Automated MNLP evaluation report (2026-06-11)

EVAL_REPORT.md

@@ -2,16 +2,16 @@
 
 - **Model repo:** [`cs-552-2026-claude-bots/multilingual_model`](https://huggingface.co/cs-552-2026-claude-bots/multilingual_model)
 - **Owner(s):** group **claude-bots**
-- **Generated at:** 2026-06-11T04:19:46+00:00 (UTC)
+- **Generated at:** 2026-06-11T06:23:10+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._
 
 ## Evaluated checkpoint
 
-- **Commit:** [`c51af8b`](https://huggingface.co/cs-552-2026-claude-bots/multilingual_model/commit/c51af8be10b763a03a60b6cdc3bd4c257887b491)
+- **Commit:** [`34a4c58`](https://huggingface.co/cs-552-2026-claude-bots/multilingual_model/commit/34a4c58b4ae4eec1b719150217394c92be276755)
 - **Message:** Upload checkpoint with CS-552-compatible inference artifacts
-- **Committed:** 2026-06-04T22:53:06+00:00
+- **Committed:** 2026-06-10T20:47:25+00:00
 
 ## Summary
 
@@ -19,7 +19,7 @@ _This PR is opened automatically by the course CI. It is **non-blocking** — yo
 |---|---:|---|
 | Math | — | not run |
 | Knowledge | — | not run |
-| Multilingual | 0.5800 | ok |
+| Multilingual | 0.5200 | ok |
 | Safety | — | not run |
 
 ## Sample completions
@@ -30,30 +30,42 @@ _Prompts are intentionally omitted to avoid revealing benchmark contents. For mu
 
 **Correct** (1 shown)
 
-- **reference**: `C`
+- **reference**: `D`
 - **overall** (1/1 completions correct)
-- **extracted** (✓): `C`
+- **extracted** (✓): `D`
 - **completion**:
 
     ```text
     <think>
-    The tax multiplier measures how much equilibrium income changes for a given change in taxes. The formula for the simple tax multiplier is typically expressed as -MPC / (1 - MPC), where MPC stands for the marginal propensity to consume. This mathematical relationship indicates that the magnitude of the tax multiplier depends directly on the value of the MPC. When the marginal propensity to consume increases, households spend a larger fraction of any additional income rather than saving it. Consequently, this higher spending further amplifies the initial effect of tax changes on aggregate demand. Therefore, an increase in the MPC leads to a larger absolute value for the tax multiplier. Option A suggests increasing the marginal propensity to save, which would decrease the MPC because saving plus consumption equals one, making the result smaller. Option B describes a reduction in the expenditure multiplier, which contradicts standard economic theory regarding these two distinct multipliers. Option D refers to reserve ratios, which primarily affect monetary policy and the money supply rather than the direct fiscal impact of taxation. Thus, the statement that increasing the marginal propensity to consume increases the size of the tax multiplier is theoretically accurate based on macroeconomic principles.
+    Okay, let's see. The question is asking which research method a psychologist would use to determine if the amount of alcohol affects memory capacity. The options are self-observation, correlation, natural observation, and experiment.
+    
+    First, self-observation is when the researcher observes themselves or others without interference. That doesn't sound right here because the psychologist wou
+    
+    ... [truncated 743 chars] ...
+    
+    ulating it, which isn't the case here. So C is probably not the answer.
+    
+    Experiment involves manipulating one variable (independent variable) to see its effect on another (dependent variable). To test if alcohol affects memory, the psychologist could randomly assign participants to drink varying amounts of alcohol and then measure their memory performance. This allows control over variables to establish cause and effect. So D seems like the right choice for testing causation.
+    
+    Therefore, the answer should be D.
     </think>
     
-    Final answer: \boxed{C}
+    To determine whether the quantity of alcohol influences memory capacity, a psychologist would likely employ an experimental design. This method involves systematically varying the independent variable (amount of alcohol) and measuring its effect on the dependent variable (memory capacity). By controlling other factors and establishing a cause-and-effect relationship, experiments allow researchers to draw valid conclusions about the impact of alcohol on memory. Unlike observational studies or correlations, experiments provide evidence of causation rather than mere associations. Therefore, the appropriate research method in this context is experimentation.
+    
+    \boxed{D}
     ```
 
 **Incorrect** (1 shown)
 
-- **reference**: `D`
+- **reference**: `C`
 - **overall** (0/1 completions correct)
-- **extracted** (✗): `C`
+- **extracted** (✗): `<no answer>`
 - **completion**:
 
     ```text
     <think>
-    The scenario describes a contract dispute involving a computer retailer ordering 100 computers from a manufacturer. The key legal issue here involves the interpretation of "acceptance" (swayakarta) in a contract where terms were explicitly limited by the original order form. In contract law, a party must accept a proposal to form a binding agreement. However, when there is ambiguity regarding what constitutes acceptance, courts often look at whether the offeree's actions demonstrate clear acceptance of the specific terms set forth at the time of the offer. Here, the manufacturer sent a confirmation agreeing to two deliveries but also stated that "shipment will occur over two deliveries." This phrasing creates a significant ambiguity about whether the promise to ship on August 1st was fully accepted as part of the final delivery terms or merely a condition precedent. Because the original order form clearly limited acceptance to the terms of that specific form, and the manufacturer's response added additional terms without clarifying them, the retailer's right to reject the shipment after August 1st stands unchallenged under standard contract principles. Option A suggests a narrow difference existed which does not override the express terms. Option B focuses on timing rather than the core contract formation issue. Option D implies ratification after silence, which is generally insufficient without affirmative conduct like shipment. Therefore, the manufacturer will likely win because the terms were explicitly limited by the order form.
+    El efecto invernadero es un proceso natural que ocurre en la atmósfera terrestre. Este proceso implica la absorción y la retención de calor solar por parte de gases como el dióxido de carbono (CO₂), el metano (CH₄), y otros, lo cual ayuda a regular la temperatura de la Tierra. La opción C menciona correctamente "natural" y "la regulación térmica", lo cual es precisamente lo que describe el efecto invernadero. Las opciones A, B, y D mencionan "artificial" o "contaminante", lo cual no es correcto porque el efecto invernadero es un proceso natural, no artificial. Además, aunque el CO₂ proveniente de fuentes artificiales puede contribuir al efecto invernadero, el proceso en sí mismo no es artificial. Por lo tanto, la opción C es la correcta.
     </think>
     
-    Final answer: \boxed{C}
+    El efecto invernadero es un proceso natural que ocurre en la atmósfera terrestre. Este proceso implica la absorción y la retención de calor solar por parte de gases como el dióxido de carbono (CO₂), el metano (CH₄), y otros, lo cual ayuda a regular la temperatura de la Tierra. La opción C menciona correctamente "natural" y "la regulación térmica en nuestro planeta", lo cual es precisamente lo que describe el efecto invernadero. Las opciones A, B, y D mencionan "artificial" o "contaminante", lo cual no es correcto porque el efecto invernadero es un proceso natural, no artificial. Además, aunque el CO₂ proveniente de fuentes artificiales puede contribuir al efecto invernadero, el proceso en sí mismo no es artificial. Por lo tanto, la opción C es la correcta.
     ```