@getollie/cli 0.0.5 → 0.2.0

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

@@ -1,68 +0,0 @@
-{
-  "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

@@ -1,68 +0,0 @@
-{
-  "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

@@ -1,68 +0,0 @@
-{
-  "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

@@ -1,68 +0,0 @@
-{
-  "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"
-}

package/library/web_applications-education_learning/javascript-dynamic-three-level-train-menu.json

@@ -1,68 +0,0 @@
-{
-  "index": 887,
-  "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. Help me write JavaScript code that dynamically generates a three-level menu with the following requirements: The top level is \"Train Selection\", and the second level includes \"My Trains\", \"Morning Trains\", \"Afternoon Trains\", \"Elementary School Evening Tutoring\", and \"Middle School Evening Tutoring\".",
-  "checklist": [
-    {
-      "id": 0,
-      "title": "Is the three-level menu structure correctly implemented?",
-      "description": "Verify if the code properly implements a hierarchical menu with 'Train Selection' as the top level, and the five specified categories ('My Trains', 'Morning Trains', etc.) as second-level items. Check if the structure allows for third-level items to be added under each second-level category. Deduct 5 points if any level is missing, 3 points if the hierarchy is flattened incorrectly.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 1,
-      "title": "Is the menu generation truly dynamic?",
-      "description": "Assess whether the menu is generated programmatically through JavaScript rather than hardcoded in HTML. Check if the menu structure is defined as data (array/object) that can be easily modified without changing the core rendering logic. Full points require a clear separation between data structure and rendering logic. Deduct 5 points if menu items are hardcoded, 3 points if the approach doesn't allow easy menu structure modifications.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 2,
-      "title": "Is there proper event handling for menu interactions?",
-      "description": "Evaluate the implementation of expand/collapse functionality for menu items. Check for click handlers that toggle visibility of submenu items, proper event bubbling/delegation, and prevention of default actions when needed. Deduct 5 points if expand/collapse functionality is missing, 3 points if event handling has issues, and 2 points if there's no visual feedback on interaction.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 3,
-      "title": "Is the menu accessible and keyboard-navigable?",
-      "description": "Check if the menu implementation includes proper ARIA attributes (aria-expanded, aria-haspopup, etc.), keyboard navigation support (tab, arrow keys, escape), and focus management. Full points require complete keyboard accessibility implementation. Deduct 5 points if ARIA attributes are missing, 5 points if keyboard navigation is not implemented.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 4,
-      "title": "Is the code robust?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether the code can handle common abnormal situations (such as empty menu items, deeply nested structures, or long item text) and provide error handling. 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. Smooth animations for expand/collapse 2. Search functionality within the menu 3. Responsive design for different screen sizes). 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 toggle menu visibility) 2. Function modules unrelated to menu navigation (e.g., unnecessary animations) 3. Fancy effects that affect performance (e.g., excessive DOM manipulations). 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 menu data structure/rendering/event handling), code reusability, and maintainability. Deduct 5 points if global variables are overused; deduct 5 points if the code duplication rate is too high (similar logic repeated for different menu levels); deduct 5 points if there's no clear organization of code functionality. 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/javascript-tourism-app-backend-code-explanation.json

@@ -1,68 +0,0 @@
-{
-  "index": 1086,
-  "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 purposes. A complete implementation plan for an interactive JavaScript-based tourism app backend code explanation system, with a duration of 8 minutes, operated in VSCode editor, including code demonstrations, real-time interaction, and visual explanation features: requires complete runtime environment configuration or specific functionality extension details.",
-  "checklist": [
-    {
-      "id": 0,
-      "title": "Is the interactive JavaScript-based tourism app backend explanation system fully implemented?",
-      "description": "Review whether the code provides a complete backend explanation system including data models, API endpoints, authentication mechanisms, and database connections. Check if the system has proper MVC/MVVM architecture and RESTful API design. Score 0 if core backend functions are missing, 5 if basic CRUD operations are implemented, and 10 if it includes comprehensive tourism-specific backend functionality (user profiles, booking systems, location services, etc.).",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 1,
-      "title": "Is the VSCode editor integration properly configured?",
-      "description": "Evaluate if the code includes necessary VSCode extension configurations (.vscode folder, settings.json, launch.json, tasks.json) for seamless integration. Check if custom snippets, keyboard shortcuts, or debugging profiles are provided for tourism app development. Deduct 3 points if VSCode-specific features are not utilized, 3 points if debugging configurations are missing, and 4 points if there's no consideration for team collaboration settings. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 2,
-      "title": "Is the 8-minute demonstration flow properly organized?",
-      "description": "Assess whether the code includes a structured demonstration script with clear time allocations for each segment (e.g., 2 min for setup, 3 min for core features, 2 min for advanced capabilities, 1 min for Q&A). Check if demonstration checkpoints or commented code sections are included to guide the presenter. Deduct 5 points if the demonstration structure is missing, 3 points if timing is unrealistic for code complexity. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 3,
-      "title": "Are real-time interaction and visual explanation features implemented?",
-      "description": "Evaluate if the code includes interactive visualization components (e.g., dynamic flow charts, real-time data monitoring dashboards, interactive architecture diagrams) that help explain the backend system. Check if the visualization updates in real-time with backend operations. Deduct 5 points if visualizations are static, 3 points if real-time updates are limited to simple metrics. Add 3 points for innovative visual metaphors specific to tourism contexts (e.g., map-based data flow visualization). The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 4,
-      "title": "Is the code robust?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether the code can handle common abnormal situations (such as network failures, invalid inputs, database connection issues, etc.) and provide friendly error prompts or recovery mechanisms. Code with strong robustness should include proper error handling, logging, transaction management, and graceful degradation. Give 10 points if comprehensive error handling is implemented, 5 points if basic exception handling exists, and 0 points if no error 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 the experience (e.g., 1. AI-powered code explanation generator 2. Tourism data visualization with geographical mapping 3. Interactive code dependency graphs 4. Live performance monitoring dashboard). 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 logging systems coexisting) 2. Function modules unrelated to tourism backend explanation (e.g., unrelated frontend components) 3. Resource-intensive visualizations that affect demonstration 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 API/services/data access layers), unit test coverage, documentation quality, 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 visual explanation components follow 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 (code font is monospace, explanatory text is sans-serif with size ≥ 14px). Deduct 3 points for each cluttered visual element, 5 points for an ineffective color scheme for code highlighting, and 5 points for poor information hierarchy. 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) Code execution feedback delay ≤ 100ms 2) Transition animations controlled between 300-500ms 3) Clear visual focus on relevant code sections during explanation. Deduct 5 points for operations without visual feedback, 3 points for lagging transitions between explanation sections, and 5 points for unintuitive navigation between code examples. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    }
-  ],
-  "class": "Web Applications-Education/Learning",
-  "difficulty": "hard"
-}

package/library/web_applications-education_learning/javascript-website-grade-geography-questions.json

@@ -1,68 +0,0 @@
-{
-  "index": 1118,
-  "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. Use JavaScript to build a website for grading students' short-answer geography questions.",
-  "checklist": [
-    {
-      "id": 0,
-      "title": "Is the core grading engine properly implemented?",
-      "description": "Check if the code implements a natural language processing (NLP) algorithm for evaluating short-answer geography questions. The system should include keyword matching, semantic similarity analysis, or machine learning models. Score 0 if no grading logic is implemented, 5 if only basic keyword matching exists, and 10 if sophisticated analysis (context understanding, synonym recognition) is included.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 1,
-      "title": "Does the system have a comprehensive geography question database?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether the code includes or connects to a structured database of geography questions with corresponding answer criteria. The database should cover various geography topics (physical geography, human geography, etc.) with clear grading rubrics. Deduct 5 points if the question set is too limited (less than 20 questions), and 3 points if the answer criteria are ambiguous. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 2,
-      "title": "Is there a flexible student answer input system?",
-      "description": "Review the implementation of the answer submission interface, including text formatting, spell-checking, word count indicators, and support for special geography symbols or terminology. The interface should allow for different answer lengths and provide clear submission feedback. Deduct 5 points if the input system doesn't handle basic text formatting or if there's no character limit indicator. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 3,
-      "title": "Are the feedback and assessment features comprehensive?",
-      "description": "Check if the system provides detailed feedback on student answers, including strengths, weaknesses, correct concepts identified, and missing key points. Score 0 if no feedback is provided, 5 if only a basic score is given, and 10 if comprehensive, educational feedback with improvement suggestions is implemented.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 4,
-      "title": "Is the code robust?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether the code can handle common abnormal situations (such as empty submissions, extremely long answers, special characters, network interruptions, etc.) and provide friendly error prompts or recovery mechanisms. Code with strong robustness should be able to effectively handle these edge cases, giving 10 points. If the robustness is average, give 5 points, and if no exceptions are handled, give 0 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 5,
-      "title": "Are there any innovative features that are eye-catching?",
-      "description": "Check whether the code includes surprise features that enhance the experience (e.g., 1. Interactive maps for geography answers 2. Visualizations of student performance analytics 3. AI-suggested learning resources based on mistakes). 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 grading algorithms coexisting) 2. Function modules unrelated to geography question grading (e.g., a built-in game) 3. Fancy effects that affect performance (e.g., excessive animations). Deduct 3 points for each redundancy found, and directly deduct 10 points if the core functions are interfered with by redundant code.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 7,
-      "title": "Does the code have engineering quality?",
-      "description": "Review modular design (such as separating grading logic/UI/data 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) Grading result feedback delay ≤ 500ms 2) Transition animation duration controlled between 300-500ms 3) Clear visual guidance for question navigation. Deduct 5 points for each operation without feedback, 3 points for sluggish grading responses, 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/learning-partner-matching-system.json

@@ -1,68 +0,0 @@
-{
-  "index": 667,
-  "question": "You are a code expert. Please use your professional knowledge to generate accurate and professional responses. Be careful to ensure the generated code is executable for demonstration. Design a learning partner matching system that intelligently pairs users based on their learning goals, interests, and time schedules. Users can browse matching results and send invitations for collaborative learning. The system should record users' pairing history and feedback to optimize the matching algorithm.",
-  "checklist": [
-    {
-      "id": 0,
-      "title": "Is the user profile and preference system fully implemented?",
-      "description": "Review whether the code includes comprehensive user profiles with learning goals, interests, skill levels, time availability, and preferred learning styles. Check if users can update their preferences and if the system stores this information persistently. Score 0 if basic user data collection is missing, 5 if only basic fields are implemented, and 10 if the profile system is comprehensive with validation and privacy controls.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 1,
-      "title": "Is the matching algorithm properly designed and implemented?",
-      "description": "Evaluate the matching algorithm's sophistication - check if it considers multiple factors (learning goals, interests, schedule compatibility, skill level) with appropriate weighting. The algorithm should use more than simple filtering and include some form of scoring or ranking. Deduct 5 points if compatibility calculation is too simplistic, and 3 points if there's no consideration for complementary skills. Score 10 if the algorithm includes machine learning components or adaptive weighting based on past matches.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 2,
-      "title": "Is the invitation and communication system functional?",
-      "description": "Check whether the system includes ways for users to browse potential matches, send invitations, accept/decline requests, and initiate communication. Verify if invitation status tracking is implemented and whether notifications are provided. Deduct 5 points if the invitation flow is incomplete, and 3 points if there's no way to message or communicate with potential partners. Give 10 points if real-time notifications and multiple communication channels are implemented.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 3,
-      "title": "Is the feedback and algorithm optimization system implemented?",
-      "description": "Assess if the code includes mechanisms to collect user feedback after pairing experiences and whether this data is used to refine future matches. Check if there's a system for rating partnerships and providing structured feedback. Deduct 5 points if feedback collection is missing, and 3 points if collected data isn't fed back into the matching algorithm. Award 10 points if the system includes comprehensive analytics and demonstrably improves matches over time.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 4,
-      "title": "Is the code robust?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether the code handles common edge cases (mismatched preferences, no available matches, users in different time zones, etc.) and provides appropriate error handling. Check for input validation, security measures against data tampering, and graceful failure modes. Give 10 points if the code handles most edge cases elegantly, 5 points for average robustness with some unhandled exceptions, and 0 points if critical paths lack error handling.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 5,
-      "title": "Are there any innovative features that are eye-catching?",
-      "description": "Check whether the code includes surprise features that enhance the experience (e.g., 1. AI-suggested learning activities, 2. Gamification elements for consistent participation, 3. Integration with calendar systems for scheduling). 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 user matching approaches 2. Function modules unrelated to learning partnerships (e.g., extensive social media features) 3. Resource-intensive features that affect core functionality (e.g., unnecessary animations or media). 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 separation of concerns (user management, matching algorithm, communication system), code reusability, and testing provisions. Check for proper database design with normalization, API documentation, and security best practices. Deduct 5 points for global variable abuse, 5 points for repeated code blocks that could be functions, and 5 points for unsecured user data. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 8,
-      "title": "Does the interface vision meet professional design standards?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether the UI follows modern design principles: 1) Clean user profiles with appropriate information hierarchy 2) Intuitive matching results display with clear call-to-actions 3) Consistent visual language across the platform. Deduct 3 points for cluttered match displays, 5 points for poor information architecture that makes navigation difficult, and 5 points for inconsistent UI elements. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 9,
-      "title": "Is the dynamic interaction smooth and seamless?",
-      "description": "Judge whether the user flows are intuitive: 1) Setting up profiles and preferences feels streamlined 2) Discovering and connecting with potential partners requires minimal steps 3) Navigation between different system sections is coherent. Deduct 5 points for confusing user journeys, 3 points for slow or unresponsive interfaces during matching processes, and 5 points for inadequate feedback when actions are completed. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    }
-  ],
-  "class": "Web Applications-Education/Learning",
-  "difficulty": "medium"
-}