@getollie/cli 0.0.4 → 0.2.0

package/library/web_applications-education_learning/academic-research-platform-frontend.json

@@ -1,68 +0,0 @@
-{
-  "index": 1661,
-  "question": "You are a code expert. Please use your professional knowledge to generate accurate, professional responses. Make sure the generated code is executable for demonstration purposes. Create a front-end for the \"Review Writer\" website project using React framework, with a design style that is cutting-edge and tech-oriented while maintaining an academic aesthetic. The website navigation includes: Home, Data Analysis, Journal Recommendations, Resource Search, Literature Management, Research Proposals, Writing Assistant, and Security & Version Management.",
-  "checklist": [
-    {
-      "id": 0,
-      "title": "Is the React component architecture properly implemented?",
-      "description": "Evaluate if the code uses a clean component hierarchy with proper separation of concerns (presentational vs. container components). Check for context API or Redux for state management. Code should implement React hooks appropriately and avoid anti-patterns. Reusable components should be modular with well-defined props. Score 0 if React is not properly implemented, 5 if basic components exist but lack proper structure, 10 if the architecture follows best practices with clean component composition.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 1,
-      "title": "Is the navigation system fully functional with proper routing?",
-      "description": "Examine if all required navigation items (Home, Data Analysis, Journal Recommendations, Resource Search, Literature Management, Research Proposals, Writing Assistant, and Security & Version Management) are implemented. Check if React Router is properly configured with appropriate routes, including nested routing where applicable. Verify navigation state persistence across refreshes, browser history support, and URL parameter handling. Score 3 if basic navigation exists, 7 if most items are implemented with routing, 10 if comprehensive navigation with proper state management is implemented.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 2,
-      "title": "Does the UI reflect the cutting-edge tech-oriented style with academic aesthetic?",
-      "description": "Assess whether the design balances modern tech aesthetics (clean lines, appropriate white space, subtle animations) with academic elements (structured layout, legible typography, scholarly color scheme). Check for consistency in UI components across all pages. The design should have visual hierarchy with clear content organization. Score 3 if the basic style is present but inconsistent, 7 if design is cohesive but lacks refinement, 10 if the UI demonstrates sophisticated design principles with perfect balance between tech and academic aesthetics.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 3,
-      "title": "Are all specified website sections meaningfully implemented?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether each section (Data Analysis, Journal Recommendations, Resource Search, etc.) has appropriate functionality beyond mere placeholders. Data Analysis should have data visualization components, Journal Recommendations should have filtering capabilities, Resource Search needs proper search functionality, Literature Management requires document organization features, Research Proposals section should have document creation tools, Writing Assistant needs text editing capabilities, and Security & Version Management should include version control UI. Deduct 1 point per section without meaningful implementation. 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 API failures, form validation errors, loading states, etc.) and provide friendly error prompts or recovery mechanisms. Code with strong robustness should include error boundaries, form validation, loading states, and graceful degradation. Give 10 points for comprehensive error handling, 5 points if only basic validation exists, 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. AI-powered writing suggestions 2. Citation format auto-detection 3. Interactive research timeline visualization 4. Real-time collaboration tools). 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 with overlapping functionality) 2. Function modules unrelated to academic writing/research (e.g., social media feeds) 3. Fancy effects that affect performance (e.g., excessive animations or unnecessarily complex visualizations). Deduct 3 points for each redundancy found, and directly deduct 10 points if the core functions are interfered with by redundant code.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 7,
-      "title": "Does the code have engineering quality?",
-      "description": "Review modular design (such as separating UI components/business logic/API layer), component reusability, and build process configuration. 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 properly configured. 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 plus accents) 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, appropriate font for academic content). 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 for academic workflow. Deduct 5 points for each operation without feedback, 3 points for visual after-images during navigation transitions, and 5 points for hard-to-find key function buttons. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    }
-  ],
-  "class": "Web Applications-Education/Learning",
-  "difficulty": "easy"
-}

package/library/web_applications-education_learning/ai-teaching-assistant-educational-platform.json

@@ -1,68 +0,0 @@
-{
-  "index": 1337,
-  "question": "You are a coding expert. Please use your professional knowledge to generate accurate and professional responses. Make sure to ensure that the code you generate is executable for demonstration purposes. Help me write the project content for an AI teaching assistant educational platform.",
-  "checklist": [
-    {
-      "id": 0,
-      "title": "Is a comprehensive AI teaching assistant system architecture designed?",
-      "description": "Review whether the architecture clearly defines the core components of an educational platform (user management, content delivery, AI assistant integration, database design). Score 0 if there's no clear architecture, 5 if basic components are outlined but connections are unclear, and 10 if a complete, well-integrated system architecture with clear data flows is provided.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 1,
-      "title": "Is the AI interaction model properly implemented?",
-      "description": "Evaluate the implementation of the AI teaching assistant's core functionality, including natural language processing capabilities, response generation algorithms, and contextual understanding. Look for prompt engineering techniques, model selection justification, and handling of educational context. Deduct 5 points if the AI model lacks educational domain adaptation, and 3 points if there's no context retention between interactions. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 2,
-      "title": "Is the educational content management system fully functional?",
-      "description": "Check whether the platform includes a comprehensive content management system with curriculum organization, lesson planning, assessment creation, and learning path customization. Score 0 if content management is missing, 5 if basic management exists but lacks educational metadata/taxonomies, and 10 if there is a complete system with content versioning, learning objective mapping, and adapting content based on student progress.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 3,
-      "title": "Are student progress tracking and analytics features implemented?",
-      "description": "Evaluate the implementation of learning analytics, student performance tracking, and personalized feedback mechanisms. Score 10 points if the system includes comprehensive dashboards for educators, learning pattern detection algorithms, and personalized intervention suggestions. Deduct 5 points if analytics are limited to basic metrics without actionable insights, and 3 points if visualization components are missing or inadequate.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 4,
-      "title": "Is the code robust?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether the code can handle common abnormal situations (such as invalid user inputs, network interruptions, AI service 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 educational experience (e.g., 1. Real-time speech-to-text for lecture transcription 2. AI-generated visual concept maps 3. Personalized learning style adaptation). 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 educational functions (e.g., multiple assessment systems) 2. Function modules unrelated to education (e.g., excessive gamification elements) 3. Fancy effects that affect platform performance (e.g., unnecessary 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 educational content/AI service/user interface 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 educational design standards?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether the overall design follows modern educational UX principles: 1) Accessible color scheme (WCAG AA compliance) 2) Consistent information hierarchy (clear visual distinction between primary/secondary content) 3) Professional typography system (readable fonts with proper contrast). Deduct 3 points for cluttered learning interfaces, 5 points for cognitive overload-inducing layouts, and 5 points for non-intuitive navigation patterns. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 9,
-      "title": "Is the platform interaction designed for effective learning?",
-      "description": "Judge whether the interaction design supports educational goals: 1) Clear feedback on learning activities within 1-2 seconds 2) Scaffolded interfaces that adapt to learner proficiency 3) Distraction-minimizing focus states during core learning activities. Deduct 5 points for cognitive friction in primary learning paths, 3 points for inconsistent interaction patterns across modules, and 5 points for excessive UI friction in assessment components. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    }
-  ],
-  "class": "Web Applications-Education/Learning",
-  "difficulty": "medium"
-}

package/library/web_applications-education_learning/andrej-karpathy-minimalist-note-taking-method.json

@@ -1,68 +0,0 @@
-{
-  "index": 438,
-  "question": "You are a Code Expert\n\n## Andrej Karpathy's Minimalist Note-taking Method\n### How to Manage All Non-Project Notes Using a Single File\n\n**Design Style:**\n- **Visual Style:** Soft Technology\n- **Emotional Tone:** Warm and Friendly\n- **Target Audience:** Young Demographics\n- **Brand Personality:** Futuristic Tech Feel\n\n**Visual Elements and Layout:**\n- **Rounded Card Layout:** Use large rounded corner cards as information containers, colored in mint green, light gray, and champagne gold accents to create a friendly, approachable feel.\n- **Soft Color System:** Primarily using mint green, light gray, champagne gold and other soft tones, avoiding strong visual stimulation.\n- **Minimalist White Space Design:** Ample white space enhances readability and reduces visual fatigue.\n- **Subtle Shadow Depth:** Subtle shadow effects give the interface a slight three-dimensional feel without overemphasis.\n- **Functional Aestheticism:** Design serves function, with no superfluous decorative elements.\n- **Grid-based Layout:** Cards arranged on a clear grid system to maintain overall sense of order.\n- **Gradient Accents:** Soft gradients used as backgrounds in parts of the interface, such as transitions from mint green to light gray, enhancing the modern feel.\n\n**Typography Style:**\n- **Data Highlighting:** Key numerical information uses extra-large font size and bold treatment, e.g., \"12,002\", \"20x\".\n- **Clear Hierarchical Typography:** Titles, explanatory text, data, and annotations distinguished by clear font size hierarchy (Headings 80-160px, Subheadings 48-80px, Body Text 32-48px, Supporting Information 24-32px).\n- **Simple Sans-serif Fonts:** All text uses modern, clean sans-serif fonts for improved readability.\n- **Consistent Text Alignment:** Maintaining unified left alignment or center alignment within cards.\n- **Color-coded Important Terms:** Using high-contrast colors like blue to mark important terms such as \"tweets\" and \"threads\".\n- **Breathing Space:** Ample spacing between text blocks creates \"breathing\" room.\n- **Special Brand Name Treatment:** Product names like \"alohi\", \"deel.\" use special fonts or styles to strengthen brand recognition.\n\n**Visual Element Style:**\n- **Subtle Icon System:** Using simple linear or filled icons, appropriately sized without overwhelming the content.\n- **Progress Visualization:** Semi-transparent circular charts + subtle gradient fills intuitively display progress, such as annual completion percentage.\n- **Color-coded Information:** Different cards use different colors for quick distinction between functional modules.\n- **Brand Identity Integration:** Product logos naturally integrated into the interface, such as \"alohi's\" circular logo.\n- **Profile Picture Elements:** Appropriate use of circular avatars adds humanizing qualities, such as on customer recommendation cards.\n- **Geometric Decorations:** Simple geometric shapes used as background decorations, such as semi-transparent circles.\n- **Component Consistency:** Buttons, labels, tabs and other elements maintain a unified style, enhancing systematic feel.\n\n**Design Principle Guidance:**\n- **Visual Hierarchy:** Headings (80-160px) > Subheadings (48-80px) > Body Text (32-48px) > Supporting Information (24-32px).\n- **Color Scheme:** Using mint green, light gray, and champagne gold as the three main color tones, ensuring contrast meets WCAG 2.1 standards.\n- **White Space Art:** Strategic use of negative space creates elegant visual balance.\n- **Font Selection:** Recommended use of two complementary modern, clean sans-serif fonts, ensuring both readability and aesthetics.\n\nFrontend implementation required",
-  "checklist": [
-    {
-      "id": 0,
-      "title": "Is Karpathy's single-file note-taking methodology accurately implemented?",
-      "description": "Review whether the code correctly implements the core concept of managing all non-project notes in a single file structure. Check if features include: unified note entry/editing, hierarchical tag system, search functionality, and note linking mechanisms. Score 0 if the single-file concept is not implemented, 5 if only basic note management exists, and 10 if the complete minimalist methodology with advanced search and organization is fully realized.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 1,
-      "title": "Does the visual design strictly follow the 'Soft Technology' aesthetic requirements?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether the interface adheres to the specified design system: mint green/light gray/champagne gold color palette, rounded card layouts with subtle shadows, and gradient accents. Check color contrast ratios meet WCAG 2.1 standards. Deduct 3 points for each color deviation from the specified palette, 5 points if rounded corners are not consistently applied, and 3 points if gradient implementations are jarring or excessive. Full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 2,
-      "title": "Is the typography hierarchy system properly implemented according to specifications?",
-      "description": "Verify that font sizing follows the exact hierarchy: Headings (80-160px), Subheadings (48-80px), Body Text (32-48px), Supporting Information (24-32px). Check for consistent sans-serif font usage, appropriate line spacing (≥1.5x), and proper text alignment. Deduct 5 points if the hierarchy is not maintained, 3 points for inconsistent font choices, and 2 points for inadequate text spacing. Full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 3,
-      "title": "Are the visual elements and layout components accurately executed?",
-      "description": "Assess implementation of: grid-based card layout, subtle shadow depth effects, minimalist white space design, progress visualization elements, and icon system consistency. Check if geometric decorations and brand identity elements are properly integrated. Deduct 3 points for each missing visual component, 5 points if the grid system is not properly implemented, and 3 points if white space ratios are inadequate. Full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 4,
-      "title": "Is the code robust and handles edge cases effectively?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether the code can handle common abnormal situations such as: large note files, special characters in content, browser compatibility issues, data corruption recovery, and performance degradation with extensive notes. Code with strong robustness should effectively handle these edge cases, giving 10 points. If robustness is average, give 5 points, and if no exceptions are handled, give 0 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 5,
-      "title": "Are there innovative features that enhance the note-taking experience?",
-      "description": "Check whether the code includes valuable enhancements such as: 1. Smart auto-tagging based on content analysis 2. Real-time collaboration features 3. Export functionality with formatting preservation 4. Keyboard shortcut customization 5. Dark/light theme toggle matching the soft technology aesthetic. Add 2-3 points for each practical innovative feature implemented (maximum 10 points).",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 6,
-      "title": "Are there any redundant features that violate the minimalist principle?",
-      "description": "Strictly check for three types of redundancy: 1. Redundant UI components that clutter the interface 2. Features unrelated to note-taking (e.g., built-in games, social media integration) 3. Excessive animations or effects that contradict the 'soft technology' aesthetic. Deduct 3 points for each redundancy found, and directly deduct 10 points if core minimalist principles are violated by feature bloat.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 7,
-      "title": "Does the code demonstrate professional engineering quality?",
-      "description": "Review modular architecture (separation of data layer/view layer/utility functions), code organization, component reusability, and performance optimization. Deduct 5 points if global state is poorly managed or no design patterns are used; deduct 5 points if code duplication exceeds 25%; deduct 3 points if no build optimization is implemented. Full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 8,
-      "title": "Does the interface design meet the specified professional visual standards?",
-      "description": "Evaluate adherence to the design specification: 1) Exact color palette implementation (mint green, light gray, champagne gold) 2) Proper spacing following 8px grid principles 3) Consistent rounded corner radius across all cards 4) Appropriate contrast ratios for accessibility. Deduct 3 points for each spacing inconsistency, 5 points for color palette deviations, and 5 points for poor visual hierarchy. Full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 9,
-      "title": "Are the interactions smooth and aligned with the 'warm and friendly' user experience?",
-      "description": "Judge whether dynamic effects create the intended emotional response: 1) Hover states with subtle transitions (200-300ms) 2) Click feedback that feels responsive (≤100ms) 3) Smooth card animations when adding/editing notes 4) Intuitive navigation flow that supports the single-file methodology. Deduct 5 points for each interaction without proper feedback, 3 points for jarring transitions, and 5 points if key functions lack discoverability. Full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    }
-  ],
-  "class": "Web Applications-Education/Learning",
-  "difficulty": "medium"
-}

package/library/web_applications-education_learning/android-novel-reader-app-json-url.json

@@ -1,68 +0,0 @@
-{
-  "index": 937,
-  "question": "You are a code expert. Please use your professional knowledge to generate accurate and expert responses. Be sure to make the generated code executable for demonstration purposes. Design a mobile app for the Android system that functions as a novel reader, retrieving book content in JSON format from specific URLs.",
-  "checklist": [
-    {
-      "id": 0,
-      "title": "Is the core novel reading functionality fully implemented?",
-      "description": "Review whether the code accurately implements the book content retrieval mechanism from JSON APIs, including parsing, caching, and displaying formatted text content. Check for proper handling of different chapter navigation, bookmarks, and reading progress tracking. Score 0 if core reading functionality is missing, 5 if basic reading is implemented but lacks navigation features, and 10 if all essential reader functions are included.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 1,
-      "title": "Is the JSON data handling correctly implemented?",
-      "description": "Evaluate the JSON parsing mechanism, including error handling for malformed data, empty responses, or unexpected content structure. Check for proper model classes representing book and chapter data. Verify that JSON parsing is performed off the main thread to prevent UI freezes. Deduct 5 points if no error handling exists, 3 points if parsing blocks the UI thread, and 2 points if model classes are poorly designed. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 2,
-      "title": "Is the network communication layer properly designed?",
-      "description": "Check whether the app implements proper HTTP client (Retrofit/Volley/OkHttp), handles network timeouts, implements retry mechanisms, and displays appropriate loading/error states. Verify implementation of network state monitoring and offline mode. Deduct 5 points if no network error handling exists, 3 points if no caching strategy is implemented, and 3 points if offline mode is missing. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 3,
-      "title": "Is the Android-specific architecture and lifecycle management implemented correctly?",
-      "description": "Assess whether the code follows Android architectural patterns (MVVM/MVP/MVI), handles configuration changes properly, manages Activity/Fragment lifecycles, and implements proper state preservation. Check for implementation of ViewModels, LiveData/StateFlow, and proper navigation components. Deduct 5 points for not following architecture patterns, 3 points for lifecycle leaks, and 3 points for improper state management. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 4,
-      "title": "Is the code robust?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether the code can handle common abnormal situations (such as network errors, out-of-memory issues, device rotation, background process killing, 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 reading experience (e.g., 1. Text-to-speech integration 2. Customizable reading themes/fonts 3. Reading statistics and analytics 4. Social sharing capabilities 5. Annotation and highlighting). 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 text parsing engines) 2. Function modules unrelated to novel reading (e.g., built-in games) 3. Fancy effects that affect performance (e.g., excessive animations during page turns). Deduct 3 points for each redundancy found, and directly deduct 10 points if the core functions are interfered with by redundant code.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 7,
-      "title": "Does the code have engineering quality?",
-      "description": "Review modular design (such as separating UI/business logic/data access layers), unit test coverage, and build process automation. Examine proper dependency injection usage, static analysis tools integration, and code documentation. Deduct 5 points if global state pollution is found or design patterns are not used; deduct 3 points if the code duplication rate is too high (over 30%); deduct 2 points if build variants (debug/release) are not properly configured. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 8,
-      "title": "Does the interface design meet modern Android UI standards?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether the UI follows Material Design principles: 1) Proper implementation of components (RecyclerView, ConstraintLayout, etc.) 2) Support for both light/dark themes 3) Responsive layouts for different screen sizes 4) Proper touch target sizes (min 48dp) 5) Accessibility compliance. Deduct 2 points for each UI guideline violation, 3 points for non-responsive layouts, and 3 points for accessibility issues. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 9,
-      "title": "Is the dynamic interaction smooth and battery-efficient?",
-      "description": "Judge whether the app performs well on mobile devices: 1) Smooth scrolling without frame drops 2) Efficient battery usage (no continuous background processes) 3) Fast app startup time (under 2 seconds) 4) Proper handling of system resources. Deduct 3 points for janky scrolling, 3 points for excessive battery drain, 2 points for slow startup, and 2 points for memory leaks. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    }
-  ],
-  "class": "Web Applications-Education/Learning",
-  "difficulty": "medium"
-}

package/library/web_applications-education_learning/anesthesia-record-form-web-code.json

@@ -1,68 +0,0 @@
-{
-  "index": 1381,
-  "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 display. Help me write a web code for an anesthesia record form, then verify if the web code can run properly. If not, modify it again until it's perfect.",
-  "checklist": [
-    {
-      "id": 0,
-      "title": "Is the basic structure of the anesthesia record form implemented?",
-      "description": "Review whether the HTML structure properly includes all essential sections of an anesthesia record form: patient information, pre-anesthesia assessment, intraoperative monitoring, medications administration, fluid management, and post-anesthesia care. Score 0 if core sections are missing, 5 if basic structure exists but lacks medical specificity, and 10 if the form comprehensively covers all standard anesthesia documentation requirements.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 1,
-      "title": "Are the data input fields appropriate for clinical use?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether the form includes the correct types of input fields for different medical data (e.g., dropdowns for ASA classification, numeric fields with proper ranges for vital signs, date/time pickers for procedures). Check if field validation implements medical constraints (e.g., systolic BP range 60-250 mmHg). Deduct 3 points for each critical medical field using inappropriate input types, and 5 points if validation is missing for critical values. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 2,
-      "title": "Does the form implement real-time vital signs charting?",
-      "description": "Check if the code includes a visual charting system for vital signs (HR, BP, SpO2, EtCO2, temperature) that can be updated in real-time. Evaluate if the charting uses appropriate visualization (line graphs for trends, color coding for out-of-range values). Deduct 5 points if charts are static, 3 points if they lack proper scaling, and 5 points if they don't support real-time updates. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 3,
-      "title": "Is there functionality for medication tracking and calculations?",
-      "description": "Review whether the code implements medication tracking with timestamps, dose calculations based on patient weight, and cumulative dose monitoring. Check for drug interaction warnings and automated BMI/dosage calculations. Deduct 3 points if timestamps aren't automatic, 5 points if weight-based calculations are missing, and 5 points if there's no cumulative dose 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 invalid data entry, connection issues during form submission, or browser compatibility issues) and provide friendly error prompts or recovery mechanisms. Code with strong robustness should be able to effectively handle these edge cases, giving 10 points. If the robustness is average, give 5 points, and if no exceptions are handled, give 0 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 5,
-      "title": "Are there any innovative features that are eye-catching?",
-      "description": "Check whether the code includes surprise features that enhance clinical workflow (e.g., 1. Voice input for hands-free documentation 2. Automated alerts for concerning vital sign trends 3. Integration with mock EMR systems 4. Offline functionality with data synchronization). 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. Duplicate data entry fields for the same information 2. Functionality not typically needed in anesthesia documentation (e.g., complex animation effects) 3. Performance-heavy features that could slow down critical documentation during surgery. Deduct 3 points for each redundancy found, and directly deduct 10 points if the core medical documentation 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 medical data models/view/form validation), test coverage for critical calculations, and responsive design for different clinical environments. Deduct 5 points if global variables store critical patient data without proper encapsulation; deduct 5 points if medical calculations lack validation; deduct 5 points if the form breaks on mobile devices that might be used in medical settings. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 8,
-      "title": "Does the interface vision meet clinical design standards?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether the design follows medical interface principles: 1) Clear visual hierarchy prioritizing critical patient data 2) Appropriate color schemes that highlight abnormal values and use accepted clinical color conventions (e.g., red for hypotension) 3) Readable typography under varied lighting conditions (operating room vs. recovery). Deduct 3 points for poor information hierarchy, 5 points for non-standard clinical color usage, and 5 points for text that would be illegible in medical settings. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 9,
-      "title": "Is the form optimized for clinical workflow?",
-      "description": "Judge whether the interface supports efficient clinical documentation: 1) Quick access to common medications and procedures 2) Keyboard shortcuts for frequent actions 3) Logical tab order following the anesthesia workflow 4) Auto-saving to prevent data loss. Deduct 5 points for workflow that contradicts clinical practice, 3 points for excessive clicks required for common tasks, and 5 points for designs that would distract from patient care. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    }
-  ],
-  "class": "Web Applications-Education/Learning",
-  "difficulty": "hard"
-}

package/library/web_applications-education_learning/apple-iphone-generations-intro.json

@@ -1,68 +0,0 @@
-{
-  "index": 1292,
-  "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. Please help me create a website that can be directly opened to display introductions to various generations of Apple iPhones.",
-  "checklist": [
-    {
-      "id": 0,
-      "title": "Is the iPhone generation display structure complete?",
-      "description": "Review whether the HTML/CSS structure accurately implements a comprehensive timeline or grid of iPhone generations, from the original iPhone to the latest models. Check if each iPhone has its own section/card with consistent layout. Score 0 if missing multiple generations, 5 if only major generations are included, and 10 if all generations including variants (e.g., Pro, Max, Plus models) are properly represented.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 1,
-      "title": "Is the iPhone data presentation comprehensive?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether each iPhone model includes essential information: release date, key specifications (processor, display, camera features), pricing (original/historical), and distinctive features that defined that generation. Deduct 2 points for each major information category missing, and 1 point for incomplete technical specifications. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 2,
-      "title": "Is visual representation of iPhone models implemented?",
-      "description": "Check if the website includes visual elements representing each iPhone generation (images, illustrations, or 3D models). Images should be properly sized, optimized, and responsive. Assess whether alt text is provided for accessibility. Deduct 5 points if visuals are missing for multiple models, 3 points if images are of poor quality or not responsive, and 2 points if alt text is missing. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 3,
-      "title": "Is comparison functionality between iPhone models available?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether the website allows users to compare different iPhone generations side-by-side (through tables, interactive elements, or visual comparisons). Check for filtering options by features, year, or specifications. Award 10 points for comprehensive comparison tools, 5 points for basic comparison capabilities, and 0 if comparison functionality is absent.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 4,
-      "title": "Is the code robust?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether the code can handle common abnormal situations (such as missing images, variable screen sizes, older browsers, etc.) and provide fallback solutions. Code with strong robustness should implement responsive design principles, polyfills for older browsers, and graceful error handling. Give 10 points for comprehensive robustness, 5 points for average implementation, and 0 points if critical fallbacks are missing.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 5,
-      "title": "Are there any innovative features that are eye-catching?",
-      "description": "Check whether the code includes surprising features that enhance the experience (e.g., 1. Interactive 3D iPhone models 2. Evolution timeline visualization 3. Color-accurate iPhone rendering 4. Audio demonstrations of features). Add 2.5 points for each practical innovative feature implemented (maximum 10 points).",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 6,
-      "title": "Are there any redundant features?",
-      "description": "Strictly check three types of redundancy: 1. Redundant implementation of similar functions (e.g., multiple ways to view the same information) 2. Function modules unrelated to iPhone information (e.g., unrelated product categories) 3. Fancy effects that affect performance (e.g., excessive animations or unnecessary parallax 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 the code's organization (separation of HTML/CSS/JS), naming conventions, appropriate use of semantic HTML elements, and code optimization (minified assets, lazy loading for images). Deduct 3 points for non-semantic markup, 3 points for inefficient or unorganized code, 2 points for poor naming conventions, and 2 points if performance optimization is missing. 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 Apple's design principles: 1) Clean, minimalist aesthetic with appropriate white space 2) Typography that mirrors Apple's San Francisco font or equivalent 3) Color scheme that complements Apple's brand identity. Deduct 3 points for cluttered layouts, 4 points for non-Apple-like design elements, and 3 points for inconsistent styling across the site. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 9,
-      "title": "Is the dynamic interaction smooth and seamless?",
-      "description": "Judge whether the website implements smooth transitions and interactions: 1) Page loading and transitions under 300ms 2) Smooth scrolling between sections 3) Intuitive navigation with clear information hierarchy. Deduct 3 points for jerky animations, 4 points for confusing navigation patterns, and 3 points for unresponsive interface elements. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    }
-  ],
-  "class": "Web Applications-Education/Learning",
-  "difficulty": "easy"
-}

package/library/web_applications-education_learning/automotive-chip-industry-subdivisions-html-code.json

@@ -1,68 +0,0 @@
-{
-  "index": 1365,
-  "question": "You are a code expert. Please use your professional knowledge to generate accurate and professional responses. Make sure that the code you generate can be executed for display. Summarize the subdivisions of the automotive chip industry and generate HTML code.",
-  "checklist": [
-    {
-      "id": 0,
-      "title": "Is the automotive chip industry subdivision analysis comprehensive?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether the content covers major automotive chip categories (e.g., MCU, SoC, ADAS processors, power management ICs, sensors). Check if the analysis includes key applications, technological trends, and market positioning of different chip types. Score 0 if only basic definitions are provided, 5 if common subdivisions are listed but lack depth, and 10 if comprehensive coverage with technical specifications and market contexts is included.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 1,
-      "title": "Does the HTML structure properly organize the industry subdivision content?",
-      "description": "Review if the HTML structure uses appropriate semantic elements (e.g., section, article, header) to organize the content hierarchically. Check if the document structure reflects the logical relationship between different chip categories and their applications. Deduct 5 points if the HTML lacks proper sectioning elements, 3 points if heading levels (h1-h6) are improperly nested, and 2 points if there's no clear content organization. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 2,
-      "title": "Does the visualization include appropriate data representation?",
-      "description": "Assess if the code implements visual elements (charts, diagrams, or tables) to represent market share, technical comparisons, or industry relationships. Evaluate if the chosen visualization methods effectively communicate complex chip industry information. Deduct 5 points if no visualization is included, 3 points if visualizations are present but don't add meaningful insight, and 2 points if the visualizations contain inaccurate data. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 3,
-      "title": "Is the implementation responsive and cross-browser compatible?",
-      "description": "Check if the HTML code includes responsive design principles (media queries, flexible layouts, viewport meta tags) to ensure the content displays correctly across different screen sizes. Verify CSS prefixing or feature detection for cross-browser compatibility. Deduct 5 points if responsive design is absent, 3 points if it's partially implemented but breaks at certain viewports, and 2 points if browser-specific issues aren't addressed. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 4,
-      "title": "Is the code robust?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether the code can handle common abnormal situations (such as missing data, image loading failures, script errors) and provides fallback options. Code with strong robustness should include error handling for API calls and graceful degradation. Give 10 points for comprehensive error handling, 5 points for basic error checks, and 0 points if no exception 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 drill-down capabilities for chip categories 2. Animated transitions between industry segments 3. Comparison tools for different chip specifications). Add 3 points for each practical innovative feature implemented (maximum 10 points).",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 6,
-      "title": "Are there any redundant features?",
-      "description": "Strictly check three types of redundancy: 1. Redundant implementation of similar visualization functions 2. Content elements unrelated to automotive chips 3. Fancy effects that affect performance (e.g., unnecessary animations, excessive DOM manipulation). Deduct 3 points for each redundancy found, and directly deduct 10 points if the core information is obscured by redundant code.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 7,
-      "title": "Does the code have engineering quality?",
-      "description": "Review modular design (such as separating content/presentation/behavior), code reusability, and maintainability. Deduct 5 points if inline styles are heavily used instead of external CSS; deduct 5 points if the code contains duplicated functionality or hardcoded values; deduct 5 points if JavaScript is not properly organized or lacks comments. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 8,
-      "title": "Does the interface vision meet professional design standards?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether the overall design follows modern design principles: 1) Harmonious color matching (no more than 3 primary colors) 2) Proper layout spacing (element spacing follows the 8px multiple principle) 3) Professional font system (body font size ≥ 14px, line height over 1.5 times). Deduct 3 points for each crowded visual element, 5 points for a glaring color combination, and 5 points for chaotic text-image layout. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 9,
-      "title": "Is the dynamic interaction smooth and seamless?",
-      "description": "Judge whether the dynamic effects conform to human perception characteristics: 1) Click feedback delay ≤ 100ms 2) Transition animation duration controlled between 300-500ms 3) Clear visual focus guidance. Deduct 5 points for each operation without feedback, 3 points for visual after-images during fast sliding, and 5 points for hard-to-find key function buttons. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    }
-  ],
-  "class": "Web Applications-Education/Learning",
-  "difficulty": "easy"
-}

package/library/web_applications-education_learning/blazor-binary-dat-file-parsing.json

@@ -1,68 +0,0 @@
-{
-  "index": 888,
-  "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 a Blazor project, after uploading a binary dat file, parse the data sequentially according to a fixed data type protocol.",
-  "checklist": [
-    {
-      "id": 0,
-      "title": "Is the file upload mechanism properly implemented in Blazor?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether the implementation uses Blazor's InputFile component correctly, handles large file uploads appropriately (streaming for files >2MB), and provides progress feedback to users. Check if the component prevents multiple simultaneous uploads that could cause race conditions. Deduct 5 points if there's no file size validation, 3 points if progress indication is missing, and 2 points if file type filtering for .dat files is absent. Full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 1,
-      "title": "Is the binary data parsing logic correctly implemented?",
-      "description": "Review whether the code correctly implements binary data reading using appropriate methods (BinaryReader, Memory<byte>, Span<byte>), properly handles endianness issues, and correctly interprets the binary format according to the specified protocol. Check for buffer management and memory efficiency. Deduct 5 points if endianness is not explicitly handled, 3 points if unsafe parsing that could lead to memory corruption is used, and 5 points if the data structure protocol is not clearly defined or followed. Full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 2,
-      "title": "Is error handling robust for binary parsing edge cases?",
-      "description": "Assess whether the code handles parsing exceptions gracefully, including unexpected EOF, corrupted data, or incorrect format versions. Check if validation is performed before parsing begins. Deduct 3 points if general exception handling is missing, 5 points if specific binary format validation is absent, and 5 points if parsing errors don't provide meaningful feedback to users about the nature of the error. Full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 3,
-      "title": "Is the parsed data visualized effectively in the UI?",
-      "description": "Examine how parsed data is presented to users - whether through tables, charts, or other appropriate visualizations based on the data type. Check if complex data structures are presented in a hierarchical manner. Deduct 3 points if raw data is displayed without formatting, 5 points if there's no contextual organization of related fields, and 5 points if large datasets aren't paginated or virtualized for performance. 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 files, parsing errors, memory limitations, UI thread blocking during parsing) 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 parsing with progress visualization 2. Schema-based binary format definition UI 3. Export capabilities to common formats like CSV/JSON 4. Data integrity validation with checksums). 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 parsing functions 2. Function modules unrelated to binary parsing (e.g., unnecessary analytics) 3. Expensive UI operations that affect parsing performance. Deduct 3 points for each redundancy found, and directly deduct 10 points if the core parsing 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 parsing logic/UI components/data models), unit test coverage for parsing edge cases, and adherence to Blazor component lifecycle best practices. Deduct 5 points if global state pollution is found; deduct 5 points if the code duplication rate is too high (over 30%); deduct 5 points if there's no separation between parsing logic and UI. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 8,
-      "title": "Does the interface vision meet professional design standards?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether the overall design follows modern design principles: 1) Harmonious color matching (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) UI remains responsive during binary parsing (background threading/progress updates) 2) Transition animations for data visualization are controlled between 300-500ms 3) Clear visual guidance during file selection and parsing phases. Deduct 5 points for UI freezing during parsing operations, 3 points for abrupt data presentation without transitions, and 5 points for lack of clear parsing status indicators. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    }
-  ],
-  "class": "Web Applications-Education/Learning",
-  "difficulty": "hard"
-}