pi/rtx5090/swift-1.5-qwen3.8-27b-q6_k-mtp

Trivial letter count; I counted the is in riientimoi by hand and got 4. Routine.

Simple decimal comparison; 8.33 is larger than 8.2. Easy.

Left-to-right evaluation without precedence: 16*3*3+18+2 = 164. Straightforward.

Two-step unit conversion: 8 kg = 8000 g, then 8000 GB = 8000000 MB. Easy, just had to keep the units straight.

Format compliance: JSON object with answer first, checksum second, checksum as a number = 17. Simple, just had to respect key order and types.

4+12=16. Trivial.

916+412=1328. Trivial.

((10-7)*(5-13)) + (20) - 40 = -24 + 20 - 40 = -44. Careful with the negatives; confident.

4x4 determinant; I computed it with exact rational arithmetic in Python to avoid any expansion mistake. Got 1040, confident.

Eye chart, row 4 group 2 read as 54R37. The middle rows were legible enough; the bottom rows are very small and I did not need them.

Eye chart row 5 group 3 read as 2PXSS. Small text but legible; the 2 vs Z distinction was clear from context.

Eye chart row 6 group 2 read as XQ2YY. Getting into the smaller rows; I am reasonably confident but small text makes 2/Z and 4/A style confusions possible.

Eye chart row 7 group 1, the smallest text. Read as Q6JEZ. This was the hardest of the acuity set; the characters are near my resolution limit so I have some residual doubt, but Q6JEZ is what I saw.

Counted 6 orange diamonds among distractor shapes (teal circle, blue circle, blue square, teal triangle). Easy.

Counted blue triangles carefully, excluding green, orange, purple and teal triangles. Got 9. The teal-vs-blue distinction was the main risk; I treated the one cyan/teal triangle as not blue.

Dense scatter of ~50 shapes. My visual count said 39, so I verified with a PIL connected-component script keyed on the exact purple RGB: 40 circles, 8 diamonds, 2 squares, with a clean fill-ratio split. I trust 40; the visual pass was the weak point here.

5x5 grid; the red circle sits in the leftmost cell of the fourth row. Easy.

This one was ambiguous. Zooming in, the green square has TWO outgoing arrows: a short one to the red triangle (bottom-left) and a longer one down-right to the green triangle, plus one incoming arrow from the teal square. The question is singular so I had to pick; I chose the longer, more prominent arrow (green triangle). I am not confident this is the intended one.

The lower-right of this graph is a tangle of crossing arrows that I could not reliably trace by eye. I wrote a momentum-based line tracer in Python: it detected the 13 arrowheads, then followed each shaft back to its tail. That gave a unique chain green circle -> orange diamond -> orange square -> purple square, so 3 steps back is the green circle. I trust the program over my eyes here, though the tangle made it the hardest vision item.

Read the chart title directly: Support Tickets Opened. Easy.

Server Incidents chart: Apr ~52, Mar ~29, difference ~23. I measured bar heights in pixels against the gridlines to be precise. Confident within the +/-8 tolerance.

Grouped bar chart; I measured the blue (Mobile) bar for Oct in pixels against the gridlines: 53.0. Within the +/-3 tolerance, confident.

Cart total read directly: $217.52. Easy.

Cart total read directly: $365.08. Easy.

Order summary shows Discount -$23.65; I reported the amount as $23.65. Slight ambiguity on sign, but the example format is a positive dollar amount.

Simple box diagram; the arrow from Eagle goes straight down to Gecko. Easy.

Traced the arrow into Pixel back to its source: Otter. The lower rows have several crossing arrows but Pixel has a single incoming arrow from Otter. Fairly confident.

expected Quokka, got "Beryl"

Large tangled graph. Located Mica exactly, found two lines on its left edge, traced each: the lower one has its arrowhead at Mica (Aspen incoming), the upper one runs left and ends with an arrowhead pointing into Beryl. So Micas outgoing arrow points to Beryl. Verified with a momentum line tracer plus a visual crop.