@getollie/cli 0.0.1

package/library/web_applications-education_learning/hunan-sichuan-attractions-cuisine.json

@@ -0,0 +1,68 @@
+{
+  "index": 1016,
+  "question": "You are a code expert. Please use your professional knowledge to generate accurate, expert responses. Be sure the code you generate is executable when possible. Could you please help me create something about tourist attractions and cuisine in Hunan and Sichuan? Please provide me with the complete code.",
+  "checklist": [
+    {
+      "id": 0,
+      "title": "Is the tourist attraction information system comprehensively implemented?",
+      "description": "Review whether the code accurately implements tourist attraction data display through HTML/JavaScript, including attraction details, geographic location, opening hours, ticket prices, and user ratings. Check if interactive maps are integrated and whether attraction filtering/searching functionality is provided. Score 0 if core attraction display is not implemented, 5 if only basic information is shown, and 10 if comprehensive attraction management with interactive features is fully included.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 1,
+      "title": "Is the cuisine information and recommendation system fully developed?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the cuisine section includes detailed information about Hunan and Sichuan dishes, restaurants, cooking methods, and ingredients. Check if recipe details, restaurant locations, price ranges, and user reviews are implemented. Verify if cuisine categorization and recommendation algorithms are present. Deduct 5 points if recipe details are missing, and 3 points if restaurant information is incomplete. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 2,
+      "title": "Is the data structure design and content management system properly architected?",
+      "description": "Assess whether the data structure efficiently organizes tourist and cuisine information using appropriate data models (JSON/database schema). Check if content management allows for easy updates, additions, and modifications of attractions and restaurants. Evaluate if search indexing and data relationships are properly established. Deduct 5 points if data structure is poorly designed, and 3 points if content management is not scalable. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 3,
+      "title": "Are interactive features and user engagement mechanisms complete?",
+      "description": "Check whether the code includes user interaction features such as rating systems, comment sections, favorite lists, and trip planning tools. Evaluate if social sharing capabilities, photo galleries, and virtual tours are implemented. Verify if user preferences and personalized recommendations are supported. Deduct 5 points if basic interaction features are missing, and 3 points if user engagement tools are incomplete. Give 10 points if fully implemented.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 4,
+      "title": "Is the code robust?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the code can handle common abnormal situations (such as missing data, network interruption, invalid user input, image loading 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 user experience (e.g., 1. AR/VR virtual attraction tours 2. AI-powered personalized itinerary planning 3. Real-time weather integration 4. Multi-language support 5. Offline map functionality). Add 3 points for each practical innovative feature implemented (maximum 10 points).",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 6,
+      "title": "Are there any redundant features?",
+      "description": "Strictly check three types of redundancy: 1. Redundant implementation of similar functions (e.g., multiple search mechanisms coexisting) 2. Function modules unrelated to tourism/cuisine (e.g., built-in games or music players) 3. Fancy effects that affect performance (e.g., excessive animations or heavy graphics). 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 layer/presentation layer/business logic), 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 3 points if the file structure is poorly organized. 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 reflecting regional culture (no more than 3 primary colors) 2) Proper layout spacing (element spacing follows the 8px multiple principle) 3) Professional typography system (body font size ≥ 14px, line height over 1.5 times) 4) High-quality images with consistent aspect ratios. Deduct 3 points for each crowded visual element, 5 points for glaring color combinations, and 5 points for chaotic 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 4) Smooth scrolling and image loading 5) Responsive design across devices. Deduct 5 points for each operation without feedback, 3 points for visual artifacts during interactions, and 5 points for hard-to-find navigation elements. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    }
+  ],
+  "class": "Web Applications-Education/Learning",
+  "difficulty": "medium"
+}

package/library/web_applications-education_learning/interactive-audio-visual-learning-tool-sound-clips-images.json

@@ -0,0 +1,68 @@
+{
+  "index": 540,
+  "question": "You are a code expert, please use your professional knowledge to generate accurate and professional responses. Make sure the generated code is executable for demonstration purposes. Build an interactive audio-visual learning tool where users can click different buttons to trigger various sound clips and related images. Design preset learning themes (such as animal sounds, musical instrument sounds, etc.) that users can switch between by clicking.",
+  "checklist": [
+    {
+      "id": 0,
+      "title": "Is the audio playback system fully implemented?",
+      "description": "Review whether the code accurately implements audio playback through HTML5 Audio API or Web Audio API, including audio preloading, play/pause controls, volume management, and cross-browser compatibility. Check if audio formats are optimized (MP3/OGG/WAV support) and if audio loading states are handled properly. Score 0 if audio cannot play, 5 if basic playback works but lacks controls, and 10 if full audio management is implemented with error handling.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 1,
+      "title": "Is the theme switching mechanism properly designed?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the theme switching system allows seamless transitions between different learning categories (animals, instruments, etc.) with proper data structure organization. Check if themes are loaded dynamically or statically, whether switching preserves user state, and if theme data is well-structured (JSON/object format). Deduct 5 points if theme switching causes page refresh, 3 points if audio/images don't update correctly during switches. Full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 2,
+      "title": "Is the interactive button system responsive and accessible?",
+      "description": "Check whether buttons provide immediate visual/audio feedback, support keyboard navigation, and include proper ARIA labels for accessibility. Evaluate if button states (normal/hover/active/disabled) are clearly defined and if touch/mouse events are handled correctly across devices. Deduct 5 points if buttons lack visual feedback, 3 points if keyboard accessibility is missing, 2 points if touch events don't work on mobile devices. Full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 3,
+      "title": "Is the multimedia synchronization and loading optimization implemented?",
+      "description": "Assess whether audio and image resources are properly synchronized, preloaded efficiently, and cached for performance. Check if loading indicators are shown during resource fetching, if fallback mechanisms exist for failed loads, and if resources are optimized for web delivery. Deduct 5 points if resources aren't preloaded causing delays, 3 points if no loading states are shown, 2 points if large files aren't optimized. 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 audio loading failures, unsupported formats, network interruptions, user rapid clicking, etc.) and provide friendly error prompts or recovery mechanisms. Code with strong robustness should gracefully handle browser compatibility issues, resource loading errors, and user interaction 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 learning experience (e.g., 1. Visual waveform display during audio playback 2. Progress tracking and learning statistics 3. Interactive quiz mode 4. Audio recording and playback comparison 5. Gamification elements like achievements). Add 3 points for each practical innovative feature implemented (maximum 10 points).",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 6,
+      "title": "Are there any redundant features?",
+      "description": "Strictly check three types of redundancy: 1. Redundant implementation of similar functions (e.g., multiple audio players coexisting) 2. Function modules unrelated to audio-visual learning (e.g., built-in calculator or weather widget) 3. Fancy effects that affect performance (e.g., excessive animations during audio playback). Deduct 3 points for each redundancy found, and directly deduct 10 points if the core learning 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 management/UI components/theme data), code organization, and maintainability. Check for proper event handling, memory leak prevention (audio object cleanup), and performance optimization. Deduct 5 points if global state pollution is found or no design patterns are used; deduct 5 points if code duplication rate is too high (over 30%); deduct 5 points if audio resources aren't properly disposed. 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 educational UI principles: 1) Child-friendly color scheme and contrast ratios 2) Clear visual hierarchy with proper spacing (8px grid system) 3) Intuitive iconography and button design 4) Readable typography (minimum 16px for educational content). Deduct 3 points for each crowded visual element, 5 points for poor color accessibility, and 5 points for confusing navigation layout. Screenshots should show clean, professional educational interface. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 9,
+      "title": "Is the dynamic interaction smooth and seamless?",
+      "description": "Judge whether the interactive experience meets educational software standards: 1) Button click to audio playback delay ≤ 50ms 2) Smooth theme transitions without jarring effects 3) Visual feedback synchronization with audio 4) Responsive design across devices 5) No audio overlap or cutting issues. Deduct 5 points for each laggy interaction, 3 points for audio timing issues, and 5 points for poor mobile touch responsiveness. Screenshots should demonstrate smooth, professional interactions. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    }
+  ],
+  "class": "Web Applications-Education/Learning",
+  "difficulty": "easy"
+}

package/library/web_applications-education_learning/interactive-geometric-proof-system.json

@@ -0,0 +1,68 @@
+{
+  "index": 654,
+  "question": "You are a code expert, please use your professional knowledge to generate accurate and professional responses. Make sure the generated code is executable when possible. ======== ROLE ========\nYou are an experienced code expert. You are provided with a software development requirement description and asked to generate project code based on these requirements. Strictly follow the rules to help users generate complete project code with simple and easy-to-understand comments, without outputting anything else.\n\n======== OUTPUT RULES ========\n1. Always generate complete, executable project code, ensuring the project is fully functional\n2. Ensure all code files you output are complete, do not omit any code\n3. Carefully review and check all code before final output, evaluating its executability. If the code cannot be executed or contains errors, regenerate it\n4. If the requirements involve external API access or user data (images, videos, audio, etc.), provide simulated data\n\n======== PROJECT REQUIREMENTS ========\nBuild an interactive geometric proof system where users can draw geometric figures on a canvas and add known conditions (such as angle values, equal sides, etc.). The system automatically generates a proof step tree based on the input conditions. Users can click on each step to view detailed derivation explanations. Provide a \"Verify\" button to check if the proof process is complete.",
+  "checklist": [
+    {
+      "id": 0,
+      "title": "Is the interactive canvas drawing functionality fully implemented?",
+      "description": "Review whether the code implements a responsive canvas drawing system that allows users to create accurate geometric shapes (points, lines, circles, polygons). Check for snap-to-grid functionality, object selection, and manipulation tools. Score 0 if drawing functionality is missing, 5 if basic shapes are supported but lack precision tools, and 10 if the system includes advanced features like constraint-based drawing.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 1,
+      "title": "Are geometric condition inputs properly implemented?",
+      "description": "Evaluate the implementation of UI components that allow users to add geometric conditions (angle measures, side lengths, parallel/perpendicular relationships, etc.). Check if the code validates input conditions for consistency and provides clear visual indicators for applied conditions. Deduct 5 points if only basic conditions are supported, 3 points if condition validation is missing, and 3 points if visual indicators are unclear. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 2,
+      "title": "Is the proof step tree generation algorithm implemented correctly?",
+      "description": "Analyze the algorithm that generates the proof step tree based on geometric axioms and theorems. Check for logical completeness, handling of multiple possible proof paths, and proper implementation of geometric reasoning. Score 0 if the algorithm is missing, 5 if it only supports basic proofs with limited theorem application, and 10 if it can handle complex proofs with multiple theorem applications and branching logic.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 3,
+      "title": "Is the interactive proof exploration functionality implemented?",
+      "description": "Check if users can click on proof steps to view detailed explanations and visualizations. Evaluate whether the code highlights relevant elements in the geometric figure when a step is selected, and whether step explanations include the theorems applied and logical justifications. Deduct 5 points if step highlighting is missing, and 3 points if explanations lack detail or theorem references. 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 geometric constructions, contradictory conditions, incomplete proofs, 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. Animation of proof steps 2. Alternative proof path suggestions 3. Theorem library with visual examples). Add 3 points for each practical innovative feature implemented (maximum 10 points).",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 6,
+      "title": "Are there any redundant features?",
+      "description": "Strictly check three types of redundancy: 1. Redundant implementation of similar functions (e.g., multiple ways to add the same condition) 2. Function modules unrelated to geometric proofs (e.g., unnecessary tools or decorations) 3. Fancy effects that affect performance (e.g., excessive animations or visual effects). 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 geometric model/rendering/proof logic layers), unit test coverage, and build process automation. Deduct 5 points if global state pollution is found or design patterns are not used; deduct 5 points if the code duplication rate is too high (over 30%); deduct 5 points if the build process is not automated. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 8,
+      "title": "Does the interface vision meet professional design standards?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the overall design follows modern design principles: 1) Harmonious color matching (no more than 3 primary colors) 2) Proper layout spacing (element spacing follows the 8px multiple principle) 3) Professional font system (body font size ≥ 14px, line height over 1.5 times). Deduct 3 points for each crowded visual element, 5 points for a glaring color combination, and 5 points for chaotic text-image layout. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 9,
+      "title": "Is the dynamic interaction smooth and seamless?",
+      "description": "Judge whether the dynamic effects conform to human perception characteristics: 1) Click feedback delay ≤ 100ms 2) Transition animation duration controlled between 300-500ms 3) Clear visual focus guidance. Deduct 5 points for each operation without feedback, 3 points for visual after-images during fast drawing operations, and 5 points for hard-to-find key function buttons. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    }
+  ],
+  "class": "Web Applications-Education/Learning",
+  "difficulty": "hard"
+}

package/library/web_applications-education_learning/interactive-html-page-classroom-group-scoring.json

@@ -0,0 +1,68 @@
+{
+  "index": 343,
+  "question": "You are a code expert. Please use your professional knowledge to generate accurate and professional responses. Be sure to make the generated code executable for demonstration. Help me create an interactive HTML page for classroom group scoring. I will provide a student list, and teachers can directly award points to groups or individual students during class, with all points summed into group totals. The page should also include a random student selection function. The interface should be clean and visually appealing. Please generate the code.",
+  "checklist": [
+    {
+      "id": 0,
+      "title": "Is the student data management system properly implemented?",
+      "description": "Check whether the code provides a complete student and group data structure with proper initialization, validation, and management functions. The system should allow adding/editing students and groups, and properly validate inputs (no duplicate IDs, proper name formatting, etc.). Score 0 if the core data structure is not implemented, 5 if basic student/group data is managed without validation, and 10 if it includes complete data management with validation and error handling.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 1,
+      "title": "Is the point awarding functionality completely implemented?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the code allows teachers to award points to both individual students and groups with proper validation. Points awarded must be properly calculated and reflected in real-time in both individual and group totals. Check for features like point history tracking, ability to modify/remove incorrect point entries, and customizable point increments. Deduct 5 points if individual/group scoring is missing, 3 points if real-time updates are not implemented, and 2 points if there's no validation for point values (e.g., negative points, non-numeric inputs).",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 2,
+      "title": "Is the random student selection feature effectively implemented?",
+      "description": "Assess the random selection algorithm for fairness and functionality. The feature should allow selecting random students with options for filtering (e.g., by group, by participation history). Check if the system visually highlights the selected student and provides options to exclude previously selected students. Deduct 3 points if the randomization is predictable/biased, 3 points if there's no visual indication of selection, and 4 points if filtering options are missing.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 3,
+      "title": "Is the visualization of group scoring and statistics properly implemented?",
+      "description": "Review whether the code includes clear visual representation of point totals for both groups and individuals. Look for features like sorting capabilities, visual indicators for highest/lowest scores, progress bars or charts showing comparative performance, and filtering options. Deduct 3 points for missing group comparisons, 3 points if individual contributions within groups aren't visible, and 4 points if there are no visual indicators beyond plain numbers.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 4,
+      "title": "Is the code robust?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the code can handle common abnormal situations (such as empty student lists, incorrect data formats, browser refresh, accidental user errors) and provide friendly error prompts or recovery mechanisms. Code with strong robustness should include form validation, data persistence across sessions, and graceful error handling. Give 10 points for comprehensive error handling and recovery, 5 points for basic validation only, and 0 points if errors crash the application.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 5,
+      "title": "Are there any innovative features that are eye-catching?",
+      "description": "Check whether the code includes surprise features that enhance the classroom experience (e.g., 1. Animated celebrations when awarding points 2. Sound effects for random selection 3. Achievement badges for groups reaching certain thresholds 4. Dark/light mode toggle 5. Exportable reports of class participation). Add 2 points for each practical innovative feature implemented (maximum 10 points).",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 6,
+      "title": "Are there any redundant features?",
+      "description": "Strictly check three types of redundancy: 1. Redundant implementation of similar functions (e.g., multiple ways to award points that conflict) 2. Function modules unrelated to classroom scoring (e.g., a built-in game unrelated to the main purpose) 3. Fancy effects that affect performance (e.g., excessive animations that slow down the interface). 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. Check for proper use of JavaScript patterns, CSS organization, and HTML semantics. Deduct 3 points if global variables are overused or if there's no separation of concerns; deduct 3 points if the code duplication rate is high; deduct 4 points if there are no comments or documentation. 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 classroom use (avoiding overly distracting colors) 2) Proper layout spacing with clear hierarchy 3) Professional font system with good readability (especially important for classroom visibility). Deduct 3 points for cluttered interface elements, 3 points for poor color contrast affecting readability, and 4 points for inconsistent design elements across the application. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 9,
+      "title": "Is the dynamic interaction smooth and intuitive for classroom use?",
+      "description": "Judge whether the interface is optimized for quick teacher interaction during class: 1) Quick access to common functions without deep menu navigation 2) Responsive controls that work on various devices (for mobile classroom use) 3) Clear visual feedback when points are awarded. Deduct 3 points if awarding points requires more than 2 clicks, 3 points if the interface isn't responsive for different screen sizes, and 4 points if there's no immediate visual feedback when actions are performed. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    }
+  ],
+  "class": "Web Applications-Education/Learning",
+  "difficulty": "easy"
+}

package/library/web_applications-education_learning/interactive-instrument-learning-platform.json

@@ -0,0 +1,68 @@
+{
+  "index": 614,
+  "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 when possible. Implement an interactive audio teaching platform for instrument learning. Users can upload reference audio (such as piano or guitar pieces) or choose from a built-in music library, then use a microphone to play or hum along. The system needs to analyze the user's audio input in real-time, compare it with the reference audio, and provide scoring and feedback on pitch and rhythm accuracy. The interface should include sheet music display (supporting simple staff notation or numbered musical notation), real-time feedback area (showing correct/incorrect notes), and progress statistics. Provide slow playback functionality and section-by-section practice options to help users gradually master difficult passages.",
+  "checklist": [
+    {
+      "id": 0,
+      "title": "Is the audio input and comparison mechanism fully implemented?",
+      "description": "Review whether the code accurately implements microphone input capture, audio processing pipeline, and comparison with reference audio. Check for pitch detection algorithms (e.g., autocorrelation, FFT-based) and rhythm analysis capabilities. Score 0 if core audio processing is missing, 5 if basic pitch detection works but rhythm analysis is incomplete, and 10 if the system can detect both pitch and timing accuracy with precision ≥90%.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 1,
+      "title": "Is the music sheet display functionality properly implemented?",
+      "description": "Evaluate if the code implements both staff notation and numbered musical notation rendering, with proper measures, clefs, and time signatures. Check if notes are highlighted in sync with playback and if user performance is visually mapped to the notation in real-time. Deduct 5 points if only one notation system is implemented, 3 points if note highlighting is missing or inaccurate, and 2 points if the sheet music doesn't adapt to different screen sizes. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 2,
+      "title": "Are the learning assistance features working correctly?",
+      "description": "Check if the code implements slow playback functionality (with adjustable tempo), section-by-section practice options, and looping capabilities. Verify that audio quality is maintained at slower speeds (using time-stretching algorithms without pitch distortion). Deduct 4 points if slow playback causes audio artifacts, 3 points if section selection is imprecise, and 3 points if there's no visual indicator for section boundaries. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 3,
+      "title": "Is the feedback and scoring system comprehensive and accurate?",
+      "description": "Evaluate the real-time feedback mechanisms: visual indicators for pitch accuracy (±10 cents tolerance), rhythm timing feedback (±50ms tolerance), and detailed performance metrics. Check if the scoring algorithm weights both note accuracy and timing appropriately. Deduct 5 points if feedback is significantly delayed (>300ms), 3 points if the scoring system lacks granularity, and 2 points if there's no performance history tracking. 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 microphone permission denial, buffer underruns, audio format incompatibilities, etc.) and provide friendly error prompts or recovery mechanisms. Code with strong robustness should include proper error handling for WebAudio API calls and graceful fallbacks for unsupported features, 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. Harmonic analysis visualization 2. AI-generated accompaniment adaptation 3. Social learning features like performance sharing). Add 3 points for each practical innovative feature implemented (maximum 10 points).",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 6,
+      "title": "Are there any redundant features?",
+      "description": "Strictly check three types of redundancy: 1. Redundant implementation of similar functions (e.g., multiple audio processing pipelines) 2. Function modules unrelated to music learning (e.g., built-in games unrelated to practice) 3. Fancy effects that affect audio processing performance. Deduct 3 points for each redundancy found, and directly deduct 10 points if the core functions are interfered with by redundant code.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 7,
+      "title": "Does the code have engineering quality?",
+      "description": "Review modular design (such as separating audio processing/UI/data management layers), unit test coverage for critical audio processing 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 design standards?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the overall design follows modern design principles: 1) Harmonious color matching (no more than 3 primary colors) 2) Proper layout spacing (element spacing follows the 8px multiple principle) 3) Professional font system (body font size ≥ 14px, line height over 1.5 times). Deduct 3 points for each crowded visual element, 5 points for a glaring color combination, and 5 points for chaotic text-image layout. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 9,
+      "title": "Is the dynamic interaction smooth and seamless?",
+      "description": "Judge whether the dynamic effects conform to human perception characteristics: 1) Audio-visual feedback synchronization ≤ 50ms 2) Transition animation duration controlled between 300-500ms 3) Clear visual focus guidance on performance elements. Deduct 5 points for each audio-visual desynchronization, 3 points for jerky animations during audio processing, and 5 points for confusing performance feedback indicators. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    }
+  ],
+  "class": "Web Applications-Education/Learning",
+  "difficulty": "hard"
+}

package/library/web_applications-education_learning/interactive-periodic-table-with-details-filtering.json

@@ -0,0 +1,68 @@
+{
+  "index": 1063,
+  "question": "You are a code expert. Please use your professional knowledge to generate accurate, expert responses. Ensure that the code you provide is executable for demonstration. Create an interactive periodic table where clicking on elements displays a detailed information popup, with support for filtering and arranging by group/period/state.",
+  "checklist": [
+    {
+      "id": 0,
+      "title": "Is the interactive periodic table structure properly implemented?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the code correctly implements the periodic table layout with accurate positioning of all 118 elements according to their groups and periods. Check if elements are visually distinct with appropriate atomic number, symbol, name, and basic properties visible at a glance. Score 0 if the periodic table structure is incorrect or incomplete, 5 if the basic layout is present but has positioning errors, and 10 if the periodic table accurately represents the standard IUPAC periodic table layout.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 1,
+      "title": "Is the element information popup functionality complete?",
+      "description": "Verify that clicking on elements triggers a detailed information popup showing comprehensive element data (atomic number, mass, electron configuration, discovery year, physical properties, etc.). The popup should be well-designed with proper closing mechanism. Deduct 3 points if key properties are missing, 3 points if the popup has positioning/display issues, and 2 points if transitions are jarring or non-existent. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 2,
+      "title": "Are the filtering and arrangement capabilities implemented?",
+      "description": "Check if the code includes UI controls to filter elements by properties (e.g., metals/non-metals, state at room temperature) and to arrange the table by different criteria (group/period/state). The filtering should be responsive and visually indicate which elements match the criteria. Deduct 4 points if only basic filtering is implemented without arrangement options, 3 points if transitions between views are not smooth, and 3 points if multiple filter combinations are not supported. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 3,
+      "title": "Is the visual representation of element states and properties implemented?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the code uses appropriate color coding or visual indicators to represent different element categories (metals, non-metals, metalloids) and states (solid, liquid, gas at standard conditions). There should be a legend explaining the visual coding system. Deduct 3 points if color coding is inconsistent with scientific conventions, 3 points if the legend is missing, and 4 points if visual distinctions between element categories are unclear. 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 browser resizing, touch vs. mouse input, missing element data, 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. Element comparison functionality 2. Interactive electron configuration visualizations 3. Historical timeline of element discovery 4. Integration with external chemical databases). 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 functionality (e.g., multiple filtering mechanisms) 2. Function modules unrelated to periodic table visualization (e.g., unnecessary animations) 3. Fancy effects that affect performance (e.g., excessive 3D 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/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 the element data is hardcoded rather than loaded from a structured data source. 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 (scientific accuracy balanced with visual appeal) 2) Proper layout spacing (element cells properly sized with adequate spacing) 3) Professional typography (clear hierarchical text with proper contrast). 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) Immediate visual feedback on hover/selection 2) Smooth transitions when filtering or rearranging elements 3) Intuitive UI controls with clear affordances. Deduct 5 points for each operation without feedback, 3 points for choppy animations during filtering, and 5 points for unintuitive interaction patterns. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    }
+  ],
+  "class": "Web Applications-Education/Learning",
+  "difficulty": "hard"
+}

package/library/web_applications-education_learning/interactive-prefix-sum-animation-cpp-code.json

@@ -0,0 +1,68 @@
+{
+  "index": 421,
+  "question": "You are a code expert. Please use your professional knowledge to generate accurate and professional responses. Make sure that the code you generate is executable for demonstration. Create an interactive HTML animation that demonstrates and explains prefix sum arrays while simultaneously running C++ code line by line.",
+  "checklist": [
+    {
+      "id": 0,
+      "title": "Is the prefix sum algorithm correctly implemented and explained?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the code accurately implements the prefix sum algorithm in C++ and clearly explains the concept. Check if it covers the time complexity analysis (O(n) for construction, O(1) for queries), and demonstrates both the building process and query operations. Score 0 if the implementation is incorrect, 5 if basic implementation is present but lacks detailed explanation, and 10 if the implementation is correct and thoroughly explained with mathematical formulas and complexity analysis.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 1,
+      "title": "Does the HTML animation synchronize with C++ code execution?",
+      "description": "Check if the HTML animation and C++ code execution are properly synchronized, with visual elements updating in real-time as the C++ code executes line by line. The animation should highlight the current line of code being executed and reflect changes in the corresponding data structures. Deduct 5 points if the animation and code execution are disconnected, 3 points if synchronization occasionally fails, and give full points if they remain perfectly in sync throughout the entire demonstration.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 2,
+      "title": "Is the visualization of the prefix sum array effective and informative?",
+      "description": "Assess whether the visualization clearly shows how the prefix sum array is built and used. Check if it illustrates the relationship between the original array and the prefix sum array, shows the running sum calculation process, and demonstrates how range queries work. The visualization should include animated transitions between states. Deduct 5 points if the visualization is static, 3 points if transitions are abrupt, and give full points for smooth, clear, and informative visualizations.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 3,
+      "title": "Does the interactive component allow for user experimentation?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether users can interact with the demonstration through features like changing input arrays, adjusting animation speed, stepping through the code manually, or trying different range queries. The interaction should be intuitive and responsive. Deduct 5 points if interaction is limited to start/stop only, 3 points if interactions don't affect the visualization appropriately, and give full points for comprehensive, responsive interactive features.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 4,
+      "title": "Is the code robust?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the code can handle common abnormal situations (such as empty arrays, negative numbers, large inputs, etc.) and provide friendly error messages or recovery mechanisms. Code with strong robustness should handle edge cases effectively, 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 learning experience (e.g., 1. Comparison with naive range sum method 2. Visual performance comparison charts 3. Interactive quiz elements to test understanding). Add 3 points for each practical innovative feature implemented (maximum 10 points).",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 6,
+      "title": "Are there any redundant features?",
+      "description": "Strictly check three types of redundancy: 1. Redundant implementation of similar functions (e.g., multiple ways to calculate the same thing) 2. Function modules unrelated to prefix sums (e.g., a built-in calculator for unrelated operations) 3. Fancy effects that affect performance (e.g., excessive animations that distract from learning). Deduct 3 points for each redundancy found, and directly deduct 10 points if the core educational 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 visualization/algorithm/interaction logic), code reusability, and maintainability. Deduct 5 points if global state pollution is found or appropriate design patterns aren't used; deduct 5 points if the code duplication rate is too high (over 30%); deduct 5 points if the code lacks comments or documentation. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 8,
+      "title": "Does the interface vision meet professional design standards?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the overall design follows modern design principles: 1) Harmonious color matching (no more than 3 primary colors) 2) Proper layout spacing (element spacing follows the 8px multiple principle) 3) Professional font system (body font size ≥ 14px, line height over 1.5 times). Deduct 3 points for each crowded visual element, 5 points for a glaring color combination, and 5 points for chaotic text-image layout. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 9,
+      "title": "Is the dynamic interaction smooth and seamless?",
+      "description": "Judge whether the dynamic effects conform to human perception characteristics: 1) Click feedback delay ≤ 100ms 2) Transition animation duration controlled between 300-500ms 3) Clear visual focus guidance. Deduct 5 points for each operation without feedback, 3 points for visual after-images during fast animations, and 5 points for hard-to-find key function buttons. The full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    }
+  ],
+  "class": "Web Applications-Education/Learning",
+  "difficulty": "medium"
+}

package/library/web_applications-education_learning/java-miniprogram-html-framework-smart-campus-social-creative-tools.json

@@ -0,0 +1,68 @@
+{
+  "index": 384,
+  "question": "You are a code expert. Please use your professional knowledge to generate accurate and professional responses. Be sure to provide executable code for demonstration. Create a Java mini-program HTML framework around the themes of smart campus, social services, and creative tools.",
+  "checklist": [
+    {
+      "id": 0,
+      "title": "Is the smart campus functionality comprehensively implemented?",
+      "description": "Review whether the code implements core smart campus features such as course scheduling, grade inquiry, library seat booking, campus navigation, and dormitory management through Java backend and HTML frontend integration. Check if real-time data synchronization is established between frontend and backend. Score 0 if no smart campus features are implemented, 5 if only basic information display is provided, and 10 if a complete smart campus ecosystem with interactive features is fully implemented.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 1,
+      "title": "Are social services features properly integrated?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the social service modules include user authentication, friend management, real-time messaging, group discussions, and activity organization features. Check if WebSocket or similar technologies are used for real-time communication and whether user privacy protection mechanisms are in place. Deduct 5 points if messaging functionality is missing, 3 points if user session management is incomplete. Full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 2,
+      "title": "Are creative tools functionality and user interaction well-designed?",
+      "description": "Assess whether creative tools include features like document editing, image processing, collaborative whiteboard, or multimedia content creation. Check if the tools provide real-time preview, version control, and export capabilities. Evaluate whether drag-and-drop interactions and intuitive toolbars are implemented. Deduct 5 points if tools lack real-time feedback, 3 points if collaborative features are missing. Full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 3,
+      "title": "Is the Java-HTML framework architecture properly structured?",
+      "description": "Review whether the Java backend follows MVC or similar architectural patterns, with proper separation of controllers, services, and data access layers. Check if RESTful APIs are correctly implemented for frontend-backend communication and whether proper error handling and response formatting are in place. Deduct 5 points if API design is inconsistent, 3 points if dependency injection is not utilized. Give 10 points if architecture is well-structured with clear separation of concerns.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 4,
+      "title": "Is the code robust?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the code can handle common abnormal situations (such as invalid input validation, database connection failures, file upload errors, concurrent access issues, etc.) and provide friendly error prompts or recovery mechanisms. Code with strong robustness should include proper exception handling, input sanitization, and graceful degradation. Give 10 points if fully robust, 5 points if average robustness, and 0 points if no exception handling is present.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 5,
+      "title": "Are there any innovative features that are eye-catching?",
+      "description": "Check whether the code includes surprise features that enhance user experience (e.g., 1. AI-powered course recommendation 2. AR campus navigation 3. Real-time collaborative editing 4. Smart scheduling optimization 5. Voice-to-text integration). Add 3 points for each practical innovative feature implemented with proper demonstration (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 authentication systems coexisting) 2. Function modules unrelated to the three core themes 3. Over-engineered features that complicate basic operations. 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 (proper package structure, separation of frontend/backend concerns), code documentation, configuration management, and build process. Deduct 5 points if global state pollution is found or SOLID principles are violated; deduct 5 points if code duplication rate is too high (over 30%); deduct 5 points if no build automation or dependency management is present. Full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 8,
+      "title": "Does the interface vision meet professional design standards?",
+      "description": "Evaluate whether the overall design follows modern design principles: 1) Harmonious color matching with consistent theme (no more than 3 primary colors) 2) Proper layout spacing following grid systems (8px multiples) 3) Professional typography (body font ≥ 14px, line height ≥ 1.5) 4) Responsive design compatibility. Deduct 3 points for each crowded visual element, 5 points for jarring color combinations, and 5 points for inconsistent styling. 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) Loading states and progress indicators for async operations 3) Smooth transitions between pages/states (300-500ms) 4) Clear visual focus and navigation cues 5) Touch-friendly interface elements. Deduct 5 points for each operation without feedback, 3 points for janky animations or transitions, and 5 points for poor mobile responsiveness. Full score is 10 points.",
+      "maxScore": 10
+    }
+  ],
+  "class": "Web Applications-Education/Learning",
+  "difficulty": "hard"
+}