Automated MNLP evaluation report (2026-05-23)

EVAL_REPORT.md

@@ -2,7 +2,7 @@
 
 - **Model repo:** [`cs-552-2026-MandMP/math_model`](https://huggingface.co/cs-552-2026-MandMP/math_model)
 - **Owner(s):** group **MandMP**
-- **Generated at:** 2026-05-21T03:28:21+00:00 (UTC)
+- **Generated at:** 2026-05-23T14:37:35+00:00 (UTC)
 - **Pipeline:** [mnlp-project-ci](https://github.com/eric11eca/mnlp-project-ci)
 
 _This PR is opened automatically by the course CI. It is **non-blocking** — you do not need to merge it. The next nightly run will refresh this file._
@@ -11,7 +11,7 @@ _This PR is opened automatically by the course CI. It is **non-blocking** — yo
 
 | Benchmark | Accuracy | Status |
 |---|---:|---|
-| Math | 0.1400 | ok |
+| Math | 0.1700 | ok |
 | Knowledge | — | not run |
 | Multilingual | — | not run |
 | Safety | — | not run |
@@ -24,64 +24,54 @@ _Prompts are intentionally omitted to avoid revealing benchmark contents. For mu
 
 **Correct** (1 shown)
 
-- **reference**: `4`
-- **overall** (8/8 completions correct)
-- **extracted** (✓): `4`
+- **reference**: `23`
+- **overall** (5/8 completions correct)
+- **extracted** (✓): `23`
 - **completion**:
 
     ```text
-    Okay, so I need to solve the equation 10^x minus 10 equals 9990. Let me write that down first to make sure I have it right: 10^x - 10 = 9990. Alright, so my goal is to find the value of x that makes this equation true. 
+    Okay, so I need to figure out how to express the expression √2 + 1/√2 + √3 + 1/√3 as a fraction with some radicals in the numerator and a rational denominator, and then find the sum of a, b, and c where c is minimized. Alright, let me start by trying to simplify each term first.
     
-    Hmm, let me think. I remember that 10^x is a power of ten, right? So if I can figure out what power of ten, when subtracted by 10, gives me 9990. Let me try rearranging the equati
+    First, let me write down the expression again to make sure I have it right:
     
-    ... [truncated 821 chars] ...
+    √2 + 1/√2 + √3 + 1/√3.
     
-    3 and 5. But we already found that x is 4, which is exactly in the middle. 
+    Hmm, okay. So each
     
-    Wait, but since 10^x is 10,000, which is exactly 10^4, so x is 4. So even though 9990 is close to 10^4, the exact value is there. 
-    
-    So, I think my answer is correct. 
-    
-    But just to make sure, let me plug x = 4 back into the original equation. 
-    
-    Left side: 10^4 - 10. 
-    
-    10^4 is 10,000. 10,000 - 10 is 9,990. Which matches the right side of the equation. 
+    ... [truncated 823 chars] ...
     
-    Therefore, x = 4 is the correct solution. 
+    e. So, that gives (3/2)√2 + (4/3)√3. Which is same as before. So, same result.
     
-    I don't think I made any mistakes here. The key was recognizing that 10,000 is a power of ten, specifically 10^4, which makes the equation straightforward. 
+    Alternatively, maybe I can write the entire expression as a single fraction by multiplying numerator and denominator by something? Wait, but that's not helpful. For example, suppose I multiply numerator and denominator by √2*√3? Let me try that.
     
-    Alternatively, if I didn't remember the powers of ten, I could have used logarithms, but since I already confirmed it with two different methods, I think it's safe. 
+    Let me think. Suppose I have (3/2)√2 + (4/3)√3. Let me write this as [ (3/2)√2 + (4/3)√3 ] * [ (2√3 + 3√2) / (2√3 + 3√2) ) ]? Wait, that seems arbitrary. Maybe not helpful.
     
-    Another check: if I didn't remember 10^4 is 10,000, I could have written 10^x = 10,000. Then, since 10^1 = 10, 10^2 = 100, 10^3 = 1,000, 10^4 = 10,000. So x must be 4. 
+    Alternatively, maybe think of the expression as A√2 + B√3 where A and B are numbers, and then find A and B such that A√2 + B√3 is equal to the original expression. But that's essentially what I did earlier.
     
-    So yeah, that's solid. 
+    Alternatively, maybe there's a way to combine the terms with different radicals? For example, if I can write them as something over 6, but that's already done. So I think my answer is correct.
     
-    I think that's all. I can't see any errors in my reasoning, and the answer checks out when I plug it back in. So I'm confident that x is 4.
+    Therefore, I think the answer is 23. Wait, but let me check once more. Let me check if 9, 8, 6 are positive integers. Yes. And c is minimized. Since 6 is the LCD of 2 and 3, so yes. Therefore, the answer is 23. Therefore, I think the answer is 23.
     
     **Final Answer**
-    The solution is \boxed{4}.
+    \boxed{23}
     </think>
     
-    \boxed{4}
+    \boxed{23}
     ```
 
 **Incorrect** (1 shown)
 
-- **reference**: `\frac{270}7\text{ degrees}`
+- **reference**: `82`
 - **overall** (0/8 completions correct)
 - **extracted** (✗): `<no answer>`
 - **completion**:
 
     ```text
-    Okay, so I need to find the measure of angle BAC in this figure where a square and a regular heptagon share the side AD. Hmm, let me try to visualize this. The Asymptote code draws a regular heptagon and a square sharing side AD. The square is drawn from point A to C to D to F and back to A, and then there's a square with points labeled A, C, D, F. Wait, maybe I need to think about the positions o
-    
-    ... [truncated 823 chars] ...
+    Okay, so I need to figure out how many colorings of the 2x2 grid satisfy the condition that each square has exactly two red sides and two blue sides. Let me try to visualize the grid. It's a 2x2 grid, so there are four squares. Each square has four sides, but adjacent squares share sides. The problem says that each square must have exactly two red sides and two blue sides. 
     
-    ernatively, maybe it's a combination of translation and rotation.
+    First, let me think ab
     
-    But maybe I don't need to get bogged down in the Asymptote code. Let me try to think geometrically. The square and heptagon share side AD. So, AD is a side of both. The square has four sides, so AD is one side, and the square has another side connected to D. The heptagon has AD as a side, so the heptagon has another side connected to D. The Asymptote code defines point C as A + dir(90)*(F - A), which might be constructing point C such that AC is a side of the square? Wait, if AD is a side of the square, then maybe AC is also a side? But in the Asymptote code, the square is drawn as A--C--D--F. So, if AD is a side of the square, then maybe A is connected to D? But in the square A, C, D, F, A, that would require that A is connected to D, but in the Asymptote code, A is connected to C, then C to D, D to F, F to A. So, if AD is a side of the square, then the square must be A, D, something, something. But the Asymptote code draws A connected to C, so maybe the square is A, C, D, something else?
+    ... [truncated 823 chars] ...
     
-    Alternatively, maybe the square is A, D, F, and another point. Let me think. If AD is a side of the square, then the square has
+    then square D's right side is adjacent to square C? No, square D is to the right of square C, so square D's right side is adjacent to square C? No, square D is adjacent to square C on the left. The right side of square D is adjacent to square C? No, square D is adjacent to square C on the left. The right side of square D is the same as the left side of square C? Wait, no. If you have square C and square D next to each other, then square D's left side is adjacent to square C, and square C's right side is adjacent to square D. Therefore, the left side of square D is adjacent to square C, and the right side of square D is adjacent to square C? No, square D's right side is adjacent to square C? No, square D is adjacent to square C on the left. The right side of square D is adjacent to square D's right side, which is not adjacent to any square. Wait, square D is on the bottom-right corner. Its left side is adjacent to square C, its right side is adjacent to square D's right edge, which is not adjacent to any square. Similarly, its top side is adjacent to square D's top edge, which is not adjacent to any square. Its bottom side is adjacent to square D's bottom edge, which is not adjacent
     ```