts during tone transitions, 3 points for delayed response recording that could affect test validity, and 5 points for confusing test flow indicators. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    }
+  ],
+  "class": "Data Science-Data Visualization Dashboards",
+  "difficulty": "hard"
+}

package/library/data_science-data_visualization_dashboards/vue2-echarts-wenzhou-map-district-data-bar-charts.json

@@ -0,0 +1,68 @@
+{
+  "index": 1722,
+  "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 and ready for demonstration. I need to create a map of Wenzhou city using Echarts in Vue 2, with bar charts on each district to display specific data for that district.",
+  "checklist": [
+    {
+      "id": 0,
+      "title": "Is the Wenzhou city map correctly implemented using ECharts?",
+      "description": "Review whether the code accurately implements the Wenzhou city map with correct geographical boundaries and district divisions. Check if GeoJSON data for Wenzhou is properly loaded and rendered. Score 0 if the map is not implemented, 5 if only basic map is shown without district divisions, and 10 if all districts are properly rendered with accurate boundaries.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 1,
+      "title": "Are the district bar charts properly implemented and integrated with the map?",
+      "description": "Evaluate if bar charts are correctly positioned on each district of the map and display district-specific data. Check if the charts maintain proper positioning during map interactions (zoom/pan). Deduct 5 points if charts don't align with districts, 3 points if charts overlap causing readability issues, and 2 points if charts don't scale appropriately with the map. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 2,
+      "title": "Is the data binding between Vue 2 and ECharts implemented correctly?",
+      "description": "Check whether reactive data binding is properly implemented between Vue 2 component state and ECharts instance. Verify that changes in component data are reflected in the charts, and the ECharts instance is properly disposed when the component is destroyed. Deduct 5 points for incorrect or missing Vue-ECharts integration, 3 points for memory leaks, and 5 points if reactivity is broken. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 3,
+      "title": "Is there proper map interaction and responsiveness?",
+      "description": "Assess whether the map includes essential interactive features like zooming, panning, and tooltips for districts and bar charts. Check if the visualization is responsive and adapts to different screen sizes. Deduct 3 points for missing zoom/pan functionality, 4 points for non-responsive design, and 5 points if tooltips are missing or 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 missing data, slow loading GeoJSON files, 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. Dynamic data updates with animations 2. Custom themes specific to Wenzhou 3. Additional data layers like population density heatmap). 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 visualization functions 2. Function modules unrelated to the Wenzhou map visualization 3. Fancy effects that affect performance (e.g., excessive animations or 3D effects that slow down rendering). Deduct 3 points for each redundancy found, and directly deduct 10 points if the core functions are interfered with by redundant code.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 7,
+      "title": "Does the code have engineering quality?",
+      "description": "Review modular design (such as separating data fetching/processing/visualization layers), reusability of components, and proper configuration management. Deduct 5 points if global state pollution is found or Vue best practices are not followed; deduct 5 points if the code duplication rate is too high (over 30%); deduct 5 points if ECharts options are hardcoded rather than dynamically generated. 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 visualization principles: 1) Harmonious color matching for districts and bar charts (appropriate contrast between map and data) 2) Proper layout with clear legends and scales 3) Professional typography for labels and tooltips (readable font sizes, proper contrast). Deduct 3 points for each crowded visual element, 5 points for poor color choices that hinder data interpretation, and 5 points for cluttered or illegible labels. 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) Chart hover/click response delay ≤ 100ms 2) Smooth transitions between data updates 3) Clear visual feedback for selected districts. Deduct 5 points for each operation without feedback, 3 points for laggy animations during interactions, and 5 points for confusing or inconsistent interaction patterns. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    }
+  ],
+  "class": "Data Science-Data Visualization Dashboards",
+  "difficulty": "medium"
+}

package/library/data_science-data_visualization_dashboards/vue2-element-ui-fastapi-tortoise-echarts-dashboard.json

@@ -0,0 +1,68 @@
+{
+  "index": 1338,
+  "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. Frontend: Vue 2 with Element UI library. Backend: FastAPI with Tortoise ORM. I need sample code to implement dashboard functionality with ECharts. Please provide comprehensive examples with full features.",
+  "checklist": [
+    {
+      "id": 0,
+      "title": "Is the Vue 2 dashboard architecture correctly structured?",
+      "description": "Check whether the code follows Vue 2 best practices with proper component hierarchy, Vuex state management, and Element UI integration. Review the main layout structure, navigation system, and responsive design implementation. Score 0 if basic Vue setup is missing, 5 if implemented but with architectural flaws, and 10 if properly organized with clear component responsibilities and efficient prop/event handling.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 1,
+      "title": "Is the ECharts integration comprehensive and well-implemented?",
+      "description": "Evaluate the ECharts implementation quality: proper initialization, responsive resizing, theme customization, and dataset binding. Check if advanced features like tooltip customization, animation controls, and interaction events are handled. Deduct 3 points if charts are not responsive, 4 points if data updates don't animate properly, and 5 points if ECharts instances aren't properly disposed. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 2,
+      "title": "Is the FastAPI backend implementation complete and RESTful?",
+      "description": "Assess if the FastAPI implementation includes proper route definitions, request validation, error handling, and documentation (via Swagger UI). Check for appropriate status codes, pagination handling, and security measures. Deduct 3 points if OpenAPI documentation is missing, 3 points if input validation is incomplete, and 4 points if error handling is insufficient. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 3,
+      "title": "Is the Tortoise ORM integration correct with proper data models and relationships?",
+      "description": "Review the Tortoise ORM model definitions, relationships, migration setup, and query optimizations. Check for proper schema design, indexing strategies, and transaction handling. Deduct 3 points if models lack validation, 4 points if relationships are improperly defined, and 3 points if migrations are not handled. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 4,
+      "title": "Is the code robust?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the code can handle common abnormal situations (such as network failures, invalid inputs, API errors, chart rendering issues) 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 data updates without page refresh 2. Interactive drill-down capabilities in charts 3. Dark/light theme switching 4. Dashboard layout customization). 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 chart wrapper components with overlapping functionality) 2. Function modules unrelated to dashboard visualization (e.g., unnecessary media players) 3. Fancy effects that affect performance (e.g., excessive animations 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 data services/UI components/state management), 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 dashboard design principles: 1) Harmonious color matching (no more than 3 primary colors plus accent 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) 4) Information hierarchy with clear visual priority. Deduct 3 points for each crowded visual element, 5 points for a glaring color combination, and 5 points for chaotic chart 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) Chart loading and interactions respond within 300ms 2) Transition animations controlled between 300-500ms 3) Clear visual feedback for user actions 4) Smooth data refreshing without jarring UI shifts. Deduct 5 points for each operation without feedback, 3 points for choppy animations during chart transitions, and 5 points for confusing or inconsistent interactive behaviors. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    }
+  ],
+  "class": "Data Science-Data Visualization Dashboards",
+  "difficulty": "easy"
+}

package/library/data_science-data_visualization_dashboards/vue3-echarts-line-chart-with-search.json

@@ -0,0 +1,68 @@
+{
+  "index": 280,
+  "question": "You are a code expert. Please use your professional knowledge to generate accurate and professional responses. Be sure to ensure that the generated code is executable for demonstration. Create a line chart in Vue 3 using TypeScript syntax with ECharts, implemented through a remote request, and include search functionality.",
+  "checklist": [
+    {
+      "id": 0,
+      "title": "Is the Vue 3 + TypeScript integration properly implemented?",
+      "description": "Check whether the code uses Vue 3 composition API with proper TypeScript type definitions. Verify that components, props, emits, and refs all have proper typing. Deduct 5 points if TypeScript interfaces are missing for data structures, 3 points if any 'any' types are used unnecessarily, and 5 points if there are TypeScript compilation errors. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 1,
+      "title": "Is ECharts correctly integrated and initialized in the Vue 3 component?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether ECharts is properly imported and initialized using Vue lifecycle hooks (onMounted, onUnmounted, etc.). Check for proper chart instance management, responsive resizing handling, and memory leak prevention. Deduct 5 points if the chart is not properly destroyed on component unmount, 3 points if window resize events aren't handled, and 3 points if chart options are not typed correctly. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 2,
+      "title": "Is the remote data fetching mechanism implemented correctly?",
+      "description": "Review if the code implements proper API calls with error handling and loading states. Check for the use of Axios/Fetch with proper request configurations, response type validation, and retry mechanisms. Deduct 5 points if there's no loading indicator during data fetching, 5 points if error handling is inadequate, and 3 points if there's no request timeout or cancellation on component unmount. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 3,
+      "title": "Is the search functionality complete and effective?",
+      "description": "Assess whether the search function includes debounce/throttle mechanisms, proper validation, and clear feedback to users. Check if searching updates the chart dynamically and if the UI provides clear indications of current search state. Deduct 5 points if search has no input validation, 3 points if there's no debounce implementation for performance, and 5 points if search results don't properly update the chart visualization. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 4,
+      "title": "Is the code robust?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the code handles edge cases such as empty data sets, API errors, invalid search inputs, and window resize events. Code with strong robustness should gracefully handle these scenarios with appropriate user feedback. Deduct 3 points for each unhandled edge case, with a maximum deduction of 10 points. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 5,
+      "title": "Are there any innovative features that are eye-catching?",
+      "description": "Check whether the implementation includes additional valuable features beyond the basic requirements (e.g., 1. Advanced filtering options 2. Data export functionality 3. Dynamic theme switching 4. Interactive tooltips with rich content). 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 state management 2. Duplicate data processing functions 3. Unnecessary wrapper components that add complexity without value. Deduct 3 points for each redundancy found, and directly deduct 10 points if core functionality is obscured by redundant code. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 7,
+      "title": "Does the code have engineering quality?",
+      "description": "Review component organization, type definitions, code reusability, and separation of concerns. Check if the code follows Vue 3 best practices and clean code principles. Deduct 3 points if components exceed 300 lines, 3 points if business logic isn't separated from the UI layer, and 4 points if there's no proper error boundary implementation. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 8,
+      "title": "Does the interface vision meet professional design standards?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the chart design follows data visualization best practices: 1) Clear axes with proper labels 2) Appropriate use of colors (color-blind friendly) 3) Proper spacing and sizing of chart elements 4) Responsive design across different screen sizes. Deduct 3 points for cluttered visualizations, 3 points for poor color choices, and 4 points for illegible text or overlapping elements. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 9,
+      "title": "Is the dynamic interaction smooth and seamless?",
+      "description": "Judge whether interactions with the chart and search functionality feel responsive and intuitive: 1) Chart animations are smooth (≤500ms) 2) Search results update without jarring UI shifts 3) Loading states are clearly communicated. Deduct 3 points for laggy chart updates, 3 points for abrupt visual changes, and 4 points for confusing interaction patterns that don't follow standard UX conventions. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    }
+  ],
+  "class": "Data Science-Data Visualization Dashboards",
+  "difficulty": "medium"
+}

package/library/data_science-data_visualization_dashboards/vue3-leaflet-temperature-data-visualization.json

@@ -0,0 +1,68 @@
+{
+  "index": 1464,
+  "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 demonstration. Implement temperature data visualization using Vue 3 and Leaflet.",
+  "checklist": [
+    {
+      "id": 0,
+      "title": "Is the Vue 3 + Leaflet integration properly implemented?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the Vue 3 component structure correctly integrates with the Leaflet library. Check for proper lifecycle hooks management (onMounted, onBeforeUnmount), Leaflet map initialization, and proper cleanup. Score 0 if the integration is broken, 5 if basic integration exists but with issues, and 10 if the integration is seamless with proper Vue 3 Composition API usage.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 1,
+      "title": "Is the temperature data visualization effectively implemented?",
+      "description": "Examine how temperature data is visualized on the map. Check for appropriate visualization techniques (heatmap, colored markers, chloropleth, etc.) that accurately represent temperature variations. Assess if color scales are intuitive and if legends are provided. Score 0 if visualization is missing, 5 if basic visualization exists but lacks clarity, and 10 if visualization is comprehensive with proper color mapping and clear visual cues.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 2,
+      "title": "Is the data fetching and processing mechanism well-designed?",
+      "description": "Review the implementation of data retrieval (API calls, static data imports) and processing logic. Check for error handling during data fetching, data transformation for visualization compatibility, and caching strategies. Deduct 5 points if error states aren't handled, 3 points if there's no loading state, and 3 points if data processing is inefficient. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 3,
+      "title": "Are interactive map features properly implemented?",
+      "description": "Assess the implementation of map interactions such as zooming, panning, tooltips on hover, and click events on temperature data points. Check if interaction with temperature layers is intuitive and responsive. Deduct 5 points if essential map interactions are broken, 3 points if temperature data isn't interactive, and 2 points if interactions lack smooth transitions. 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 empty data, API failures, incorrect data formats, 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. Time-based animation of temperature changes 2. Multiple visualization modes (heatmap/isolines/colored markers) 3. Comparison tools for different time periods). 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 map library imports or duplicate visualization layers 2. Unnecessary UI components that don't contribute to temperature visualization 3. Heavy animations or effects that slow down map rendering. Deduct 3 points for each redundancy found, and directly deduct 10 points if the core visualization 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 map configuration/data handling/UI components), reusability of components, and proper Vue 3 best practices. Deduct 5 points if global state management is messy or Composition API is misused; deduct 5 points if the code duplication rate is too high (over 30%); deduct 5 points if there's no separation of concerns between visualization logic and UI. 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 for both UI and temperature visualization (color scales should be scientifically appropriate) 2) Proper layout spacing for controls and legends 3) Professional font system for temperature indicators and map labels. Deduct 3 points for each crowded visual element, 5 points for confusing temperature color scales, and 5 points for poorly positioned legends or controls. 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) Map loading and rendering performance (should complete within 2 seconds) 2) Smooth transitions when changing temperature visualization settings 3) Responsive tooltip displays when interacting with temperature data. Deduct 5 points for laggy map performance, 3 points for jarring transitions between data views, and 5 points for delayed response when interacting with temperature points. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    }
+  ],
+  "class": "Data Science-Data Visualization Dashboards",
+  "difficulty": "easy"
+}

package/library/data_science-data_visualization_dashboards/vue3-threejs-dynamic-map-dashboard-visualization.json

@@ -0,0 +1,68 @@
+{
+  "index": 1587,
+  "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. Implement a visualization dashboard using Vue 3 and Three.js to import a map model, where information at a specific point on the map continuously changes and updates.",
+  "checklist": [
+    {
+      "id": 0,
+      "title": "Is the Vue 3 integration with Three.js properly implemented?",
+      "description": "Check whether the code correctly integrates Vue 3 with Three.js using proper lifecycle hooks (onMounted, onBeforeUnmount) and reactive data management. Verify that component structure follows Vue 3 composition API best practices, with clear separation of concerns. Score 0 if Three.js isn't integrated with Vue at all, 5 if basic integration exists but has lifecycle issues, and 10 if integration is seamless with proper reactivity.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 1,
+      "title": "Is the map model import functionality complete?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the code includes comprehensive map model loading capabilities: supports multiple 3D formats (GLTF/GLB, OBJ, FBX), implements proper loading progress indicators, handles loading errors gracefully, and optimizes large model performance. Score 0 if map loading is missing, 5 if only basic loading exists without error handling, and 10 if a robust map import system with optimization is implemented.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 2,
+      "title": "Is the point-specific data update mechanism implemented effectively?",
+      "description": "Assess whether the code implements a system for specific map points to receive and visualize real-time data updates. Check for raycasting implementation to select points, data binding between map points and information sources, and visualization of changing data. The update mechanism should handle high-frequency updates (>1 update/second) without performance degradation. Score 0 if this core feature is missing, 5 if implemented but with performance issues, and 10 if fully functional with optimized performance.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 3,
+      "title": "Is the real-time data visualization system comprehensive?",
+      "description": "Review whether the dashboard includes various visualization methods for the changing data (e.g., color changes, size animations, particle effects, floating panels with charts). Check if the visualization adapts to different data types and ranges. Verify that transitions between data states are smooth and meaningful. Deduct 5 points if visualizations are basic or limited to text only; deduct 3 points if animations are jerky or distracting. Full score requires at least 3 different visualization techniques with smooth transitions.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 4,
+      "title": "Is the code robust?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the code can handle common abnormal situations (such as model loading failures, WebGL context loss, data feed interruptions, etc.) and provide friendly error prompts or recovery mechanisms. Code with strong robustness should be able to effectively handle these edge cases, giving 10 points. If the robustness is average, give 5 points, and if no exceptions are handled, give 0 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 5,
+      "title": "Are there any innovative features that are eye-catching?",
+      "description": "Check whether the code includes surprise features that enhance the experience (e.g., 1. GPU-based data filtering 2. VR/AR view mode 3. Advanced shader effects for data emphasis). 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 camera control systems coexisting) 2. Function modules unrelated to the dashboard visualization (e.g., unnecessary social features) 3. Fancy effects that affect performance (e.g., excessive post-processing filters). 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 3D rendering logic/Vue components/data services), 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 frame rate drops below 30fps during interactions, and 5 points for camera controls that cause disorientation or motion sickness. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    }
+  ],
+  "class": "Data Science-Data Visualization Dashboards",
+  "difficulty": "medium"
+}

package/library/data_science-data_visualization_dashboards/water-margin-character-relationship-diagram.json

@@ -0,0 +1,68 @@
+{
+  "index": 1579,
+  "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. Based on the character relationships in the novel \"Water Margin\" (also known as \"Outlaws of the Marsh\"), please generate code for a character relationship diagram.",
+  "checklist": [
+    {
+      "id": 0,
+      "title": "Is the character relationship graph data structure well-designed?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the code properly represents the complex character relationships from 'Water Margin' using an appropriate graph data structure. Check if nodes represent characters with proper attributes (e.g., name, rank, skills) and edges represent different relationship types (e.g., brotherhood, mentorship, rivalry, family). Score 0 if no clear data structure is defined, 5 if only basic node-edge relationships exist, and 10 if rich relationship types with attributes are implemented.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 1,
+      "title": "Does the visualization accurately represent the 'Water Margin' character relationships?",
+      "description": "Assess whether the visualization includes the main characters (at least the 36 heavenly spirits and 72 earthly fiends) and their key relationships. Check if the visualization distinguishes between different types of relationships through visual cues (colors, line styles, etc.). Deduct 5 points if fewer than 30 key characters are included, 3 points if relationship types aren't visually distinct, and 2 points if historically inaccurate relationships are depicted.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 2,
+      "title": "Are interactive features implemented for exploring the character network?",
+      "description": "Verify if the visualization includes interactive features like zooming, panning, highlighting connections on hover, filtering by relationship type, or character search. Score 0 if no interactivity exists, 5 if only basic hover/click interactions are implemented, and 10 if multiple advanced interactive features are available for deep exploration of the character network.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 3,
+      "title": "Is the layout algorithm appropriate for displaying complex character networks?",
+      "description": "Examine whether the code implements an appropriate layout algorithm (force-directed, hierarchical, etc.) that effectively visualizes the complex network without excessive edge crossings or node overlaps. Check if the layout considers character groupings (e.g., Liangshan bandits, imperial officials). Deduct 5 points if the visualization is cluttered with many crossing edges, and 3 points if no consideration is given to logical character groupings.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 4,
+      "title": "Is the code robust?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the code can handle edge cases such as missing character data, connection errors, browser compatibility issues, or varying screen sizes. Code with strong robustness should include error handling, responsive design principles, and graceful degradation. Give 10 points for comprehensive error handling and responsiveness, 5 points for average robustness, and 0 points if errors break the visualization.",
+      "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. Historical context annotations 2. Character story snippets on interaction 3. Timeline view of character appearances 4. Filtering by story arcs). 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 visualization techniques 2. Unnecessary features unrelated to character relationships 3. Fancy effects that affect performance without adding informational value. Deduct 3 points for each redundancy found, and directly deduct 10 points if core visualization functionality is compromised by redundant code.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 7,
+      "title": "Does the code have engineering quality?",
+      "description": "Review modular design (separation of data processing, visualization logic, and UI controls), code reusability, and maintainability. 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 clear separation between data and visualization layers. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 8,
+      "title": "Does the interface vision meet professional design standards?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the visualization follows modern design principles: 1) Harmonious color scheme appropriate for the historical theme 2) Proper layout with clear node labels and legible text 3) Balanced visual hierarchy emphasizing important characters/relationships. Deduct 3 points for cluttered node arrangements, 5 points for poor color choices that make relationships hard to distinguish, and 5 points for illegible character names or information. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 9,
+      "title": "Is the dynamic interaction smooth and seamless?",
+      "description": "Judge whether the dynamic effects enhance understanding of the complex network: 1) Smooth transitions when filtering or rearranging nodes 2) Appropriate animation speed (300-500ms) for state changes 3) Responsive feedback when interacting with characters. Deduct 5 points for jerky animations during network exploration, 3 points for delayed response (>200ms) to user interactions, and 5 points for animations that obscure the understanding of relationships. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    }
+  ],
+  "class": "Data Science-Data Visualization Dashboards",
+  "difficulty": "medium"
+}