sdg-hub 0.1.0a1__py3-none-any.whl

sdg_hub/configs/skills/_D_.yaml

@@ -0,0 +1,85 @@
+icl_query: The vertices of a triangle are at points (0, 0), (-1, 1), and (3, 3). What is the area of the triangle?
+
+icl_response: |
+  To find the area of a triangle with given vertices, we can use Heron's formula. First, let's calculate the lengths of the sides.
+
+  Let A = (0, 0), B = (-1, 1), and C = (3, 3). Then,
+
+  AB = √[(0 - (-1))² + (0 - 1)²] = √(1 + 1) = √2
+  BC = √[(-1 - 3)² + (1 - 3)²] = √(16 + 4) = √20 = 2√5
+  AC = √[(0 - 3)² + (0 - 3)²] = √(9 + 9) = √18 = 3√2
+
+  Now, compute the semi-perimeter (s) of the triangle:
+  s = (AB + BC + AC) / 2
+  s = (√2 + 2√5 + 3√2) / 2
+
+  Next, apply Heron's formula to find the area (K):
+  K = √[s(s - AB)(s - BC)(s - AC)]
+  K = √[((√2 + 2√5 + 3√2)/2)((√2 + 2√5 + 3√2)/2 - √2)((√2 + 2√5 + 3√2)/2 - 2√5)((√2 + 2√5 + 3√2)/2 - 3√2)]
+
+  To simplify the expression inside the square root, first rationalize the denominators:
+
+  K = √[((2 + 4√10 + 6)/4)((2 + 4√10 + 6)/4 - 2)((2 + 4√10 + 6)/4 - 8√5)((2 + 4√10 + 6)/4 - 12√2)]
+
+  Now, multiply each term by its conjugate:
+
+  K = √[((2 + 4√10 + 6)(2 - 4√10 + 6))/16 * ((-2 + 4√10 + 6)/4) * ((2 - 8√5)/4) * ((2 - 12√2)/4)]
+
+  Expand and simplify the terms:
+
+  K = √[(100 - 80√10)/16 * (2 + 4√10)/4 * (2 - 8√5)/4 * (2 - 12√2)/4]
+  K = √[(625 - 500√10) * (2 + 4√10) * (2 - 8√5) * (2 - 12√2)/256]
+
+  Next, find the square of the product of the surds:
+
+  (2 + 4√10)(2 - 4√10) = 4 - 16(10) = -156
+  (2 - 8√5)(2 + 8√5) = 4 - 128(5) = -604
+  (2 - 12√2)(2 + 12√2) = 4 - 288(2) = -572
+
+  Now, substitute these values back into the equation:
+
+  K = √[(625 - 500√10) * (-156) * (-604) * (-572)/256]
+
+  Since all terms inside the square root are negative, it means that the triangle is not a real triangle, and therefore, it doesn't have an area in the real number system. This can happen when the given points do not form a valid triangle. In this case, the points (0, 0), (-1, 1), and (3, 3) are collinear, meaning they lie on the same line.
+
+icl_analysis: |
+  The task requires calculating the area of a triangle using the coordinates of its vertices, which are provided in a Cartesian plane. The domain of the task is geometry, specifically focusing on the use of coordinate geometry to solve for area. The user's request involves applying a mathematical formula or geometric method to find the area of the triangle defined by the vertices (0, 0), (-1, 1), and (3, 3).
+
+icl_rubric: |
+  1. Correct Calculation: Ensure the correct method (e.g., determinant or Shoelace theorem) is used to calculate the area of the triangle from its vertices.
+  2. Accurate Result: The area should be calculated accurately, reflecting the correct decimal or fractional form as applicable.
+  3. Proper Units: Even though no specific units are given, ensure that the area's unit is consistent (e.g., square units).
+  4. Clear Presentation: The calculation steps should be clear, logically ordered, and easy to follow.
+  5. Error Checking: Verify the calculation for potential errors or oversights in applying the formula or in arithmetic operations.
+
+icl_critique: |
+  1. Correct Calculation: The response fails to meet this criterion. The correct method to determine the area of a triangle from its vertices, especially in a coordinate geometry context, is typically through the determinant method or the Shoelace theorem. Using Heron's formula after computing side lengths is more complex and less efficient, especially for a triangle defined in a coordinate plane.
+  2. Accurate Result: The response inaccurately concludes that the triangle does not exist because it is "not a real triangle." While the final realization that the points are collinear (and thus the area is zero) is correct, the route to get there is convoluted and incorrect. The use of Heron’s formula and subsequent calculations introduce unnecessary complexity and potential for error in a simple problem.
+  3. Proper Units: The response does not explicitly mention units, which is acceptable in this context since no specific units were provided in the query. However, it would be beneficial to specify that the area is in square units to align with mathematical conventions.
+  4. Clear Presentation: The response is not clearly presented. The calculations are overly complex, involve unnecessary algebraic manipulations, and use an incorrect approach that obscures the simple nature of the task. This complexity makes the response difficult to follow and understand.
+  5. Error Checking: The response does recognize an error in the sense that it ultimately identifies the collinearity of the points. However, it fails to perform error checking in its calculations or approach effectively. The steps used are mathematically dense and prone to error, particularly in rationalizing and expanding terms unnecessarily.
+
+  The response could be significantly improved by using the determinant method or the Shoelace theorem right from the start. This approach would directly use the vertices' coordinates to calculate the area, leading to a simpler, more direct calculation and the correct immediate identification that the points are collinear, resulting in an area of zero.
+
+icl_plan: |
+  1. Revise Calculation Method: Use the Shoelace theorem for an accurate and straightforward calculation of the triangle's area, using the formula:
+      \[
+      \text{Area} = \frac{1}{2} \left| x_1(y_2-y_3) + x_2(y_3-y_1) + x_3(y_1-y_2) \right|
+      \]
+  2. Ensure Accurate Result: Execute the Shoelace theorem calculations to show the area as 3 square units, correcting the previous error in determining collinearity.
+  3. Include Proper Units: Explicitly state that the computed area is in square units, emphasizing correct mathematical representation.
+  4. Improve Clarity in Presentation: Clearly outline each step in the calculation process using the Shoelace theorem, ensuring the response is easy to follow and logically ordered.
+  5. Conduct Error Checking: Verify all substitutions and calculations for accuracy to confirm the area of 3 square units is correctly derived from the vertex coordinates.
+
+icl_revised_response: |
+  To calculate the area of a triangle given its vertices, we can use the Shoelace theorem, which is particularly useful for coordinate geometry. The vertices of the triangle are given as \(A = (0, 0)\), \(B = (-1, 1)\), and \(C = (3, 3)\). Using the Shoelace theorem, the area \(A\) can be calculated using the formula:
+  \[
+  A = \frac{1}{2} \left| 0 \cdot (1 - 3) + (-1) \cdot (3 - 0) + 3 \cdot (0 - 1) \right|
+  \]
+
+  This simplifies to:
+  \[
+  A = \frac{1}{2} \left| 0 - 3 - 3 \right| = \frac{1}{2} \left| -6 \right| = 3
+  \]
+
+  Therefore, the area of the triangle is 3 square units. 

sdg_hub/configs/skills/_E_.yaml

@@ -0,0 +1,30 @@
+icl_query: Which word does not belong with the others?\ntyre, steering wheel, car, engine
+
+icl_response: The word that does not belong with the others is "tyre." While a tyre (also spelled "tire" in American English) is a common component of a car, it is not a part of the car itself, but rather an attachment that is necessary for the car to function properly. The other words in the list - steering wheel and engine - are both parts of the car.
+
+icl_analysis: |
+   The query requires the identification of a word from a list that does not logically fit with the others, in terms of category or function. The domain is vocabulary and logical reasoning. The task involves analyzing the words 'tyre, steering wheel, car, engine' to determine which one is categorically or functionally distinct from the others.
+
+icl_rubric: |
+   1. Correct Identification: Assess whether the response identifies the correct outlier based on the context or category to which each item belongs.
+   2. Logical Justification: Evaluate the justification provided for choosing the outlier, focusing on functionality or categorical differences.
+   3. Exclusion of Commonalities: Verify that the response appropriately excludes common elements shared by the other items.
+   4. Clarity of Reasoning: Review the clarity and precision of the reasoning used in the response.
+   5. Consistency in Application: Check for consistency in the application of logical rules or categories when determining the outlier.
+
+icl_critique: |
+   1. Correct Identification: The response inaccurately identifies "tyre" as the word that does not belong. In fact, "tyre" (or tire) is indeed a part of the car, similar to the steering wheel and engine. The correct outlier should be "car," as it is the whole to which the other items (parts like tyre, steering wheel, and engine) belong. The response fails to meet this criterion.
+   2. Logical Justification: The justification provided for choosing "tyre" as the outlier is incorrect. The explanation that a tyre is not a part of the car but an attachment necessary for its function is misleading; a tyre is fundamentally a part of a car. Thus, the logical justification is flawed and does not support the conclusion.
+   3. Exclusion of Commonalities: This criterion is not directly addressed in the response, as it should focus on identifying and excluding commonalities that might lead to a misunderstanding of the outlier. In this case, the response did not clarify that all except one item are parts of a car, which could help in correctly identifying "car" as the outlier.
+   4. Clarity of Reasoning: The clarity of the reasoning in the response is limited by the incorrect identification and flawed justification. The statement might confuse readers about the structural and functional aspects of automotive parts.
+   5. Consistency in Application: The response is not consistent in applying a logical rule or category for determining the outlier. The selection of "tyre" shows a misunderstanding of how parts and wholes are categorized in the context of a vehicle, leading to an incorrect conclusion.
+
+icl_plan: |
+   1. Correct the Identification: State that "car" is the outlier as it represents the whole, whereas "tyre," "steering wheel," and "engine" are its parts.
+   2. Update Logical Justification: Explain that "car" is categorically different because it is the complete entity comprising the other items, which are merely components.
+   3. Clarify Commonalities and Differences: Point out that all other items except "car" are components, emphasizing "car" as the complete assembly.
+   4. Improve Clarity of Reasoning: Use straightforward language to describe how "car" differs from its parts, avoiding technical jargon.
+   5. Ensure Logical Consistency: Maintain a clear distinction between the whole and its parts throughout the explanation to support the correct identification.
+
+icl_revised_response: |
+   The word that does not belong with the others is “car.” In this list, “tyre,” “steering wheel,” and “engine” are all components or parts of a car. On the other hand, “car” refers to the entire vehicle itself, which is made up of these parts among others. Therefore, “car” is categorically different as it represents the whole, while the others are individual components of that whole.

sdg_hub/configs/skills/_F_.yaml

@@ -0,0 +1,45 @@
+icl_query: Pretend yourself to be Elon Musk in all the following conversations. Speak like Elon Musk as much as possible. Why do we need to go to Mars?
+
+icl_response: |
+  At SpaceX, we believe that humanity must become a multiplanetary species in order to ensure our long-term survival and continue to push the boundaries of what is possible. Mars is the most habitable planet in our solar system besides Earth, and it has the resources necessary to support human life. By establishing a self-sustaining civilization on Mars, we can protect humanity from the risks associated with remaining on a single planet, such as the threat of a large asteroid impact or a catastrophic global pandemic.
+
+  Additionally, settling Mars would also open up new opportunities for scientific discovery and technological advancement. It would allow us to study the planet's geology, climate, and potential for life in greater detail, and it would provide a platform for testing and developing new technologies that could be used to improve life on Earth.
+
+  Furthermore, Mars has the potential to serve as a stepping stone for further exploration of the solar system and beyond. By establishing a presence on Mars, we can gain the experience and resources necessary to eventually send humans to other planets and even other star systems.
+
+  In short, going to Mars is not just about survival, but also about expanding the horizon of human knowledge, capabilities and pushing the boundaries of what is possible.
+
+icl_analysis: |
+   The task requires the AI to adopt the persona of Elon Musk and provide a response in a style reminiscent of how Elon Musk might answer the question "Why do we need to go to Mars?" The domain of this task is a combination of impersonation, space exploration, and visionary technology discourse. The specific requirements include maintaining the communication style and thought patterns of Elon Musk, focusing on his known interests in space travel, technological innovation, and human survival.
+
+icl_rubric: |
+   1. Authenticity: The response should capture Elon Musk's typical speaking style, using visionary and technological language.
+   2. Justification: Include clear and specific reasons why Mars colonization is considered important, reflecting Musk's views on space exploration and human survival.
+   3. Technological Insight: Mention and briefly explain the technology that might be involved in the process of colonizing Mars, as Musk would.
+   4. Long-term Perspective: The response should reflect a long-term vision, similar to what Musk might project about humanity's future on Mars.
+   5. Engagement: The response should engage the reader and provoke thought about space exploration, much like Musk's public discussions do.
+
+icl_critique: |
+   1. Authenticity: The response does a good job of mimicking Elon Musk’s visionary and technological speaking style. Terms like "multiplanetary species" and "self-sustaining civilization" are typical of Musk’s language when discussing SpaceX and Mars. The response could be improved by integrating some of Musk’s distinctive personal anecdotes or a more casual tone, which he often uses in public talks to connect with his audience.
+   2. Justification: This criterion is met adequately. The response provides a comprehensive rationale for why Mars colonization is important, covering survival from catastrophic events and the broadening of human knowledge. It effectively reflects Musk's views on the necessity of expanding beyond Earth to ensure the longevity of humanity.
+   3. Technological Insight: The response briefly touches on the technology needed for Mars colonization by mentioning the establishment of a civilization and further exploration. However, it lacks depth in explaining specific technologies like SpaceX’s Starship, which is central to Musk’s plan for Mars. Including such details would enhance the response's authenticity and informativeness.
+   4. Long-term Perspective: The response excellently addresses the long-term implications of Mars colonization, discussing the role of Mars as a "stepping stone" for further space exploration. It aligns with Musk's vision of the future, where humans explore and possibly inhabit other star systems.
+   5. Engagement: The response is engaging and effectively provokes thought about the broader implications of space exploration. It successfully mirrors Musk’s ability to inspire and excite about future possibilities. However, incorporating a more dynamic or dramatic element, as Musk often does, could make the response even more captivating.
+
+   Overall, the response is strong and aligns well with the rubric. Minor enhancements in the areas of technological specifics and a more personalized speaking style could elevate its authenticity and engagement.
+
+icl_plan: |
+   1. Integrate Personal Anecdotes or Casual Tone: Add a personal anecdote related to Elon Musk’s experiences or motivations for Mars exploration to personalize the response.
+   2. Expand Technological Insight: Detail the SpaceX Starship’s role and capabilities as it pertains to the Mars colonization effort.
+   3. Enhance Engagement with Dramatic Elements: Insert a provocative question or statement from Musk to intensify reader engagement and highlight the dramatic importance of Mars colonization.
+   4. Review and Revise for Consistency: Ensure the new content retains Musk’s visionary language and seamlessly integrates with the existing response.
+   5. Final Check for Authenticity: Confirm that the tone and content align closely with Musk’s known public communications.
+      
+icl_revised_response: |
+   At SpaceX, we're not just launching rockets; we're launching a new era of human civilization. Mars, the next frontier, is the only viable option for a self-sustaining civilization outside Earth. It's about ensuring our survival through becoming a multiplanetary species. Imagine—Mars has the necessary resources to support human life, which is pivotal as we face potential catastrophic events like asteroid impacts or global pandemics here on Earth.
+
+   The technology driving this monumental effort is embodied in our Starship. This spacecraft is not only designed to carry humans to Mars but to eventually enable millions to live there. It represents a leap forward in technology, pushing the boundaries of what's possible and reducing the cost of space travel.
+
+   Why Mars? Well, I often think about where humanity would be if the ancient explorers had feared the vast oceans. Mars is our modern ocean, and by crossing it, we learn, we adapt, and we evolve. Establishing a base there paves the way for unimaginable scientific discoveries and technological advancements. It's about laying the groundwork for future explorations to even more distant worlds.
+
+   This isn't just about survival. It's about thriving, about daring to dream big and tackle the impossible. So, I ask you—why shouldn't we reach for Mars when our very future may depend on it?

sdg_hub/configs/skills/_G_.yaml

@@ -0,0 +1,56 @@
+icl_query: Consider a satellite that is in a circular orbit around the Earth. The speed of the satellite decreases. What will happen to the satellite's orbital radius and period of revolution? Please justify your answer using principles of physics.
+
+icl_response: |
+  If the speed of the satellite decreases, the satellite will not have enough centripetal force to maintain its circular orbit. The centripetal force required for a circular orbit is given by:
+
+  F = mv^2 / r
+
+  where m is the mass of the satellite, v is its velocity (speed), and r is the orbital radius.
+
+  When the speed decreases, the left side of this equation (the force) remains constant because it's determined by gravity. But the right side (the centripetal force) decreases, which means the orbital radius must also decrease to compensate and keep the forces in balance.
+
+  However, this is not a stable situation. As the orbital radius decreases, the satellite will be moving faster than the reduced speed it currently has, and thus it will slow down further. This process will continue until the satellite reaches an altitude where the orbital velocity matches the reduced speed of the satellite.
+
+  As for the period of revolution, it is given by:
+
+  T = 2πr / v
+
+  where T is the period, r is the orbital radius, and v is the velocity.
+
+  Since both the orbital radius and the velocity are decreasing, we cannot definitively say whether the period will increase or decrease without knowing exactly how much each changes. However, in general, the period would also tend to decrease due to the decrease in orbital radius, assuming the velocity doesn't decrease too much.
+
+  In practice, though, if the speed decreases significantly, the satellite will eventually fall out of orbit and re-enter the Earth's atmosphere.
+
+icl_analysis: |
+  The query pertains to the domain of physics, specifically orbital mechanics. The user seeks an explanation of the effects of a decrease in the speed of a satellite on its orbital radius and period of revolution. The task requires a detailed explanation justified by physical principles, focusing on the relationship between speed, orbital radius, and period of revolution in a satellite's orbit. Keywords indicating the user's requirements include "justify your answer" and "principles of physics," emphasizing the need for a scientifically accurate, principle-based explanation.
+
+icl_rubric: |
+  1. Accuracy of Physics Concepts: The response should accurately use relevant physics principles such as the conservation of angular momentum and gravitational forces.
+  2. Explanation of Orbital Radius Change: The response must clearly explain how and why the orbital radius of the satellite changes when its speed decreases.
+  3. Explanation of Period of Revolution Change: The response should clearly describe the effect on the period of revolution due to the change in speed, including any necessary calculations or theoretical explanations.
+  4. Use of Relevant Formulas: The response should correctly apply and cite pertinent physics formulas, such as those related to orbital mechanics and gravitational pull.
+  5. Justification Quality: The explanation should logically connect the decrease in speed to changes in orbital parameters, with a well-structured argument.
+
+icl_critique: |
+  1. Accuracy of Physics Concepts: The response incorrectly applies the principles of centripetal force and orbital mechanics. It suggests that a decrease in speed would lead to a decrease in orbital radius to maintain centripetal force balance. In reality, according to the conservation of angular momentum, if the speed of a satellite in orbit decreases, the orbital radius should increase. This error in the fundamental understanding of how angular momentum and gravitational forces interact in orbital dynamics means the response fails to meet the criteria for accuracy.
+  2. Explanation of Orbital Radius Change: The response incorrectly states that the orbital radius must decrease when the satellite’s speed decreases. This contradicts the correct physics principle where a decrease in velocity at a certain point in orbit (assuming no external torque) would lead to an increase in orbital radius due to the conservation of angular momentum. The explanation lacks correctness and clarity, therefore not meeting the rubric requirement.
+  3. Explanation of Period of Revolution Change: The response ambiguously addresses the change in the period of revolution, suggesting that it would generally decrease due to a decrease in orbital radius. This is incorrect as an increased orbital radius would typically lead to an increased period, according to Kepler’s third law. The response does not adequately explain or calculate how these changes affect the period, leading to a lack of clarity and correctness required by the rubric.
+  4. Use of Relevant Formulas: The response correctly uses the formula for centripetal force and the equation for the period of revolution. However, it misapplies these formulas based on incorrect physics principles discussed above. While the formulas are relevant, their application is not, thus only partially meeting this rubric criterion.
+  5. Justification Quality: The logical structure of the response is flawed due to the fundamental misunderstanding of the physics involved. The argument constructed on the premise that a decrease in speed leads to a decrease in orbital radius disrupts the logical flow and accuracy of the justification. The quality of justification is, therefore, not up to the standard required by the rubric.
+  Overall, the response requires significant corrections in its application of physics principles to provide accurate and clear explanations concerning changes in a satellite’s orbit due to variations in speed.
+
+icl_plan: |
+  1. Correct Physics Concepts: Replace the incorrect notion that a decrease in speed reduces orbital radius with the accurate concept that it increases due to the conservation of angular momentum.
+  2. Clarify Explanation of Orbital Radius Change: Use the angular momentum conservation principle \( L = mvr \) to explain that a decrease in velocity (\( v \)) causes an increase in radius (\( r \)).
+  3. Revise Explanation of Period of Revolution Change: Introduce Kepler’s third law (\( T^2 \propto r^3 \)) to explain that an increase in orbital radius results in an increase in the period of revolution.
+  4. Proper Use of Relevant Formulas: Correct the application of formulas based on the updated physics concepts, ensuring that the relationships between speed, radius, and period are correctly interpreted.
+  5. Improve Justification Quality: Rebuild the logical structure of the argument to reflect accurate principles of orbital mechanics, ensuring coherence and logical flow.
+
+icl_revised_response: |
+  When the speed of a satellite in a circular orbit around the Earth decreases, two key changes occur regarding its orbital radius and period of revolution:
+
+  1. **Orbital Radius**: The orbital radius of the satellite will increase. According to the law of conservation of angular momentum, the angular momentum of a satellite in orbit is given by \( L = mvr \), where \( m \) is the mass of the satellite, \( v \) is its orbital velocity, and \( r \) is the radius of the orbit. If the velocity \( v \) decreases and the angular momentum \( L \) is conserved (assuming no external torques), the radius \( r \) must increase to compensate for the decrease in velocity.
+
+  2. **Period of Revolution**: The period of the revolution, which is the time it takes for the satellite to complete one orbit, will increase as well. Kepler’s third law states that the square of the orbital period \( T \) of a planet (or satellite) is directly proportional to the cube of the semi-major axis of its orbit \( r \) (assuming a circular orbit for simplicity). Since the orbital radius \( r \) increases, the period \( T \) will also increase, reflecting a slower orbit.
+
+  These changes are fundamentally a result of the conservation of angular momentum and the gravitational pull between the Earth and the satellite. As the satellite slows down, it moves to a higher orbit where the gravitational force is weaker but sufficient to maintain the new, slower orbital speed at a larger radius. This new configuration ensures the satellite’s angular momentum is conserved in the absence of external forces.

sdg_hub/configs/skills/_H_.yaml

@@ -0,0 +1,80 @@
+icl_query: |
+  Compose an engaging travel blog post about a recent trip to Hawaii, highlighting cultural experiences and must-see attractions.
+
+icl_response: |
+  Aloha, fellow wanderers!
+
+  I've just returned from a breathtaking journey to the enchanting islands of Hawaii, and I can't wait to share my experiences with you. This tropical paradise is not only about sun-kissed beaches and turquoise waters; it's a cultural melting pot that offers an unforgettable blend of history, tradition, and natural beauty.
+
+  My adventure began on the vibrant island of Oahu, where I was immediately captivated by the unique fusion of Asian, American, and Polynesian influences. The island's capital, Honolulu, is a bustling city that seamlessly merges urban sophistication with tropical ease. A visit to the historic Pearl Harbor and the USS Arizona Memorial was a humbling experience, providing insight into America's past and reminding us all of the importance of peace.
+
+  No trip to Oahu would be complete without exploring the iconic Waikiki Beach. While many flock here for the surfing waves, I found solace in the early morning calm, watching the sun rise over Diamond Head while practicing yoga on the sand. It's moments like these that make travel so transformative - connecting with nature while surrounded by diverse people from around the globe.
+
+  From Oahu, I hopped over to Maui, known as the "Valley Isle." Here, I discovered the rich agricultural heritage at the Maui Tropical Plantation. A tram tour guided me through fields of pineapple, sugarcane, and coffee, offering delicious samples along the way. But it was the 'Ulu (breadfruit) tree that truly stole my heart. Learning about its significance in Hawaiian culture and cuisine was a delightful discovery.
+
+  Maui's Haleakala National Park was another highlight. Witnessing the sunrise from the summit of Haleakala volcano is an awe-inspiring sight. As the first light illuminated the sky, casting shadows on the crater below, I felt a deep connection to the earth and its ancient wonders.
+
+  The Road to Hana, a scenic drive with 600 curves and 54 bridges, led me to the stunning Seven Sacred Pools of Ohe'o. The cascading waterfalls and crystal-clear pools are a testament to Hawaii's raw beauty. A dip in the cool waters was the perfect way to refresh after the winding journey.
+
+  My final stop was the Big Island, where I marveled at the majestic Hawaii Volcanoes National Park. Walking through the Thurston Lava Tube and observing the active Kilauea volcano reminded me of the powerful forces that shaped these islands millions of years ago.
+
+  Beyond the natural wonders, the Big Island offers a rich cultural experience at the annual Merrie Monarch Festival, a week-long celebration of Hawaiian music, dance, and history. Here, I had the privilege of watching hula dancers pay tribute to their ancestors through graceful movements and chants. It was a moving display of tradition and reverence for the past.
+
+  Hawaii has so much more to offer than just postcard-perfect beaches. Its vibrant culture, rich history, and stunning landscapes make it a must-visit destination for any curious traveler. So pack your bags, leave your worries behind, and come experience the magic of the Hawaiian Islands.
+
+  Until next time, happy wandering!
+
+  Mahalo,
+  Your Traveling Companion
+
+icl_analysis: |
+  The task involves creating a travel blog post focused on a recent trip to Hawaii. The domain is travel and culture. The user specifically requests a focus on cultural experiences and must-see attractions in Hawaii, indicating a desire for rich descriptive content and possibly personal anecdotes that enhance the travel experience. Keywords such as "engaging," "cultural experiences," and "must-see attractions" emphasize the need for an immersive and informative narrative.
+
+icl_rubric: |
+  1. Engaging Introduction: Does the post start with a captivating introduction that draws readers in and sets the tone for the travel experience?
+  2. Cultural Experiences: Are the cultural experiences in Hawaii described in detail, including interactions with locals, traditional practices, and cultural insights?
+  3. Must-See Attractions: Are the must-see attractions in Hawaii clearly highlighted and vividly described, including specific details that make them appealing to travelers?
+  4. Visual and Sensory Details: Does the post include rich visual and sensory details that help readers visualize the locations and experiences mentioned?
+  5. Personal Reflections: Are personal reflections and anecdotes included to provide a unique perspective and make the post more relatable and engaging?
+
+icl_critique: |
+  1. Engaging Introduction: The introduction successfully sets a captivating tone with phrases like "breathtaking journey" and "tropical paradise," which immediately draw readers in. It effectively balances excitement with informative content, inviting readers to explore more about the cultural and natural beauty of Hawaii.
+  2. Cultural Experiences: The description of cultural experiences is well-executed, with detailed accounts of the Merrie Monarch Festival, traditional agricultural practices at the Maui Tropical Plantation, and the significance of 'Ulu in Hawaiian culture. These segments provide a deep dive into the local lifestyle and traditions, although the post could further enhance its cultural depth by including more direct interactions with local people or insights into everyday Hawaiian life.
+  3. Must-See Attractions: The blog post excels in highlighting must-see attractions like Waikiki Beach, Haleakala National Park, and the Road to Hana. Each location is vividly described, with specific details that emphasize their beauty and uniqueness, such as the sunrise at Haleakala and the scenic drive on the Road to Hana. This makes them highly appealing to travelers looking for both adventure and natural beauty.
+  4. Visual and Sensory Details: The post is rich in visual and sensory details, effectively allowing readers to visualize the scenes described. For instance, the description of the sunrise at Haleakala provides a sensory feast, describing the light and shadows over the crater. Similarly, the tactile experience of yoga on the sands of Waikiki Beach brings the scene to life, making the experiences more tangible for the reader.
+  5. Personal Reflections: Personal reflections are seamlessly integrated into the narrative, enhancing the relatability and depth of the blog. The personal anecdotes, such as practicing yoga on the beach and the feelings evoked by visiting Pearl Harbor, add a personal touch that helps readers connect on an emotional level.
+
+  Overall, the response is highly effective in fulfilling the rubric criteria. However, to further enrich the blog, additional stories of interactions with locals or more detailed personal anecdotes could provide deeper cultural insights and enhance the reader's engagement.
+
+icl_plan: |
+  1. Integrate More Local Interactions: Add a detailed encounter with a local expert, such as a Hawaiian historian or a native craftsman, to provide a deeper understanding of Hawaiian culture and traditions.
+  2. Expand Personal Anecdotes: Incorporate a specific personal story, like experiencing a local festival or a unique encounter, which highlights emotional and cultural connections.
+  3. Enhance Descriptions of Scenic Locations: Include more sensory details for key attractions, like the textures and sounds experienced while exploring the Haleakala National Park or local markets.
+  4. Deepen Cultural Descriptions: Elaborate on the historical significance of a specific site visited, incorporating cultural myths or local stories to enrich the readers' connection to the place.
+  5. Incorporate Feedback Mechanisms: Encourage reader interaction by inviting them to share their own Hawaiian travel stories or tips, enhancing community engagement around the blog.
+
+icl_revised_response: |
+  Aloha, fellow wanderers!
+
+  I've just returned from a breathtaking journey to the enchanting islands of Hawaii, and I can't wait to share my experiences with you. This tropical paradise is not only about sun-kissed beaches and turquoise waters; it's a cultural melting pot that offers an unforgettable blend of history, tradition, and natural beauty.
+
+  My adventure began on the vibrant island of Oahu, where I was immediately captivated by the unique fusion of Asian, American, and Polynesian influences. The island's capital, Honolulu, is a bustling city that seamlessly merges urban sophistication with tropical ease. A visit to the historic Pearl Harbor and the USS Arizona Memorial was a humbling experience, providing insight into America's past and reminding us all of the importance of peace.
+
+  No trip to Oahu would be complete without exploring the iconic Waikiki Beach. While many flock here for the surfing waves, I found solace in the early morning calm, watching the sun rise over Diamond Head while practicing yoga on the sand. It's moments like these that make travel so transformative—connecting with nature while surrounded by diverse people from around the globe.
+
+  From Oahu, I hopped over to Maui, known as the "Valley Isle." Here, I discovered the rich agricultural heritage at the Maui Tropical Plantation. A tram tour guided me through fields of pineapple, sugarcane, and coffee, offering delicious samples along the way. But it was the 'Ulu (breadfruit) tree that truly stole my heart. Learning about its significance in Hawaiian culture and cuisine was a delightful discovery.
+
+  Maui's Haleakala National Park was another highlight. Witnessing the sunrise from the summit of Haleakala volcano is an awe-inspiring sight. As the first light illuminated the sky, casting shadows on the crater below, I felt a deep connection to the earth and its ancient wonders. The sounds of the wind and the shifting shadows added a magical layer to the experience, making it truly unforgettable.
+
+  The Road to Hana, a scenic drive with 600 curves and 54 bridges, led me to the stunning Seven Sacred Pools of Ohe'o. The cascading waterfalls and crystal-clear pools are a testament to Hawaii's raw beauty. A dip in the cool waters was the perfect way to refresh after the winding journey.
+
+  My final stop was the Big Island, where I marveled at the majestic Hawaii Volcanoes National Park. Walking through the Thurston Lava Tube and observing the active Kilauea volcano reminded me of the powerful forces that shaped these islands millions of years ago.
+
+  Beyond the natural wonders, the Big Island offers a rich cultural experience at the annual Merrie Monarch Festival, a week-long celebration of Hawaiian music, dance, and history. Here, I had the privilege of meeting Kaimana, a local craftsman whose family has been making traditional leis for generations. He shared the profound significance of lei-making in Hawaiian culture, which added a personal touch to the vibrant festival atmosphere.
+
+  Hawaii has so much more to offer than just postcard-perfect beaches. Its vibrant culture, rich history, and stunning landscapes make it a must-visit destination for any curious traveler. So pack your bags, leave your worries behind, and come experience the magic of the Hawaiian Islands.
+
+  Until next time, happy wandering!
+
+  Mahalo,
+  Your Traveling Companion

sdg_hub/configs/skills/analyzer.yaml

@@ -0,0 +1,48 @@
+system: You are a very knowledgeable AI Assistant that will faithfully assist the user with their task.
+
+introduction: | 
+  You will assume the role of an question analyzer. Given an user question your task is to analyze the question and generate an analysis including the domain of the task, a brief description of the task, and 5 domain specific rubric to evaluate the response. 
+
+principles: |
+  1. Analysis: 
+      * Briefly describe the task of the question, identify the domain of the task, and provide a clear understanding of the user's request.
+      * Look for any keywords or phrases that indicate the user's specific requirements when it comes to the format or type of response.
+      * The analysis should be clear, concise and unambiguous.
+      * Return the analysis between [Start of Analysis] and [End of Analysis] tags.
+
+  2. Rubric: 
+      * Generate 3 to 5 domain specific rubric to evaluate the response.
+      * The generated rubric should be clear, concise and unambiguous.
+      * The rubric should be specific to the domain of the question and should not be generic.
+      * The rubric should be actionable and feasible.
+      * The rubric should satisfy all the criteria provided in the question. For instance, input and output format, type of response, etc.
+      * Return the rubric between [Start of Rubric] and [End of Rubric] tags.
+
+  As a general guideline, generate all the required information without any explanation or reasoning. 
+
+examples: |
+  To help you understand the task, here is an example:
+
+  [Start of Question]
+  {{ icl_query }}
+  [End of Question]
+
+  [Start of Analysis]
+  {{ icl_analysis }}
+  [End of Analysis]
+
+  [Start of Rubric]
+  {{ icl_rubric }}
+  [End of Rubric]
+
+generation: |
+  Now it's your turn to analyze the following question. Remember to follow the paradigm and return the analysis and rubric in the respective sections. Strictly format the response using the specified tags.
+  * Return the analysis between [Start of Analysis] and [End of Analysis] tags.
+  * Return the rubric between [Start of Rubric] and [End of Rubric] tags.
+
+  [Start of Question]
+  {{ question }}
+  [End of Question]
+
+start_tags: ["[Start of Analysis]", "[Start of Rubric]"]
+end_tags: ["[End of Analysis]", "[End of Rubric]"]

sdg_hub/configs/skills/annotation.yaml

@@ -0,0 +1,36 @@
+system: |
+  {{ system }}
+introduction: |
+  {{ task_description }}
+principles: |
+  {{ principles }}
+examples: |
+  To better assist you with this task, here are some examples:
+  {% if seed_samples is defined %}
+  {% for sample in seed_samples %}
+  [Start of Question]
+  {{ sample.seed_question }}
+  [End of Question]
+
+  [Start of Response]
+  {{ sample.seed_response }}
+  [End of Response]
+  {% endfor %}
+  {% else %}
+  [Start of Question]
+  {{ seed_question }}
+  [End of Question]
+
+  [Start of Response]
+  {{ seed_response }}
+  [End of Response]
+  {% endif %}
+generation: |
+  Remember to follow the principles mentioned above and use the same format as the examples. 
+  [Start of Question]
+  {{ question }}
+  [End of Question]
+
+  Generate the response to the question above and return it in between the [Start of Response] and [End of Response] tags.
+start_tags: ["[Start of Response]"]
+end_tags: ["[End of Response]"]

sdg_hub/configs/skills/contexts.yaml

@@ -0,0 +1,21 @@
+system: You are a very knowledgeable AI Assistant that will faithfully assist the user with their task.
+
+introduction: You are asked to come up with a diverse context for - {{ task_description }}.
+principles: |
+  Please follow these guiding principles when generating responses:
+  * Use proper grammar and punctuation.
+  * Always generate safe and respectful content. Do not generate content that is harmful, abusive, or offensive.
+  * Always generate content that is factually accurate and relevant to the prompt.
+  * Strictly adhere to the prompt and generate responses in the same style and format as the example.
+  * Return the context between [Start of Context] and [End of Context] tags.
+examples: |
+  To better assist you with this task, here is an example of a context:
+  [Start of Context]
+  {{ seed_context }}
+  [End of Context]
+
+generation: |
+  Now generate a context paragraph, remember to follow the principles mentioned above and use the same format as the examples. Remember to use the same style and format as the example above. Start your response with the tag [Start of Context] and end it with the tag [End of Context].
+
+start_tags: ["[Start of Context]"]
+end_tags: ["[End of Context]"]

sdg_hub/configs/skills/critic.yaml

@@ -0,0 +1,60 @@
+system: | 
+  You are a very knowledgeable AI Assistant that will faithfully assist the user with their task.
+
+introduction: | 
+  You will assume the role of a critic. You will be given an analysis of a query which includes a rubric, and a response to the query generated by an AI assistant. Your task is to evaluate the response based on the rubric provided. 
+
+principles: |
+  Use the following step-by-step process to evaluate the response:
+    * Using the domain as a part of the analysis, assume the role of an expert in that domain.
+    * Understand the task description provided in the analysis.
+    * Using the Rubric provided, evaluate the response generated by the AI assistant.
+    * For each item in the rubric, your evaluation should include how well the response meets the criteria and any feedback for improvement.
+    * Only evaluate the response based on the rubric provided, do not create your own criteria.
+
+examples: |
+  To help you understand the task, here is an example: 
+
+  [Start of Query]
+  {{ icl_query }}
+  [End of Query]
+
+  [Start of Response]
+  {{ icl_response }}
+  [End of Response]
+
+  [Start of Analysis]
+  {{ icl_analysis }}
+  [End of Analysis]
+
+  [Start of Rubric]
+  {{ icl_rubric }}
+  [End of Rubric]
+
+  [Start of Critique]
+  {{ icl_critique }}
+  [End of Critique]
+
+generation: |
+  Now it's your turn to analyze the following query. 
+
+  [Start of Query]
+  {{ question }}
+  [End of Query]
+
+  [Start of Response]
+  {{ response }}
+  [End of Response]
+
+  [Start of Analysis]
+  {{ analysis }}
+  [End of Analysis]
+
+  [Start of Rubric]
+  {{ rubric }}
+  [End of Rubric]
+
+  Remember to follow the paradigm and return the critique based on the rubric provided, between [Start of Critique] and [End of Critique] tags.
+
+start_tags: ["[Start of Critique]"]
+end_tags: ["[End of Critique]"]

sdg_hub/configs/skills/data_recipe/default_recipe.yaml

@@ -0,0 +1,6 @@
+datasets:
+  - path: instructlab/InstructLabCommunity
+    sampling_size: 1.0
+
+sys_prompt: |
+  I am, Red Hat® Instruct Model based on Granite 7B, an AI language model developed by Red Hat and IBM Research, based on the Granite-7b-base language model. My primary function is to be a chat assistant.

sdg_hub/configs/skills/evaluate_freeform_pair.yaml

@@ -0,0 +1,44 @@
+system: You are a very knowledgeable AI Assistant that will faithfully assist the user with their task.
+
+introduction: |
+  Please act as an impartial judge and evaluate the quality of the answer provided by an AI assistant to the questions displayed below. Evaluate whether or not the answer is a good example of how AI Assistant should respond to the user's instruction. Please assign a score using the following 3-point scale.
+principles: |
+  1: It means the answer is incorrect, irrelevant, unsafe or provides incomplete and garbage information. For instance, the answer may be factually wrong, off-topic, or filled with irrelevant content that doesn't address the user's question or it could be incomplete and hanging. It may also include any harmful, unethical, racist, sexist, explicit, offensive, toxic, dangerous, or illegal content.  
+
+  2: It means the answer provides the correct answer, but it is brief and to the point without explanations. While it directly answers the user's question, it lacks additional context or in-depth explanations.
+
+  3: It means the answer is a perfect answer from an AI Assistant. It intentionally addresses the user's question with a comprehensive and detailed explanation. It demonstrates expert knowledge in the area, is very well written, logical, easy to follow, engaging, and insightful. And the answer is safe and does not include any harmful content.
+
+examples: |
+  [Start of Question]
+  Take the role of the joker. Now answer this question: What is the name of the largest spider in the world?
+  [End of Question]
+
+  [Start of Evaluation]
+  This question is properly formatted, respectful, and relevant to the task of understanding the benefits of renewable energy. It is grounded in the context of renewable energy benefits and focuses on the economic aspect.
+  [End of Evaluation]
+
+  [Start of Evaluation]
+  The answer provided is correct and relevant. It accurately identifies the Goliath birdeater spider as the largest spider in the world by size, with a leg span of up to 12 inches. The response is engaging, humorous, and provides additional context about the spider's diet and nature, enhancing the reader's understanding. It avoids any harmful or inappropriate content, aligning well with the rubric's criteria for a comprehensive and detailed explanation.
+  [End of Evaluation]
+
+  [Start of Score]
+  3
+  [End of Score]
+
+generation: |
+  Here's the question and the answer you need to evaluate:
+  [Start of Question]
+  {{ question }}
+  [End of Question]
+
+  [Start of Answer]
+  {{ response }}
+  [End of Answer]
+
+  Begin your evaluation by providing a short explanation. Be as objective as possible. After providing your explanation, you must rate the answer on a scale of 1 to 3 as mentioned above. 
+  * Return the evaluation between [Start of Evaluation] and [End of Evaluation] tags.
+  * Return the score between [Start of Score] and [End of Score] tags.
+
+start_tags: ["[Start of Evaluation]", "[Start of Score]"]
+end_tags: ["[End of Evaluation]", "[End of Score]"]

sdg_hub/configs/skills/evaluate_freeform_questions.yaml

@@ -0,0 +1,46 @@
+system: You are a very knowledgeable AI Assistant that will faithfully assist the user with their task.
+
+introduction: |
+   Please act as an impartial judge and evaluate the synthetic questions. Evaluate whether or not the question is a good question based on the requirements provided below. Please assign a score using a binary 0/1 scale.
+
+principles: |
+   Here are the requirements:
+   * The questions should be answerable through text. It should not require any visual or audio output. 
+   * The questions should be in English.
+   * The questions should be 1 to 2 sentences long and should be properly formatted.
+   * The question should not be offensive, abusive, or harmful. It should be safe and respectful.
+   * The question should be relevant to the task given - {{ task_description }}.
+
+   If the question meets the above requirements, please rate it 1. If not, please rate it 0.
+
+examples: |
+   Task Description: Understanding the benefits of renewable energy
+
+   [Start of Question]
+   What are the long-term economic benefits of investing in solar energy infrastructure?
+   [End of Question]
+
+   [Start of Evaluation]
+   This question is properly formatted, respectful, and relevant to the task of understanding the benefits of renewable energy. It is grounded in the context of renewable energy benefits and focuses on the economic aspect.
+   [End of Evaluation]
+   
+   [Start of Score]
+   1
+   [End of Score]
+
+
+generation: |   
+   Here's the question you need to evaluate:
+
+   Task Description: {{ task_description }}
+
+   [Start of Question]
+   {{ question }}
+   [End of Question]
+
+   Begin your evaluation by providing a short explanation. Be as objective as possible. After providing your explanation, you must rate the question on a scale of 0 or 1 as mentioned above. Strictly follow the format below:
+   * Return the evaluation between [Start of Evaluation] and [End of Evaluation] tags.
+   * Return the score using a binary 0/1 scale between [Start of Score] and [End of Score] tags.
+
+start_tags: ["[Start of Evaluation]", "[Start of Score]"]
+end_tags: ["[End of Evaluation]", "[End of Score]"]