@getollie/cli 0.0.5 → 0.2.1

package/library/multimedia_editing-audio_editing/qianqian-jingting-ttplayer-music-player-qml-pyside6.json

@@ -1,68 +0,0 @@
-{
-  "index": 1421,
-  "question": "You are a code expert. Please use your professional knowledge to generate accurate and professional responses. Be sure to ensure that the generated code is executable for demonstration. Create a Qianqian Jingting (TTPlayer) style music player software with QML for the interface and PySide6 for control.",
-  "checklist": [
-    {
-      "id": 0,
-      "title": "Is the music player interface design visually similar to TTPlayer?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether the QML interface properly implements the distinctive Qianqian Jingting (TTPlayer) visual style, including the classic blue gradient color scheme, semi-transparent design elements, reflective surfaces, and rounded corners. Score 0 if the design bears no resemblance to TTPlayer, 5 if basic styling is present but lacks defining characteristics, and 10 if the interface is nearly indistinguishable from the original TTPlayer aesthetic.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 1,
-      "title": "Does the code implement core music playback functionality?",
-      "description": "Check if the implementation includes essential music player functions: play/pause/stop controls, seeking functionality, volume control, playlist management, and support for common audio formats (MP3, FLAC, etc.). Verify that MediaPlayer or similar QML elements are properly integrated with audio sources. Score 0 if playback doesn't work, 5 if basic playback works but with limited controls, and 10 if all core functionality is properly implemented and working.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 2,
-      "title": "Is the PySide6 backend properly integrated with the QML frontend?",
-      "description": "Review whether the code correctly implements the MVC pattern with PySide6 providing backend functionality to the QML interface. Check that signals and slots are properly connected, Python models are exposed to QML correctly, and file system operations are handled by PySide6. Deduct 5 points if data binding is inconsistent or broken, and 3 points if Python backend functions are not properly accessible from QML. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 3,
-      "title": "Does the implementation include TTPlayer's signature visualization features?",
-      "description": "Assess whether the code implements TTPlayer's distinctive audio visualization elements, such as spectrum analyzer, waveform display, or particle effects that respond to music. Check that visualizations are responsive to audio in real-time using FFT analysis or similar techniques. Score 0 if visualizations are missing, 5 if basic visualizations exist but aren't reactive to music, and 10 if visualizations are fully implemented with TTPlayer's distinctive style.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 4,
-      "title": "Is the code robust?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether the code can handle common abnormal situations (such as missing audio files, corrupted metadata, memory limitations, 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. Lyrics synchronization and display 2. Online music search/streaming integration 3. Custom audio equalizer with presets). 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 volume control implementations) 2. Function modules unrelated to music playback (e.g., a built-in web browser) 3. Fancy effects that affect performance (e.g., excessive animations that consume CPU). 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/playback logic/data models), reusable QML components, Python class organization, and proper resource management. 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 resource files are not properly managed. 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 while maintaining TTPlayer's aesthetic: 1) Consistent and harmonious color scheme 2) Proper layout spacing and alignment 3) Professional typography (readable font sizes and weights). Deduct 3 points for each crowded visual element, 5 points for color combinations that clash with TTPlayer's brand identity, and 5 points for chaotic UI element placement. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 9,
-      "title": "Is the dynamic interaction smooth and responsive?",
-      "description": "Judge whether the dynamic effects conform to modern UI standards: 1) Click feedback delay ≤ 100ms 2) Smooth transitions between UI states 3) Responsive UI that doesn't block during file operations or loading. Deduct 5 points for each operation without feedback, 3 points for stuttering animations, and 5 points for UI freezing during background operations. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    }
-  ],
-  "class": "Multimedia Editing-Audio Editing",
-  "difficulty": "hard"
-}

package/library/multimedia_editing-audio_editing/real-time-multi-user-audio-editing-platform.json

@@ -1,68 +0,0 @@
-{
-  "index": 516,
-  "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 whenever possible. Implement a real-time multi-user online audio editing collaboration platform that allows multiple users to simultaneously edit the same audio project, synchronize changes in real-time, and provide version control functionality.",
-  "checklist": [
-    {
-      "id": 0,
-      "title": "Is the audio editing system fully implemented?",
-      "description": "Review whether the code implements core audio processing functionality including waveform visualization, playback controls, track mixing, and effects application. Score 0 if core editing capabilities are missing, 5 if only basic playback and recording are implemented, and 10 if comprehensive audio manipulation features (cutting, splicing, effects, multi-track editing) are present.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 1,
-      "title": "Is the real-time collaboration functionality implemented?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether the system allows multiple users to edit the same audio project simultaneously with proper conflict resolution. Check for WebSocket/WebRTC implementation with operational transformation or CRDT algorithms for handling concurrent edits. Deduct 5 points if changes aren't propagated in real-time (≤ 300ms), and 3 points if user presence indicators are missing. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 2,
-      "title": "Is the version control system properly implemented?",
-      "description": "Assess whether the code includes robust version control capabilities including commit history, branching, merging, and the ability to revert to previous states. Check if audio state snapshots are stored efficiently (using differential storage rather than full copies). Deduct 5 points if there's no visual history timeline, and 3 points if branch management is missing. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 3,
-      "title": "Is the audio synchronization mechanism optimized for network efficiency?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether the code implements bandwidth-efficient audio synchronization using techniques like delta encoding, audio chunk caching, and progressive loading. Check for handling of network latency with local prediction and server correction. Deduct 5 points if large audio files transfer causes UI freezing, and 3 points if there's no offline editing capability with later synchronization. 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 audio format incompatibilities, network interruptions, browser audio API limitations, etc.) and provide friendly error prompts or recovery mechanisms. Code with strong robustness should be able to effectively handle these edge cases, giving 10 points. If the robustness is average, give 5 points, and if no exceptions are handled, give 0 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 5,
-      "title": "Are there any innovative features that are eye-catching?",
-      "description": "Check whether the code includes surprise features that enhance the experience (e.g., 1. AI-assisted audio enhancement tools 2. Real-time voice chat for collaboration sessions 3. Interactive audio visualization options). 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 audio editing (e.g., a built-in video player) 3. Fancy effects that affect performance (e.g., excessive animations in the UI). 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/network 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) Waveform rendering and manipulation response ≤ 100ms 2) Transition animation duration controlled between 300-500ms 3) Clear visual feedback during audio processing operations. Deduct 5 points for each operation without feedback, 3 points for laggy waveform displays during editing, and 5 points for unintuitive tool placement. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    }
-  ],
-  "class": "Multimedia Editing-Audio Editing",
-  "difficulty": "hard"
-}

package/library/multimedia_editing-audio_editing/timeline-based-audio-annotation-tool.json

@@ -1,68 +0,0 @@
-{
-  "index": 481,
-  "question": "You are a code expert. Please use your professional knowledge to generate accurate and professional responses. Try to ensure that the code generated is executable for demonstration.\n\n## Role ##\nYou are an experienced code expert. You are now provided with a software development requirement description, and you are asked to generate project code based on this requirement. Strictly follow the rules to help users generate complete project code with simple and easy-to-understand language comments, and don't output anything else.\n\n## Output Rules ##\n1. You will always generate complete runnable project code. Please ensure that the project is complete and executable\n2. Ensure that all code files you output are complete, without omitting any code\n3. Carefully review and check all code before the final output to evaluate its executability. If the code cannot be executed or contains errors, it needs to be regenerated\n4. If the requirements involve external API access or need to use user data (images, videos, audio, etc.), please provide mock data\n\n## Project Requirements Description ##\nPlease develop a timeline-based audio annotation tool suitable for music teachers, audio editors, or collaborators. Users can upload audio files, then add text comments, voice annotations, or graphical markers at specific points on the timeline. Other users can view these annotations, add replies, forming a conversation. The system should support filtering by annotation type, exporting annotation summaries, and automatically pausing and displaying annotations at the corresponding position during audio playback.",
-  "checklist": [
-    {
-      "id": 0,
-      "title": "Is the audio upload and playback functionality fully implemented?",
-      "description": "Review whether the code accurately implements audio file upload handling, proper playback controls (play/pause/seek), and waveform visualization. Check if the audio player supports various formats (MP3, WAV, OGG) and handles edge cases like large files and invalid formats.0 points if audio upload/playback is missing, 5 points if basic functionality works but with limitations, 10 points for a complete implementation with format support, error handling, and responsive waveform visualization.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 1,
-      "title": "Is the timeline-based annotation system properly implemented?",
-      "description": "Examine the implementation of adding, editing, and displaying annotations at specific time points on the timeline. Check if the system supports all required annotation types (text comments, voice annotations, graphical markers) with precise time positioning. Verify that annotations are visually distinguishable on the timeline.0 points if annotations cannot be added to timeline points, 5 points if only basic text annotations are supported, 10 points for full implementation of all annotation types with accurate time positioning and visual representation.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 2,
-      "title": "Is the collaborative annotation functionality implemented?",
-      "description": "Assess whether users can view others' annotations and add replies, forming conversation threads. Check if the system properly manages user identification, permissions, and real-time or asynchronous updates. Verify that threaded discussions are properly organized and displayed.0 points if collaboration features are missing, 5 points if basic viewing/replying works but lacks organization, 10 points for complete implementation with proper threading, user identification, and update mechanisms.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 3,
-      "title": "Are the advanced annotation features implemented?",
-      "description": "Evaluate the implementation of filtering by annotation type, exporting annotation summaries, and automatic pausing/displaying annotations during playback. Check if these features are intuitive and functional. Verify that exported summaries contain all relevant information.Deduct 3 points if filtering is missing, 3 points if export functionality is incomplete, and 4 points if the automatic pause/display feature doesn't work properly. Full score is 10 points for complete implementation of all advanced features.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 4,
-      "title": "Is the code robust?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether the code can handle common abnormal situations (such as unsupported file formats, network interruptions, concurrent editing conflicts) and provide friendly error prompts or recovery mechanisms. Code with strong robustness should effectively handle these edge cases.10 points for comprehensive error handling covering all key user flows, 5 points for average robustness with some gaps, 0 points if critical error scenarios are unhandled.",
-      "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-based automatic transcription, 2. Customizable keyboard shortcuts, 3. Export to common formats like PDF/CSV, 4. Visual heat map showing annotation density across timeline).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 annotation systems), 2. Function modules unrelated to audio annotation (e.g., unrelated social features), 3. Fancy effects that affect performance (e.g., heavy animations that slow down timeline navigation).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/annotation logic/view layers), unit test coverage, and build process automation. Check for proper state management, clean code practices, and documentation.Deduct 5 points if global state pollution is found or design patterns are not used; deduct 5 points if the code duplication rate is too high (over 30%); deduct 5 points if 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) 4) Clear visual distinction between timeline, audio controls, and annotation panel.Deduct 3 points for each crowded visual element, 5 points for a glaring color combination, and 5 points for chaotic layout. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 9,
-      "title": "Is the dynamic interaction smooth and seamless?",
-      "description": "Judge whether the dynamic effects conform to human perception characteristics: 1) Timeline scrubbing feels responsive (≤ 100ms delay) 2) Annotation placement is precise and intuitive 3) Playback transitions are smooth 4) Annotation filtering updates display immediately 5) Audio playback synchronizes perfectly with visual timeline position.Deduct 5 points for each operation without feedback, 3 points for laggy timeline navigation, and 5 points for hard-to-use annotation placement. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    }
-  ],
-  "class": "Multimedia Editing-Audio Editing",
-  "difficulty": "hard"
-}

package/library/multimedia_editing-audio_editing/timeline-based-audio-editor.json

@@ -1,68 +0,0 @@
-{
-  "index": 626,
-  "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. Implement a timeline-based audio editor where users can add, move, and delete audio clips on a timeline, adjust the playback position and duration of each clip, and finally export the edited audio.",
-  "checklist": [
-    {
-      "id": 0,
-      "title": "Is the core timeline-based audio editor interface implemented?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether the code provides a complete visual timeline interface with proper time scale representation, audio track visualization, and cursor positioning. Check if the timeline shows waveform representations of audio clips and supports zooming in/out of the timeline view. Score 0 if the timeline visualization is missing, 5 if basic timeline is implemented without waveforms, and 10 if the timeline is fully featured with proper visual feedback.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 1,
-      "title": "Are the audio clip manipulation operations fully functional?",
-      "description": "Check whether users can add audio clips to the timeline, move them by drag-and-drop, delete selected clips, and trim clip boundaries. Verify that the code handles overlapping clips appropriately (either with layering or automatic spacing). Deduct 3 points if any of these basic operations is missing, and 2 points if the operations lack visual feedback during manipulation. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 2,
-      "title": "Is audio playback with timeline synchronization implemented?",
-      "description": "Verify that the code includes a functional playback mechanism that plays audio clips according to their timeline positions, with a moving playhead indicator showing the current playback position. Check if playback controls (play, pause, stop) are implemented and work correctly with the timeline. Deduct 5 points if playback doesn't sync with the visual timeline, and 3 points if seeking functionality is missing. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 3,
-      "title": "Does the implementation support audio export functionality?",
-      "description": "Evaluate if the code provides a mechanism to export the final edited audio, including proper mixing of overlapping clips, handling of gaps in the timeline, and export format options (e.g., WAV, MP3). Check if the export process shows progress feedback and handles errors gracefully. Score 0 if export functionality is missing, 5 if basic export is implemented without format options or proper mixing, and 10 if complete export functionality is provided.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 4,
-      "title": "Is the code robust?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether the code can handle common abnormal situations (such as invalid audio files, browser incompatibilities, memory limitations with large files, etc.) and provide friendly error prompts or recovery mechanisms. Code with strong robustness should be able to effectively handle these edge cases, giving 10 points. If the robustness is average, give 5 points, and if no exceptions are handled, give 0 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 5,
-      "title": "Are there any innovative features that are eye-catching?",
-      "description": "Check whether the code includes surprise features that enhance the experience (e.g., 1. Real-time audio effects processing 2. Keyboard shortcuts for efficient editing 3. Automated beat detection for clip alignment 4. Multi-track mixing controls). 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 libraries used for the same purpose) 2. Function modules unrelated to audio editing (e.g., a built-in video player when not needed) 3. Fancy effects that affect performance (e.g., excessive animations that slow down the interface). Deduct 3 points for each redundancy found, and directly deduct 10 points if the core functions are interfered with by redundant code.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 7,
-      "title": "Does the code have engineering quality?",
-      "description": "Review modular design (such as separating audio processing/UI/data management layers), unit test coverage, and build process automation. Check for proper use of Web Audio API or similar technologies. Deduct 5 points if global state pollution is found or design patterns are not used; deduct 5 points if the code duplication rate is too high (over 30%); deduct 5 points if the build process is not automated. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 8,
-      "title": "Does the interface vision meet professional design standards?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether the overall design follows modern design principles: 1) Harmonious color matching (no more than 3 primary colors) 2) Proper layout spacing (element spacing follows the 8px multiple principle) 3) Professional font system (body font size ≥ 14px, line height over 1.5 times). Deduct 3 points for each crowded visual element, 5 points for a glaring color combination, and 5 points for chaotic text-image layout. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 9,
-      "title": "Is the dynamic interaction smooth and seamless?",
-      "description": "Judge whether the dynamic effects conform to human perception characteristics: 1) Click feedback delay ≤ 100ms 2) Transition animation duration controlled between 300-500ms 3) Clear visual focus guidance. Check specifically for smooth waveform scrolling and responsive clip manipulation. Deduct 5 points for each operation without feedback, 3 points for laggy timeline scrolling, and 5 points for hard-to-find key function buttons. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    }
-  ],
-  "class": "Multimedia Editing-Audio Editing",
-  "difficulty": "hard"
-}

package/library/multimedia_editing-audio_editing/vocal-removal-from-audio-frontend-application.json

@@ -1,68 +0,0 @@
-{
-  "index": 629,
-  "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 purposes. Develop a frontend application for vocal removal from audio where users can upload audio files containing vocals, click a \"remove vocals\" button to eliminate the vocals from the audio, and then listen to and download the processed audio after completion.",
-  "checklist": [
-    {
-      "id": 0,
-      "title": "Is the audio file upload functionality properly implemented?",
-      "description": "Review if the code includes a proper file upload component with audio format validation (.mp3, .wav, etc.), size limitations, and error handling. Check if the code provides clear feedback on upload progress and success/failure states. Score 0 if not implemented, 5 if only basic upload exists without validation, and 10 if complete with format validation, error handling and visual feedback.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 1,
-      "title": "Is the vocal removal algorithm implementation effective?",
-      "description": "Evaluate the technical implementation of the vocal removal algorithm. Check if it uses proper DSP techniques like center channel isolation, frequency filtering, or phase cancellation. Advanced implementations should include adjustable parameters like frequency ranges or isolation intensity. Deduct 5 points if only using basic stereo channel subtraction without optimizations, 3 points if using pre-built libraries without proper configuration. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 2,
-      "title": "Is the audio processing feedback and progress indication implemented?",
-      "description": "Assess whether the application shows real-time processing status, completion percentage, or estimated time remaining. Check if visual feedback is provided during processing (like waveform visualization or progress bar). Deduct 5 points if the UI freezes during processing without feedback, 3 points if only basic loading indicators are used without specific progress information. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 3,
-      "title": "Is the audio playback and download functionality complete?",
-      "description": "Check if the application implements audio playback controls (play, pause, seek) for both original and processed audio with proper visualization (waveform or spectrum). Verify if the download functionality includes appropriate format options and metadata preservation. Deduct 5 points if playback controls are missing or broken, 3 points if download functionality lacks format options. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 4,
-      "title": "Is the code robust?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether the code handles common edge cases like unsupported audio formats, corrupted files, browser compatibility issues, and memory constraints for large audio files. Check if proper error handling and recovery mechanisms exist. 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 audio spectrum visualization 2. Multiple vocal isolation algorithms to choose from 3. Batch processing capabilities 4. Audio quality enhancement options). 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 audio processing functions 2. Function modules unrelated to vocal removal (e.g., unnecessary social sharing features) 3. Fancy effects that affect 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 logic/UI/file handling layers), use of appropriate design patterns, and performance optimization techniques. 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 no optimization for memory usage during audio processing. 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 jerky animations during audio waveform rendering, and 5 points for hard-to-find key function buttons. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    }
-  ],
-  "class": "Multimedia Editing-Audio Editing",
-  "difficulty": "easy"
-}

package/library/multimedia_editing-audio_editing/vocal-remover-frontend-audio-processing.json

@@ -1,68 +0,0 @@
-{
-  "index": 568,
-  "question": "You are a code expert. Please use your professional knowledge to generate accurate and professional responses. Try to ensure the code you generate is executable.\n\n======== ROLE ========\nYou are an experienced code expert. You are provided with a software development requirement description and asked to generate project code based on these requirements. Strictly follow the rules to help users generate complete project code that is fully commented in simple, easy-to-understand language. Do not output anything else.\n\n======== OUTPUT RULES ========\n1. Always generate complete, runnable project code, ensuring the project is fully executable\n2. Ensure all code files you output are complete without omitting any code\n3. Carefully review and check all code before final output to evaluate its executability. If the code cannot be executed or contains errors, regenerate it\n4. If the requirements involve external API access or need to use user data (images, videos, audio, etc.), provide simulated data\n\n======== PROJECT REQUIREMENT DESCRIPTION ========\nCreate a front-end project for removing vocals from audio. Users can upload audio files containing vocals, and the program will attempt to remove the vocals. After processing, users can listen to and save the instrumental version of the audio.",
-  "checklist": [
-    {
-      "id": 0,
-      "title": "Is the audio file upload and processing system fully implemented?",
-      "description": "Review whether the code accurately implements file upload functionality for audio files, validates file types/sizes, and provides appropriate feedback during the upload process. Check if error handling for invalid files is implemented. Score 0 if the upload functionality is missing, 5 if basic upload is implemented without validation, and 10 if complete with validation, progress indication, and error handling.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 1,
-      "title": "Is the vocal removal algorithm correctly implemented?",
-      "description": "Evaluate the implementation of the vocal removal algorithm. Check if it uses appropriate audio processing techniques (such as center channel elimination, frequency filtering, or machine learning approaches). Verify if the algorithm handles different audio formats and quality levels. Score 0 if no algorithm is implemented, 5 if a basic approach is used but with significant limitations, and 10 if a comprehensive solution with adjustable parameters is provided.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 2,
-      "title": "Is the audio playback functionality complete and user-friendly?",
-      "description": "Check if the code includes proper audio playback controls for both the original and processed audio. This should include play/pause, volume control, seeking capabilities, and display of current playback position/duration. Score 0 if playback is missing, 5 if basic playback is implemented but missing controls, and 10 if all expected features are present with visual feedback.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 3,
-      "title": "Is the audio download/save functionality implemented correctly?",
-      "description": "Review if the code allows users to save/download the processed instrumental audio in appropriate formats. Check if file naming conventions and metadata are handled properly. Score 0 if saving functionality is missing, 5 if basic download is implemented but with limitations, and 10 if the feature is complete with format options and proper metadata preservation.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 4,
-      "title": "Is the code robust?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether the code can handle common abnormal situations (such as incompatible audio formats, large file sizes, browser compatibility issues, etc.) and provide friendly error prompts or recovery mechanisms. Code with strong robustness should be able to effectively handle these edge cases, giving 10 points. If the robustness is average, give 5 points, and if no exceptions are handled, give 0 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 5,
-      "title": "Are there any innovative features that are eye-catching?",
-      "description": "Check whether the code includes surprise features that enhance the experience (e.g., 1. Realtime visualization of audio waves/spectrum 2. Adjustable parameters for vocal isolation strength 3. Before/after comparison functionality). Add 3 points for each practical innovative feature implemented (maximum 10 points).",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 6,
-      "title": "Are there any redundant features?",
-      "description": "Strictly check three types of redundancy: 1. Redundant implementation of similar functions (e.g., multiple audio processing libraries doing the same work) 2. Function modules unrelated to audio processing (e.g., unnecessary social media integrations) 3. Fancy effects that affect performance (e.g., excessive animations that slow down audio processing). 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 logic/UI/file handling), code reusability, and build process automation. Deduct 5 points if global state pollution is found or design patterns are not used; deduct 5 points if the code duplication rate is too high (over 30%); deduct 5 points if the build process is not automated. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 8,
-      "title": "Does the interface vision meet professional design standards?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether the overall design follows modern design principles: 1) Harmonious color matching (no more than 3 primary colors) 2) Proper layout spacing (element spacing follows the 8px multiple principle) 3) Professional font system (body font size ≥ 14px, line height over 1.5 times). Deduct 3 points for each crowded visual element, 5 points for a glaring color combination, and 5 points for chaotic text-image layout. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 9,
-      "title": "Is the dynamic interaction smooth and seamless?",
-      "description": "Judge whether the dynamic effects conform to human perception characteristics: 1) Click feedback delay ≤ 100ms 2) Transition animation duration controlled between 300-500ms 3) Clear visual feedback during audio processing. Deduct 5 points for each operation without feedback, 3 points for laggy UI during audio processing, and 5 points for confusing processing state indicators. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    }
-  ],
-  "class": "Multimedia Editing-Audio Editing",
-  "difficulty": "medium"
-}

package/library/multimedia_editing-audio_editing/vue2-music-player-playlist-loop.json

@@ -1,68 +0,0 @@
-{
-  "index": 1471,
-  "question": "You are a code expert. Please use your professional knowledge to generate accurate and professional responses. Be sure to provide executable code. Use Vue 2.js to create a music player that supports random playlist playback, list loop, and single song loop.",
-  "checklist": [
-    {
-      "id": 0,
-      "title": "Is the music player's core playback functionality fully implemented?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether the code implements the essential audio playback controls (play, pause, stop, seek, volume control) using the HTML5 Audio API or a similar technology within Vue 2. Check if proper event listeners are attached for audio events (ended, timeupdate, loadedmetadata). Score 0 if core functionality is missing, 5 if basic controls are present but incomplete, and 10 if all controls work with proper error handling.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 1,
-      "title": "Are all three required playback modes correctly implemented?",
-      "description": "Verify that the code includes proper implementation of: 1) Random playlist playback (with true randomization that doesn't repeat until all songs are played), 2) List loop (sequential playback with return to beginning), and 3) Single song loop. Each mode should have clear state management and visual indicators. Deduct 3 points for each missing mode, 2 points if the randomization algorithm is flawed (e.g., allows immediate repeats), and 2 points if mode switching isn't smooth. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 2,
-      "title": "Is the playlist management system properly designed?",
-      "description": "Assess whether the playlist system allows users to view the current queue, see what's currently playing, and supports basic operations like adding/removing songs. Check if the data structure for managing the playlist is efficient and maintains proper state across playback mode changes. Deduct 5 points if the playlist is hard-coded with no manipulation functions, 3 points if the current song isn't properly highlighted, and 3 points if playlist state isn't preserved when switching modes. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 3,
-      "title": "Is the audio progress tracking and visualization implemented?",
-      "description": "Examine if the player includes a progress bar/timeline that accurately displays song position, allows seeking, and updates in real-time. Check if duration and current time are displayed in minutes:seconds format. Deduct 5 points if seeking functionality is missing, 3 points if the progress visualization doesn't update smoothly, and 3 points if time displays are missing or incorrectly formatted. 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 unavailable audio sources, network interruptions, unsupported audio formats, etc.) and provide friendly error prompts or recovery mechanisms. Check if the player state remains consistent after errors. 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. Visualizations that respond to audio frequency 2. Lyrics display synchronized with the track 3. Playlist sorting/filtering options 4. Keyboard shortcuts for playback control). 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 volume control methods coexisting) 2. Function modules unrelated to music playback (e.g., unnecessary external services) 3. Fancy effects that affect performance (e.g., heavy animations that cause lag during playback). 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 handling logic/UI components/state management), component reusability, and Vue best practices like proper lifecycle hooks usage and computed properties. Deduct 5 points if global state is managed poorly or Vue reactivity isn't leveraged properly; deduct 5 points if the code has high duplication; deduct 5 points if prop drilling is excessive instead of using a proper state management pattern. 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). Check if the player has a consistent visual language and clear visual hierarchy. Deduct 3 points for each crowded visual element, 5 points for a glaring color combination, and 5 points for chaotic control placement. 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 animations controlled between 300-500ms 3) Clear visual feedback when changing modes or songs. Examine if hover states and active states are visually distinct. Deduct 5 points for each operation without feedback, 3 points for jerky animations during mode changes, and 5 points for controls that don't clearly indicate their current state. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    }
-  ],
-  "class": "Multimedia Editing-Audio Editing",
-  "difficulty": "easy"
-}

package/library/multimedia_editing-audio_editing/web-based-audio-sampler-sequencer.json

@@ -1,68 +0,0 @@
-{
-  "index": 531,
-  "question": "You are a code expert, please use your professional knowledge to generate accurate and professional responses. Try to ensure the generated code is executable for demonstration. ======== ROLE ========\nYou are an experienced code expert. I'm providing you with a software development requirement description, and you need to generate project code based on these requirements. Strictly follow the rules to help users generate complete project code with simple and easy-to-understand language comments, without outputting anything else.\n\n======== OUTPUT RULES ========\n1. You should always generate complete, runnable project code, ensuring the project is fully executable\n2. Ensure all code files you output are complete, don't omit any code\n3. Carefully review and check all code before final output, evaluating its executability. If the code cannot execute or contains errors, regenerate it\n4. If the requirements involve external API access or user data (images, videos, audio, etc.), please provide mock data\n\n======== PROJECT REQUIREMENTS ========\nDevelop a web-based audio sampler that supports loading multiple drum kit samples (Kick/Snare/HiHat). Implement a 16-step sequencer where each step can trigger different samples, with support for adjusting BPM and volume/pan for each sample.",
-  "checklist": [
-    {
-      "id": 0,
-      "title": "Is the audio loading mechanism properly implemented?",
-      "description": "Check whether the code correctly implements audio sample loading using Web Audio API, supports multiple drum kit samples (at minimum Kick, Snare, and HiHat), and handles audio file loading states properly. Verify error handling for failed audio loads and format compatibility (mp3, wav, etc.).0 points if audio loading is missing, 5 points if only basic loading exists without error handling, 10 points if comprehensive with preloading optimization and proper error handling.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 1,
-      "title": "Is the 16-step sequencer correctly implemented?",
-      "description": "Evaluate if the sequencer properly implements a 16-step grid interface where users can toggle steps for each drum sample. The sequencer should visually indicate the current playing step, support proper timing based on BPM, and maintain accurate playback timing using requestAnimationFrame or precise timers instead of setTimeout.0 points if the sequencer is missing/non-functional, 5 points for basic implementation with timing issues, 10 points for a robust implementation with sample-accurate timing and visual feedback.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 2,
-      "title": "Is the BPM adjustment functionality implemented?",
-      "description": "Check if the code provides an interface to adjust tempo (BPM), whether it correctly calculates note timing based on BPM changes, and if it handles transitions between tempos smoothly without audio glitches. The implementation should support a reasonable range (e.g., 60-200 BPM).0 points if BPM control is missing, 5 points for basic implementation with calculation issues, 10 points for fully functional BPM control with smooth transitions.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 3,
-      "title": "Are volume and pan controls for each sample implemented?",
-      "description": "Verify if each drum sample has individual volume and pan controls that affect audio output in real-time. Check if the controls use appropriate Web Audio API nodes (GainNode for volume, StereoPannerNode for pan) and update parameter values smoothly without clicks or pops.0 points if controls are missing, 5 points if only basic implementation without smooth transitions, 10 points for complete implementation with visualization and smooth parameter changes.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 4,
-      "title": "Is the code robust?",
-      "description": "Evaluate whether the code can handle common abnormal situations (such as audio context suspension on mobile devices, browser autoplay restrictions, audio buffer errors, etc.) and provide friendly error prompts or recovery mechanisms. Check if there's a fallback mechanism when Web Audio API is not supported.0 points if no exception handling exists, 5 points if basic error handling is implemented, 10 points for comprehensive error handling with user-friendly recovery options.",
-      "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. Pattern saving/loading functionality 2. Sample replacement/customization 3. Audio effects like reverb/delay 4. MIDI export). Each practical innovative feature earns additional points.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 for: 1. Redundant implementation of similar audio functions (e.g., multiple volume control mechanisms) 2. Function modules unrelated to audio sampling (e.g., unnecessary visual effects) 3. Performance-heavy features that affect audio timing (e.g., excessive animations during playback).Deduct 3 points for each redundancy found, and directly deduct 10 points if the core audio 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 engine/UI/state management), appropriate use of design patterns, code reusability, and performance optimization for audio processing. Check if audio worklets or workers are used for performance-critical tasks where appropriate.Deduct 5 points if global state pollution is found; deduct 5 points if the code has high duplication; deduct 5 points if audio processing blocks the main thread unnecessarily. 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 music application design principles: 1) Clear visual indication of steps and playback position 2) Proper contrast between active and inactive steps 3) Professional layout of controls with logical grouping. Check if the interface is intuitive for music production.Deduct 3 points for each confusing UI element, 5 points for poor readability of sequencer states, and 5 points for illogically placed controls. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    },
-    {
-      "id": 9,
-      "title": "Is the audio performance smooth and responsive?",
-      "description": "Judge whether the audio engine performs according to industry standards: 1) Audio latency ≤ 20ms 2) No audible clicks or pops during playback 3) Smooth timing even when UI is busy 4) Sample triggering is precisely timed according to musical grid. Check for buffer underruns or timing drift during extended playback.Deduct 5 points for audible latency issues, 3 points for occasional timing glitches, and 5 points for unstable playback under load. The full score is 10 points.",
-      "maxScore": 10
-    }
-  ],
-  "class": "Multimedia Editing-Audio Editing",
-  "difficulty": "hard"
-}