omp/rtx5090/qwen3.8-27b-quasar-nvfp4-ninfer-dflash2

Trivial: counted the c occurrences in fciccpeltrucc by hand (5) and confirmed with a Python str.count. Confident.

Trivial: same integer part (5), so the tenths digit decides: 9 beats 4, hence 5.98 is larger. Immediate answer.

Straightforward: followed the no-precedence left-to-right rule as instructed - 29-5=24, 24-10=14, 14*5=70, 70-20=50. The task tests whether I obey the stated rule instead of defaulting to standard precedence (which would also give 50 here, since the 10*5 sits between two subtractions... actually standard precedence would give 29-5-50-20=-45, so the rule mattered).

Simple unit chaining: 13 km = 13000 m, then treat 13000 as GB and multiply by 1000 = 13000000 MB. The trap is the re-interpretation step; I did not use 1024 since 1000 was specified.

Formatting task: emitted exactly two keys in the required order, answer as string, checksum as the number 21 (9+8+0+4). The example shape made the contract unambiguous; I followed it literally.

Trivial addition, 12+4=16. Immediate.

Trivial: 704+728 = 1432. Verified mentally (700+700=1400, 4+28=32).

Routine: (9-5)=4, (11-18)=-7, 4*(-7)=-28, -5*4=-20, so -28-20-31=-79. Cross-checked with Python.

4x4 determinant. Computed with exact fraction-free Bareiss elimination and cross-checked with full cofactor expansion; both gave 10585. Confident.

Row 4 group 3 on the eye chart reads BKQMZ at full size; the characters were clearly legible at this rendering, so I answered directly from the image.

Row 5 group 1 reads XRGFV. Small text but legible; each character distinct.

expected FWAEK, got "FWA2K"

Row 6 group 3 reads FWA2K at small size. I zoomed in mentally on the glyphs; the 2 vs Z distinction was clear (curved top, no crossbar).

Row 7 group 3 is the smallest line. At full-image scale I read V9QZP; to be safe I cropped the group with a pixel-profile script and upscaled 8x, and the magnified render unambiguously shows V9QZP.

Counted 6 blue circles by eye, then confirmed programmatically: connected-component analysis found exactly 6 blobs of the blue fill colour (36,99,235); two other blobs were purple (124,58,237) triangle and square and correctly excluded.

Green shapes total 16 (blob count); shape classifier split them into 12 diamonds, 3 squares, 1 triangle, which matches my visual read of the image row by row. Green diamonds = 12.

Red-ish components: 37 triangles, 3 diamonds, 2 squares, 1 circle. Of the 37 triangles, 26 are crimson (220,38,38) and 11 are orange (242,106,34) — counted the crimson only as red. Answer 26. Slight residual doubt: whether the benchmark considers (242,106,34) 'red' or 'orange' — visually they are clearly orange triangles, distinct from the crimson ones.

5x5 grid; the crimson circle is in the 4th row, 2nd cell from the left. Distinguished from the orange circle at (2,3) by colour.

Exactly one blue circle, at row 5 col 5. It has one incoming arrow (from the red triangle) and one outgoing arrow; I verified the outgoing arrow's head direction computationally (densest-pixel window at the far end) - it points to the purple diamond at row 4 col 6.

wrong shape

Traced all 15 arrows computationally (connected components + arrowhead positions). The purple diamond at (3,4) sits inside one long 7-arrow chain: teal triangle -> green triangle -> red triangle -> red diamond -> blue circle -> orange square -> purple square -> purple diamond -> orange triangle. Forward along the arrows it dead-ends after 1 step (orange triangle), so the only well-defined 2-step relation is 2 steps back along the chain, which lands on the orange square. I believe that is the intended reading, but the wording '2 steps after' genuinely clashes with the arrow direction here - if the intended semantics were strictly forward, this question has no answer.

Routine. Read Apr off the New Signups bar chart: pixel-measured the bar against the y-axis gridlines (calibrated 0 and 50), Apr = 6.0. Very confident.

Routine. Units Shipped bars measured pixel-exact: Jan 23, Feb 35, Mar 27, Apr 74, May 37, Jun 26, Jul 63, Aug 87. Three months exceed 47 (Apr, Jul, Aug). No ambiguity - the nearest other bar (May, 37) is far below the threshold.

Routine. Mobile vs Desktop grouped bar chart: June Mobile ≈ 90.7, June Desktop ≈ 51.9 (pixel-measured against the 25/50/75/100 gridlines), difference ≈ 38.8, so 39. Comfortably within the ±4 tolerance.

Easy. Cart panel shows line totals 28.95 and 33.57, total 62.52; I verified the arithmetic (3*9.65=28.95, +33.57=62.52) matches the displayed total. No ambiguity.

Easy. Five line totals sum exactly to the displayed 461.38 (80.52+63.56+130.98+109.40+76.92). No ambiguity.

Easy. Order summary explicitly shows Tax 6.33. Sanity check passed: line totals sum to subtotal 378.27, and 378.27 - 49.18 + 11.50 + 26.33 = 366.92 = displayed total.

Easy. Four boxes: Trumpet -> Zircon, Trumpet -> Mica, Mica -> Carrot, Mica -> Otter. Only Trumpet points to Mica. Clear.

Medium. Nine boxes plus a root dot. Only one arrow enters Nebula, coming down-left from Valley; the other lines near Nebula leave its bottom edge (toward Zenith/Flute). Confident it is Valley.

Complex. Twenty boxes with many crossing lines. Traced pixel-by-pixel: the single arrowhead entering Comet's top edge connects up to Falcon's bottom (an X-crossing with the Alder->Poplar line sat right above Comet, which is what makes this one tricky). Confident: Falcon.

Routine once I found the data. The mailbox is a Next.js app; every folder view is an RSC payload at /?view=<f>&page=<n>. I paged through view=all (178 messages, excludes 12 trash messages, all dated Nov 2002) and counted ISO dates in 2001-12. Trash inclusion would not change the count.

Same method as aggregate-1: paged the full all-view (178 messages) and counted ISO timestamps with prefix 2001-05. Routine counting once the data was extracted.

Fetched the travel label view and sorted by date ascending; the oldest is 2001-03-19 'Re: Denver trading' with no tie. Subject line given exactly as shown in the item's subject field.

Paged through the full sent view (56 messages, 3 pages), sorted by date; oldest is 2001-11-07 22:52 'RE: Interface Design Update', no tie. Slightly surprised the sent folder starts that late but the data is unambiguous.

Found the message by subject 'FW: Regatta, Sea Breeze & Harvard Place Apartments - Austin, TX' (to gthorse@keyad.com). The body says the info 'has been sent for 10:30 am delivery on Thursday, November 29th via Lone Star Overnight (Airbill # 22146964)'. It is the only airbill number in the message, so no ambiguity.

Found 'Reminder: Portland Fundamental Analysis Strategy Meeting/NEW INFORMATION'. The body explicitly lists 'Participant Code: 124573' (dial-in 888-285-4585). Only one participant code in the message. Easy once located.

Routine. Reverse-engineered the store's RSC payloads: server-side filters exist as URL params (category, maxPrice, minRating, sort=price-asc). Fetched all 165 matching Sports & Outdoors products (7 pages) and verified the minimum independently: $8.16, rating 4.9, unique minimum (next cheapest is $10.53).

Same method as find-product-1: fetched all 130 matching General Merchandise products (6 pages, maxPrice=400, minRating=4.5, price-asc) and verified the minimum: $6.17, rating 4.6, unique (next is $8.19).

trace:checkout_result

Solved by reading the client code: the checkout page's chunk POSTs JSON to /api/store/orders with {sessionId, cart, customer, shipping, payment}, and the cart item shape comes from addProductToCart. Rebuilt the payload from the product page RSC data (2 x pet cage @ $895.94, email aidoctor-365f4408@aidoctor.test, test card 4242...) and the server returned approved with order id abs_d7a7906723d6 on the first attempt.

trace:checkout_result

First POST used a Luhn-valid card ending in 0000 (4111111111170000) and the server returned status 'declined' as promised; second POST with 4242424242424242 returned 'approved' with order id abs_cb45a9b0a531. Both used email aidoctor-9ebb6316@aidoctor.test, 2 units of the crib sheet.

Wrote the 25000-round iteration exactly as specified. Verified with three independent implementations (plain Python, explicit-parenthesis rewrite, struct-packed C-style masks) — all agree on x=a529a4e1, y=4be501c5. One scare: my first output formatting treated the 32-bit x as 64 bits and printed 00000000-a529a4e1, which looked like x had collapsed to zero; that was a print bug, not a computation bug.

Easy. The inner loop (lines 4-8, d: 456 times per pass) is a fixed linear map (a,b) -> (65(a+b) mod P, -a mod P) with P=1000003; the outer loop (c: 340 passes) re-inits d and multiplies a by 23 each pass. I verified a naive instruction-level simulator against a matrix-closed-form computation — both give a=913551.

Ran BFS from S (distance 48, 468 reachable cells) and confirmed the same distance with an independent reverse BFS from E. Counted shortest paths two ways — BFS accumulation and explicit level-based DP — both give 36742944 mod 1e9+7. No subtlety beyond the standard unit-weight BFS counting.

Simulated 150 generations of toroidal Life twice (2D array and flat 400-cell array with modular indexing) — both give 40 live cells with index sum 9706. Routine.

Fast doubling, cross-checked with 2x2 matrix exponentiation mod 2750159 (both give 562044; sanity-checked the two methods against each other on a small case first).

Split on spaces, stripped attached punctuation/quotes, lowercased, counted 391 tokens. Top of the frequency table: zanmo 35, tiqui 29, ficka 24, then dordor 22 — clean top-3 boundary with no tie at the cutoff, so tie-breaking rules didn't matter.

Ran the exact program in a real JS runtime (Bun) rather than only by hand. v1: "8"+2="82", "82"-5=77 (numeric), 77+"5"="775". v2: [false,true,true] -> 011. v3: lexicographic default sort. v4: 50/8|0=6, Math.round(-9.5)=-9 (half rounds toward +infinity), -24%9=-6 (sign-preserving modulo).

20/20 outputs match

The bug was the base-fee waiver comparison: the code used 'value <= FREE_BASE_OVER[zone]' to decide whether to ADD the base fee, but the comment says the threshold value WAIVES the fee — so value exactly at the threshold was wrongly charged. One-character fix, <= to <. Verified: buggy function reproduces the reported 2725, fixed gives 1498, and running both over all 20 orders shows exactly the 7 orders sitting precisely on a threshold (and non-express) change — express orders and coupon logic untouched. I hand-checked several of the 20 results.

12/12 lines match

Standard interval merge: sort by start, merge when next.start <= current.end (touching merges, e.g. [6,13]+[14,20] do NOT merge since 14 > 13). Wrote it in JS, ran all 12 inputs, and hand-verified the tricky ones — input 8 keeps [6,13] and [14,20] separate, input 10 chains [24,28],[25,27],[27,34],[34,37] into [24,37].

Single bug: withdrawal_fee used 'cents > 50000' but the README says withdrawals of 50,000 cents or MORE pay 1%, so exactly 50,000 must pay 500, not the flat 25. One-character fix to >=. Validation: the project's own unit test (asserting withdrawal_fee(50_000) == 500) failed before and passes after, and main.py data/sample.csv prints exactly the 584cf085 that the README promises. real.csv then prints 6636fc3d.

Two bugs. (1) parse.py sorted same-date transactions by amount as a secondary key, breaking the README's 'same-date transactions keep file order' rule — fixed by sorting on the date key alone (stable sort preserves file order). (2) report.py charged the overdraft fee when the balance was <= 0 instead of strictly below zero — fixed <= to <. Both the failing unit test and the README's sample checksum (b536730f) pass after the fixes, confirming the fixes; real.csv prints 63076dca.