@getollie/cli 0.0.1

package/library/data_science-predictive_modeling/sales-forecasts-in-tabular-format.json

@@ -0,0 +1,68 @@
+{
+  "index": 965,
+  "question": "You are a coding expert. Please use your professional knowledge to generate accurate and professional responses. Make sure that the code you generate is executable for demonstration. Generate sales forecasts in a tabular format.",
+  "checklist": [
+    {
+      "id": 0,
+      "title": "Is the forecasting algorithm properly implemented?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the code implements a statistically sound forecasting method (e.g., time series analysis, regression, exponential smoothing, ARIMA). Check if the algorithm handles seasonality, trends, and cyclical patterns. Score 0 if no forecasting logic exists, 5 if only basic linear projection is implemented, and 10 if multiple sophisticated forecasting methods are available with accuracy metrics.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 1,
+      "title": "Is the data processing pipeline robust?",
+      "description": "Review whether the code includes proper data cleaning, normalization, and transformation steps. Check for handling of missing values, outliers, and data type conversions. Verify if the code can process different input data formats (CSV, Excel, JSON, etc.). Deduct 5 points if missing value handling is omitted, 3 points if outlier detection is absent. Full score for comprehensive preprocessing with validation steps.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 2,
+      "title": "Is the tabular output format well-implemented?",
+      "description": "Assess if the table has proper headers, consistent formatting of numbers (decimal places, thousands separators), appropriate column widths, and clear labeling. Check if the table includes important metrics like forecast values, confidence intervals, and percentage changes. Deduct 5 points if the table lacks proper formatting, 3 points if it's missing essential sales metrics.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 3,
+      "title": "Are visualization components included to complement tabular data?",
+      "description": "Check if the code generates complementary visual representations (charts, graphs) that enhance understanding of the forecasts. Evaluate whether appropriate chart types are used (line charts for trends, bar charts for comparisons). Deduct 5 points if no visualizations are provided, 3 points if visualizations lack interactivity or legends.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 4,
+      "title": "Is the code robust?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the code can handle common abnormal situations (such as malformed input data, unexpected data types, edge cases) and provide friendly error prompts or recovery mechanisms. Code with strong robustness should 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 filtering of forecast periods 2. Auto-recommendation of best forecasting method based on data characteristics 3. Exportable reports with findings). 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 forecasting algorithms 2. Function modules unrelated to sales forecasting (e.g., unnecessary marketing analysis) 3. Complex visualizations that don't add analytical value. 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 processing/modeling/visualization layers), documentation quality, and maintainability. Deduct 5 points if global variables are overused; deduct 5 points if the code lacks comments or documentation; deduct 5 points if the code structure makes it difficult to extend or modify. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 8,
+      "title": "Does the table design meet professional standards?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the table follows professional design principles: 1) Consistent typography (font size, weight for different data categories) 2) Proper use of borders, spacing, and alignment 3) Clear visual hierarchy between headers, data, and totals. Deduct 3 points for inconsistent formatting, 5 points for poor information hierarchy, and 5 points for cluttered layout. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 9,
+      "title": "Is the user interaction intuitive and responsive?",
+      "description": "Judge whether the interface provides intuitive controls for adjusting forecast parameters and viewing results: 1) Clear input mechanisms for date ranges and variables 2) Responsive updates when parameters change 3) Informative tooltips or context information. Deduct 5 points if parameters cannot be adjusted, 3 points for slow response times, and 5 points if the interaction flow is confusing. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    }
+  ],
+  "class": "Data Science-Predictive Modeling",
+  "difficulty": "medium"
+}

package/library/data_science-predictive_modeling/stock-k-line-wave-analysis-buy-sell-points.json

@@ -0,0 +1,68 @@
+{
+  "index": 807,
+  "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. For the analysis of K-line wave cycles for each stock in Shanghai and Shenzhen markets, combined with the K-line wave analysis of both markets' overall trends, determine the one-week trend direction. Display individual stock price movements with dotted line code, and edit the code to show buy/sell points with alerts based on predicted price movements.",
+  "checklist": [
+    {
+      "id": 0,
+      "title": "K-line data structure implementation and retrieval",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the code properly defines K-line data structures (OHLCV - Open, High, Low, Close, Volume) with proper typing and efficient retrieval mechanisms. Check if the code fetches real-time or historical data from Shanghai/Shenzhen markets through appropriate APIs with error handling. Score 0 if K-line data structure is missing, 5 if basic structures exist but lack error handling, 10 if comprehensive implementation with efficient retrieval and proper error handling.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 1,
+      "title": "Wave cycle detection algorithm implementation",
+      "description": "Review the implementation of technical indicators used for wave analysis (e.g., Moving Averages, Bollinger Bands, MACD, KDJ, Fibonacci retracements). Check if the code includes at least three different technical indicators and implements proper pattern recognition algorithms. Deduct 5 points if only basic MA crossover is implemented, 3 points if trend strength validation is missing. The full score requires detection of Elliott Waves or similar complex patterns with accuracy validation mechanisms.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 2,
+      "title": "Market-wide trend correlation analysis",
+      "description": "Assess whether the code correlates individual stock movements with market-wide indices to predict trend direction. Check if it includes Shanghai Composite Index and Shenzhen Component Index data with proper weighting algorithms, sector rotation analysis, and market breadth indicators. Deduct 5 points if only one market index is analyzed, 3 points if sector correlation is missing, and 5 points if there's no volatility comparison between individual stocks and the broader market.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 3,
+      "title": "Trend prediction and visualization with dotted line",
+      "description": "Evaluate the implementation of trend prediction for the one-week forecast with proper backtesting mechanisms. Review the dotted line visualization that represents predicted price movements, including proper styling, differentiation from historical data, and confidence intervals. Score 0 if prediction visualization is missing, 5 if basic prediction exists without confidence intervals, 10 if comprehensive visualization with multiple scenarios (bullish/bearish/neutral) and probability indicators.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 4,
+      "title": "Is the code robust?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the code can handle common abnormal situations (such as missing data points, market holidays, sudden volatility spikes, API failures, 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 alert notification system 2. Multi-timeframe analysis (daily/weekly/monthly comparisons) 3. Volume profile analysis 4. Sentiment analysis integration from news sources). 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 calculation of similar technical indicators (e.g., multiple moving average calculations with similar periods) 2. Function modules unrelated to stock analysis (e.g., cryptocurrency data) 3. Fancy visual 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 fetching/analysis/visualization layers), caching strategies for performance, and proper documentation. 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 handling large datasets. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 8,
+      "title": "Does the interface vision meet professional financial analysis standards?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the visualization follows financial charting best practices: 1) Professional color scheme (green/red for price movements, neutrals for background) 2) Clear labeling of axes and indicators 3) Proper scaling that prevents visual distortion of trends 4) Clean, uncluttered layout with information hierarchy. Deduct 3 points for each misleading visual element, 5 points for color schemes that make pattern recognition difficult, and 5 points for overlapping elements that obscure important data. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 9,
+      "title": "Is the buy/sell alert system effective and user-friendly?",
+      "description": "Judge whether the alert system meets these requirements: 1) Clear visual differentiation between buy/sell signals 2) Configurable alert thresholds 3) False positive minimization through confirmation patterns 4) Alert history tracking. Deduct 5 points if alerts don't include confidence levels, 3 points if alert conditions aren't clearly documented, and 5 points if there's no mechanism to validate alert accuracy against actual market movements. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    }
+  ],
+  "class": "Data Science-Predictive Modeling",
+  "difficulty": "hard"
+}

package/library/data_science-statistical_analysis/ahp-decision-making-program.json

@@ -0,0 +1,68 @@
+{
+  "index": 1580,
+  "question": "You are a code expert. Please use your professional knowledge to generate accurate and professional responses. Be sure to provide executable code whenever possible. Help me write a small program using AHP (Analytic Hierarchy Process) for decision-making.",
+  "checklist": [
+    {
+      "id": 0,
+      "title": "Is the AHP core algorithm correctly implemented?",
+      "description": "Examine whether the code correctly implements the key components of AHP: criteria matrix creation, normalization, consistency check (CR < 0.1), and final weight calculation. Check for the presence of eigenvector calculation for weights and proper consistency ratio calculation using Random Index (RI) values. Award 10 points for complete implementation, 5 points if only basic matrix operations are present without consistency checking, 0 points if the core algorithm is missing.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 1,
+      "title": "Is the pairwise comparison functionality complete?",
+      "description": "Verify if the code includes mechanisms for users to input pairwise comparisons using the standard 1-9 scale. Check if the implementation properly handles reciprocal values (if A is 3 times more important than B, then B must be 1/3 as important as A). Award 10 points for complete implementation with validation, 5 points if only basic input is provided without validation, 0 points if the functionality is missing.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 2,
+      "title": "Is a hierarchical structure for criteria and alternatives properly implemented?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the code allows for a proper hierarchical structure with main criteria, possible sub-criteria, and alternatives. The program should be able to handle at least one level of sub-criteria. Deduct 5 points if only flat criteria are supported without hierarchy, deduct 3 points if the hierarchy is limited to only two levels. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 3,
+      "title": "Does the program provide comprehensive results and sensitivity analysis?",
+      "description": "Check if the program calculates final alternative rankings and provides some form of sensitivity analysis to understand how changes in judgments affect the final decision. Verify if visualization of results is included (bar charts, tables, etc.). Award 10 points if comprehensive results with sensitivity analysis are present, 5 points for basic results without sensitivity analysis, 0 points if results presentation is minimal or missing.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 4,
+      "title": "Is the code robust?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the code handles common errors (such as invalid inputs, inconsistent judgments, matrix singularity issues) and provides friendly error prompts or recovery mechanisms. Code with strong robustness should validate all user inputs, handle mathematical edge cases, and prevent program crashes. Give 10 points if comprehensive error handling exists, 5 points if basic error handling is present, and 0 points if no error handling is implemented.",
+      "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 visualization of hierarchy 2. Automated recommendations for inconsistent judgments 3. Export capabilities to PDF/Excel 4. Group decision support). 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 matrix normalization methods) 2. Function modules unrelated to AHP decision-making 3. Unnecessary complexity that could be simplified. 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 calculation logic from UI), code organization, documentation, and potential for reuse. 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 documentation is insufficient. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 8,
+      "title": "Does the interface design meet professional standards?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the user interface (if included) follows good design principles: 1) Clear organization of input forms 2) Intuitive flow from criteria definition to results 3) Proper use of tables and input controls. Deduct 3 points for each confusing interface element, 5 points for poor organization of the decision hierarchy, and 5 points for unclear results presentation. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 9,
+      "title": "Is the user interaction intuitive and helpful?",
+      "description": "Judge whether the program provides clear guidance through the AHP process: 1) Clear instructions for pairwise comparisons 2) Helpful feedback on consistency 3) Understandable presentation of results. Deduct 5 points if users must understand AHP deeply before using the program, 3 points if the comparison process is tedious without shortcuts, and 5 points if results interpretation requires external explanation. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    }
+  ],
+  "class": "Data Science-Statistical Analysis",
+  "difficulty": "easy"
+}

package/library/data_science-statistical_analysis/browser-data-post-processing-software.json

@@ -0,0 +1,68 @@
+{
+  "index": 1047,
+  "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. Help me complete a program, a browser-based data post-processing software, with functions including data import, data processing, data statistics, and speed-based statistics.",
+  "checklist": [
+    {
+      "id": 0,
+      "title": "Is the data import functionality comprehensively implemented?",
+      "description": "Review whether the code supports multiple data formats (CSV, JSON, XML, Excel) with proper file validation and parsing. Check if drag-and-drop upload, batch import, and large file chunked processing are implemented. Score 0 if only basic file reading is present, 5 if single format import works, and 10 if multiple formats with validation and error handling are fully supported.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 1,
+      "title": "Is the data processing engine robust and feature-complete?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the processing capabilities include data cleaning (null value handling, duplicate removal), transformation (filtering, sorting, grouping), and computation (aggregation, mathematical operations). Check for undo/redo functionality and processing history. Deduct 5 points if no data validation is present, 3 points if processing operations cannot be chained. Full score requires comprehensive processing pipeline with preview capabilities.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 2,
+      "title": "Are comprehensive data statistics features implemented?",
+      "description": "Check whether statistical analysis includes descriptive statistics (mean, median, mode, standard deviation), correlation analysis, and trend analysis. Verify if results are exportable and visualized through charts/graphs. Deduct 5 points if only basic calculations are present, 3 points if no visualization is provided. Full score requires advanced statistical functions with interactive charts.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 3,
+      "title": "Is speed-based statistics functionality properly designed and implemented?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the system can measure and analyze processing speeds, performance metrics, and throughput statistics. Check for real-time performance monitoring, benchmark comparisons, and performance optimization suggestions. Deduct 5 points if only basic timing is implemented, 3 points if no performance analytics dashboard is present. Full score requires comprehensive speed analysis with actionable insights.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 4,
+      "title": "Is the code robust?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the code can handle common abnormal situations (such as corrupted files, invalid data formats, memory limitations, browser compatibility issues) and provide friendly error prompts or recovery mechanisms. Code with strong robustness should effectively handle edge cases including large dataset processing without crashes. Give 10 points if fully robust, 5 points if average, and 0 points if no exception handling.",
+      "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 preview during processing 2. Smart data type detection and suggestions 3. Collaborative data sharing capabilities 4. Advanced visualization templates). 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 data parsing logics coexisting) 2. Function modules unrelated to data processing (e.g., built-in games or social features) 3. Fancy effects that affect performance (e.g., excessive animations during data processing). Deduct 3 points for each redundancy found, and directly deduct 10 points if 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 processing/UI/storage layers), error handling coverage, and code organization. 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 no proper data validation or sanitization is implemented. 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) 4) Clear data table presentation with proper contrast ratios. Deduct 3 points for each crowded visual element, 5 points for glaring color combinations, and 5 points for chaotic data 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) File upload feedback delay ≤ 100ms 2) Data processing progress indicators with smooth animations 3) Transition effects controlled between 300-500ms 4) Clear visual focus guidance during multi-step workflows. Deduct 5 points for each operation without feedback, 3 points for laggy data table scrolling, and 5 points for hard-to-find key function buttons. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    }
+  ],
+  "class": "Data Science-Statistical Analysis",
+  "difficulty": "hard"
+}

package/library/data_science-statistical_analysis/data-analysis-tool-with-excel-support.json

@@ -0,0 +1,68 @@
+{
+  "index": 738,
+  "question": "You are a code expert, please use your professional knowledge to generate accurate and professional responses. Make sure the code you generate is functional for demonstration purposes.\n\nData Collection Form: Used to record field survey data, such as facility conditions, questionnaire results, observation records, etc.\n\nQuestionnaire Statistics Table: Organizes questionnaire responses, including basic information, satisfaction ratings, and open-ended questions.\n\nIssue Coding Table: Categorizes and codes observed problems for subsequent statistical analysis.\n\nStatistical Analysis Table: Performs descriptive statistics, such as facility coverage rate, problem frequency, etc.\n\nVisualization Chart Templates: Guides users on how to generate bar charts, radar charts, etc. using Excel's built-in charting functions.\n\nPlace all the above table contents into a single HTML tool file, with support for Excel import and export functionality on the page.",
+  "checklist": [
+    {
+      "id": 0,
+      "title": "Is the Data Collection Form fully implemented?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the HTML form properly implements fields for recording field survey data (facility conditions, questionnaire results, observation records). Check for form validation, field types appropriateness (text, number, dropdown, date), and conditional logic. Score 0 if missing entirely, 5 if basic fields exist without validation, and 10 if comprehensively implemented with proper validation and field dependencies.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 1,
+      "title": "Is the Questionnaire Statistics Table properly structured?",
+      "description": "Review the implementation of the questionnaire responses organization system, including sections for basic information, satisfaction ratings, and open-ended questions. Check for proper data typing, sorting capabilities, filtering options, and aggregation functions. Deduct 3 points if missing search functionality, 3 points if lacking data validation, and 4 points if aggregation functions are absent. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 2,
+      "title": "Is the Issue Coding Table implementation complete?",
+      "description": "Assess whether the code includes a robust system for categorizing and coding observed problems with hierarchical categories, subcategories, and unique identifiers. Check for code search functionality, code relationship mapping, and frequency tracking. Deduct 5 points if hierarchical categorization is missing, and 5 points if no code relationship visualization exists. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 3,
+      "title": "Is the Statistical Analysis Table functionality comprehensive?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the implementation includes proper descriptive statistics calculations (mean, median, mode, standard deviation), facility coverage rate calculation, problem frequency analysis, and cross-tabulation capabilities. Check for formula correctness and automatic recalculation. Deduct 3 points for each missing statistical function, and 5 points if calculations contain errors. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 4,
+      "title": "Is the code robust?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the code can handle common abnormal situations (such as invalid data input, file import/export errors, 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. Auto-save functionality 2. Dark/light mode toggle 3. Responsive design for mobile devices 4. Data visualization previews). 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 data export methods with identical functionality) 2. Function modules unrelated to data collection and analysis (e.g., unnecessary animations) 3. Features that affect performance (e.g., heavy DOM operations or excessive event listeners). 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/view/controller layers), code organization, 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 error handling for Excel import/export operations. 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 form layout (clear sections, aligned inputs, consistent styling). Deduct 3 points for each crowded visual element, 5 points for a glaring color combination, and 5 points for chaotic table layouts. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 9,
+      "title": "Is the Excel import/export functionality properly implemented?",
+      "description": "Judge whether the Excel import/export functionality works as expected: 1) Supports standard Excel formats (.xlsx, .xls) 2) Maintains data integrity during import/export 3) Provides proper progress indication and error handling 4) Preserves formatting and formulas where appropriate. Deduct 5 points if only one direction (import or export) is implemented, 3 points for data loss during transfer, and 5 points if the operation is not user-friendly. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    }
+  ],
+  "class": "Data Science-Statistical Analysis",
+  "difficulty": "hard"
+}

package/library/data_science-statistical_analysis/demonstrate-process-deriving-pi-html.json

@@ -0,0 +1,68 @@
+{
+  "index": 1775,
+  "question": "You are a code expert. Please use your professional knowledge to generate accurate, professional responses. Be sure to ensure that the generated code is executable for demonstration purposes. Demonstrate the process of deriving pi (π) in HTML.",
+  "checklist": [
+    {
+      "id": 0,
+      "title": "Is the mathematical derivation of π correctly implemented?",
+      "description": "Review whether the code accurately implements at least one classical π derivation method (such as Monte Carlo simulation, Leibniz series, Machin formula, or geometric methods like inscribed/circumscribed polygons). Check if the mathematical logic is sound and the algorithm converges correctly. Score 0 if no valid π derivation method is implemented, 5 if only basic approximation without proper mathematical foundation, and 10 if multiple rigorous mathematical methods are correctly implemented with proper convergence analysis.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 1,
+      "title": "Is the step-by-step visualization process effectively demonstrated?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the HTML implementation provides clear visual representation of the π derivation process through interactive elements, animated sequences, or progressive displays. Check if intermediate steps, calculations, and convergence progress are visually presented. Deduct 5 points if only static results are shown without process visualization, and 3 points if the visualization lacks mathematical context or educational value. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 2,
+      "title": "Is real-time calculation and accuracy tracking implemented?",
+      "description": "Check whether the system provides real-time computation with accuracy metrics, iteration counters, and error analysis. Evaluate if the implementation shows convergence rates, precision improvements, and comparison with the actual π value. Deduct 5 points if no accuracy tracking is provided, and 3 points if the precision analysis is superficial or mathematically incorrect. Give 10 points for comprehensive accuracy analysis with multiple precision indicators.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 3,
+      "title": "Are interactive controls and parameter adjustments provided?",
+      "description": "Assess whether the code includes user controls for adjusting calculation parameters (such as iteration counts, sample sizes, or precision levels) and provides interactive elements to explore different aspects of π derivation. Check if users can modify computational parameters and observe real-time changes. Deduct 5 points if no interactive controls are implemented, and 3 points if controls are present but don't significantly impact the demonstration. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 4,
+      "title": "Is the code robust?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the code can handle common abnormal situations (such as invalid input parameters, computational overflow, division by zero, infinite loops, or browser performance limitations) and provide friendly error prompts or recovery mechanisms. Code with strong robustness should effectively handle edge cases and provide graceful degradation. Give 10 points for comprehensive error handling, 5 points for basic exception management, and 0 points if no exceptions are handled.",
+      "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 mathematical demonstration experience (e.g., 1. Comparison of multiple π derivation methods simultaneously 2. Historical timeline of π calculation milestones 3. Interactive geometric proofs with dynamic manipulation 4. Performance benchmarking across different algorithms). 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 calculation methods without clear distinction 2. Function modules unrelated to π derivation (e.g., unrelated mathematical calculators) 3. Overly complex animations that distract from the mathematical content. Deduct 3 points for each redundancy found, and directly deduct 10 points if the core mathematical demonstration is interfered with by redundant code.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 7,
+      "title": "Does the code have engineering quality?",
+      "description": "Review modular design (such as separating calculation logic/visualization/UI components), code organization, and performance optimization. Deduct 5 points if global state pollution is found or proper separation of concerns is not implemented; deduct 5 points if the code duplication rate is too high (over 30%); deduct 5 points if mathematical calculations are not optimized for performance. 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 suitable for mathematical content (no more than 3 primary colors) 2) Proper layout spacing with clear mathematical notation (element spacing follows the 8px multiple principle) 3) Professional typography with readable mathematical expressions (body font size ≥ 14px, line height over 1.5 times). Deduct 3 points for each crowded visual element, 5 points for distracting color combinations that hinder mathematical readability, and 5 points for poorly formatted mathematical expressions. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 9,
+      "title": "Is the dynamic interaction smooth and seamless?",
+      "description": "Judge whether the mathematical demonstration follows smooth interaction principles: 1) Parameter adjustment feedback delay ≤ 100ms 2) Animation transitions for mathematical processes controlled between 300-500ms 3) Clear visual focus on current calculation steps 4) Smooth progression through derivation stages. Deduct 5 points for each operation without immediate feedback, 3 points for jarring transitions that break mathematical flow, and 5 points for unclear progression indicators in the derivation process. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    }
+  ],
+  "class": "Data Science-Statistical Analysis",
+  "difficulty": "easy"
+}

package/library/data_science-statistical_analysis/design-complete-quantitative-factor-research-platform.json

@@ -0,0 +1,68 @@
+{
+  "index": 777,
+  "question": "You are a code expert. Please use your professional knowledge to generate accurate and professional responses. Make sure that the code you generate is executable and properly displayed. Help me design a complete quantitative factor research platform, providing the full code. I store all my data in parquet format.",
+  "checklist": [
+    {
+      "id": 0,
+      "title": "Data Import and Processing Pipeline",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the platform implements a complete data processing pipeline for parquet files. Check for efficient loading mechanisms with parallel processing, data type validation, handling of missing values, and automatic schema detection. Verify if there's memory optimization for large datasets through streaming or chunking. Score 0 if basic parquet loading is missing, 5 if only simple reading is implemented, and 10 if a complete pipeline with optimization is present.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 1,
+      "title": "Factor Creation and Calculation Framework",
+      "description": "Review the implementation of factor creation tools. Check for a flexible API that allows custom factor definitions, vectorized operations, proper time series alignment, and cross-sectional normalization. Verify if the code includes performance tracking for calculation time. Deduct 5 points if the framework doesn't support customized factor expressions, 3 points if it lacks batch processing capabilities. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 2,
+      "title": "Backtesting Engine Quality",
+      "description": "Assess the robustness of the backtesting engine, including accurate position tracking, proper handling of transaction costs, dividend adjustments, and various rebalancing strategies. Check if it supports multiple portfolio construction methods and risk models. Deduct 5 points if look-ahead bias prevention is missing, 3 points if transaction cost models are oversimplified, and 2 points if it lacks support for position constraints. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 3,
+      "title": "Performance Analysis and Visualization Tools",
+      "description": "Evaluate the comprehensiveness of performance metrics calculation and visualization capabilities. Check for standard metrics (Sharpe, Sortino, drawdowns, etc.), factor exposure analysis, and interactive visualization tools. The system should offer both time-series and cross-sectional analysis views. Deduct 5 points if key performance metrics are missing, 5 points if visualizations are static-only with no interactivity, 3 points if correlation/regression analysis tools are absent. 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 corrupted parquet files, out-of-memory errors, numerical instabilities in calculations, etc.) and provide friendly error prompts or recovery mechanisms. Check for proper exception handling, input validation, and edge case management. Code with strong robustness should be able to effectively handle these edge cases, giving 10 points. If the robustness is average, give 5 points, and if no exceptions are handled, give 0 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 5,
+      "title": "Are there any innovative features that are eye-catching?",
+      "description": "Check whether the code includes surprise features that enhance the experience (e.g., 1. Auto-factor discovery algorithms 2. Machine learning integration for factor evaluation 3. Real-time data streaming capabilities 4. GPU acceleration for calculations). 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 implementations of similar analysis functions (e.g., multiple ways to calculate the same metric) 2. Function modules unrelated to quantitative research (e.g., unnecessary UI elements) 3. Computationally expensive features that affect performance without adding value. 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 (separation of data access, factor calculation, backtesting, and visualization layers), unit test coverage for critical components, and build process automation. Check for proper documentation, maintainable code structure, and performance optimizations. 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 dashboard and visualization designs follow modern data visualization principles: 1) Consistent color coding for metrics (no more than 5 primary colors) 2) Proper layout with clear information hierarchy 3) Professional typography with appropriate sizing for data displays. Check if interactive elements are clearly distinguishable and follow standard conventions. Deduct 3 points for cluttered visualizations, 5 points for misleading data representations (e.g., truncated axes), and 5 points for poor information density. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 9,
+      "title": "Is the dynamic interaction smooth and seamless?",
+      "description": "Judge whether the platform's interactive elements perform well: 1) Calculation and filtering operations respond within 500ms for standard datasets 2) Transitions between views are smooth and logical 3) Interactive charts provide immediate feedback on hover/selection. Evaluate if large data operations employ progress indicators or asynchronous processing. Deduct 5 points for unresponsive interfaces during calculations, 3 points for jarring transitions between analysis views, and 5 points for confusing navigation patterns. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    }
+  ],
+  "class": "Data Science-Statistical Analysis",
+  "difficulty": "hard"
+}

package/library/data_science-statistical_analysis/energy-water-consumption-heat-stations-chart-analysis.json

@@ -0,0 +1,68 @@
+{
+  "index": 1430,
+  "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. Design a chart to record and analyze the statistics of energy consumption and water consumption from multiple heat source stations.",
+  "checklist": [
+    {
+      "id": 0,
+      "title": "Is the multi-source data collection and processing system fully implemented?",
+      "description": "Review whether the code accurately implements data collection interfaces for multiple heat source stations through APIs/WebSocket connections, and whether it includes real-time data validation, data normalization, and timestamp synchronization mechanisms. Score 0 if no data collection logic is implemented, 5 if only basic data fetching is present, and 10 if comprehensive data processing with error handling and data quality checks are fully included.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 1,
+      "title": "Are the energy and water consumption statistical analysis functions comprehensively implemented?",
+      "description": "Check whether the statistical analysis includes multiple dimensions: hourly/daily/monthly consumption trends, peak/off-peak analysis, efficiency ratios, comparative analysis between stations, and anomaly detection algorithms. Deduct 5 points if aggregation functions are missing, and 3 points if no trend analysis is provided. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 2,
+      "title": "Is the chart visualization system designed with professional data presentation capabilities?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the visualization system uses appropriate chart types (line charts for trends, bar charts for comparisons, heat maps for distribution patterns) with interactive features like zoom, filter, and drill-down capabilities. Deduct 5 points if chart types are inappropriate for data nature. Check whether real-time data updates are smoothly reflected in charts. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 3,
+      "title": "Is the complete data persistence and historical analysis framework constructed?",
+      "description": "Check whether the code includes complete data storage mechanisms with efficient querying capabilities, historical data archiving, data export functionality (CSV/Excel/PDF), and backup/recovery systems. Deduct 5 points if no data persistence is implemented, and 3 points if historical data querying is inefficient (>3s response time). Give 10 points if fully implemented with optimized database indexing.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 4,
+      "title": "Is the code robust?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the code can handle common abnormal situations (such as network timeouts, invalid data formats, missing data points, API failures, 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. AI-powered consumption prediction models 2. Automated alert system for abnormal consumption patterns 3. Interactive dashboard with customizable widgets 4. Energy efficiency scoring system). 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 chart types (e.g., multiple line chart libraries coexisting) 2. Function modules unrelated to energy/water analysis (e.g., built-in games or social features) 3. Excessive visual effects that slow down data rendering (e.g., unnecessary 3D animations). Deduct 3 points for each redundancy found, and directly deduct 10 points if core analytics 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 layer/business logic/presentation layers), unit test coverage for calculation functions, 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 dashboard design standards?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the dashboard design follows modern data visualization principles: 1) Harmonious color coding for different data types (no more than 5 primary colors) 2) Proper grid layout with consistent spacing (following 8px grid system) 3) Professional typography hierarchy (headers ≥ 16px, body text ≥ 14px, line height 1.4-1.6). Deduct 3 points for each cluttered visual element, 5 points for poor color contrast in charts, and 5 points for inconsistent visual hierarchy. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 9,
+      "title": "Is the dynamic interaction smooth and seamless?",
+      "description": "Judge whether the interactive elements conform to professional dashboard standards: 1) Chart loading and filtering response time ≤ 500ms 2) Smooth transitions between different time periods (200-400ms duration) 3) Clear hover states and tooltips with relevant context 4) Intuitive navigation between different analysis views. Deduct 5 points for each unresponsive interaction, 3 points for laggy chart updates, and 5 points for unclear data point identification. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    }
+  ],
+  "class": "Data Science-Statistical Analysis",
+  "difficulty": "hard"
+}