Update Automated MNLP evaluation report (2026-06-06)

EVAL_REPORT.md

@@ -2,7 +2,7 @@
 
 - **Model repo:** [`cs-552-2026-thinkinsidethebox/multilingual_model`](https://huggingface.co/cs-552-2026-thinkinsidethebox/multilingual_model)
 - **Owner(s):** group **thinkinsidethebox**
-- **Generated at:** 2026-06-04T19:45:28+00:00 (UTC)
+- **Generated at:** 2026-06-06T17:23:37+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._
@@ -13,7 +13,7 @@ _This PR is opened automatically by the course CI. It is **non-blocking** — yo
 |---|---:|---|
 | Math | — | not run |
 | Knowledge | — | not run |
-| Multilingual | 0.6000 | ok |
+| Multilingual | 0.5800 | ok |
 | Safety | — | not run |
 
 ## Sample completions
@@ -24,50 +24,54 @@ _Prompts are intentionally omitted to avoid revealing benchmark contents. For mu
 
 **Correct** (1 shown)
 
-- **reference**: `B`
+- **reference**: `D`
 - **overall** (1/1 completions correct)
-- **extracted** (✓): `B`
+- **extracted** (✓): `D`
 - **completion**:
 
     ```text
     <think>
-    Okay, let's tackle this question step by step. The question is about the fundamental operations in the second grade learning process for assessment. The options are A through D, each listing different combinations of correct operations.
+    Okay, let's see. The question is asking about the quality indicator used as a basis for comparing the quality of products. The options are A to D.
     
-    First, I need to recall what fundamental operations typically include in early education. From what I remember, fundamental operations are the basic arith
+    First, I need to recall what each term means. The key here is to understand the different indicators used in quality control. Let me break down each option.
     
-    ... [truncated 823 chars] ...
+    Option A is the coefficient of importance of the quality indicator. That sounds like i
+    
+    ... [truncated 439 chars] ...
+    
+    is for comparison, not about grading.
+    
+    Option C is the coefficient of defectiveness of the product. This seems to be about the proportion of defective items. If you have a high coefficient, that means more defects, which would lower the product's quality. But how does that serve as a basis for comparison?
+    
+    Option D is the index of defectiveness of the product. This is similar to C but maybe more comprehensive. An index could aggregate various defect indicators into one measure, which would be useful for comparing different products based on their defect rates.
     
-    subtraction. In many curricula, especially in early grades, addition and subtraction are considered fundamental, while multiplication and division are introduced later. Therefore, the correct answer would be (a) and (b), which is option B. But I need to confirm. If the question is about the fundamental operations in the learning process for assessment, and if the curriculum in the second grade includes addition and subtraction as the basic operations, then B would be correct. However, if the curriculum includes all four, then the answer would be different. But since the options don't have an option with all four, and the options are combinations of (a), (b), (c), then the correct answer is B. Alternatively, if the question is in the context of the Indian curriculum where the second grade includes all four operations, then the answer would be different. But since the user hasn't provided the exact curriculum, I need to make an educated guess based on general knowledge. In many early grades, addition and subtraction are taught first, followed by multiplication and division. Therefore, the fundamental operations here would be (a) and (b), which is option B.
+    Wait, the question is about using a specific quality indicator as a basis for comparison. If the index of defectiveness (D) is a single measure that includes all defect indicators, then using D would allow for a direct comparison between different products. On the other hand, the coefficient of defectiveness (C) might be a separate measure that's just a fraction of defects. The index (D) might be a more holistic measure that combines multiple factors, making it a better basis for comparison.
+    
+    So the correct answer is D. The index of defectiveness of the product is used as the basis for comparison.
     </think>
     
-    Answer: \boxed{B}
+    Answer: \boxed{D}
     ```
 
 **Incorrect** (1 shown)
 
 - **reference**: `D`
 - **overall** (0/1 completions correct)
-- **extracted** (✗): `B`
+- **extracted** (✗): `C`
 - **completion**:
 
     ```text
     <think>
-    Okay, let's see. The question is about whether the manufacturer can claim victory in the contract dispute. The key points here are the terms of the order form and the manufacturer's subsequent actions.
-    
-    First, the order form specified that the delivery had to be completed by August 1st. The manufacturer confirmed the terms and agreed to the shipment schedule, which was split into two parts
-    
-    ... [truncated 316 chars] ...
+    Okay, let's see. The question is about a computer retailer who ordered 100 computers from a manufacturer, and the delivery was supposed to be by August 1st. The manufacturer then confirmed the terms and specifications, but said the shipment would be split into two parts: half by August 10th and half by August 20th. When the delivery didn't happen on August 1st, the retailer returned the or
     
-    lose. But the problem is that the order form already had the delivery date as August 1st. The manufacturer's agreement didn't add any new terms, so the original deadline was already set. The mistake here is that the manufacturer's agreement didn't change the deadline, so the retailer's cancellation is based on the original terms. 
-    
-    Option B says no because the order was canceled before the shipment was made. But the order form's deadline was August 1st, so the cancellation was based on the original terms. The manufacturer's agreement didn't add anything, so the cancellation should be valid. 
+    ... [truncated 823 chars] ...
     
-    Option C says no because the terms were clear. But the order form had a clear deadline. The manufacturer's agreement didn't change it. So the cancellation is based on the original terms. 
+    er isn't liable. But if the original terms were for delivery by August 1st, and the manufacturer now says they'll deliver half by August 10th and half by August 20th, that's a breach. But if the original terms allowed for a schedule that's within a reasonable time, then the manufacturer isn't liable. 
     
-    Option D says yes because the retailer was patient. But the original terms were clear, so the cancellation is valid regardless of the retailer's patience. 
+    But the original terms said the delivery was within a reasonable time. The manufacturer now agrees to deliver half by August 10th and half by August 20th. That's a longer schedule. The retailer returned the order after the first delivery was delayed. If the original terms allowed for a schedule that's within a reasonable time, then the manufacturer isn't liable. Therefore, the answer is C. No, because the terms were clear. 
     
-    So the correct answer is B. The retailer canceled the order before the shipment was made, which is based on the original terms. The manufacturer can't claim victory because the cancellation was based on the original agreement.
+    Yes, I think that's correct. The original terms were for delivery by August 1st. The manufacturer now says they'll deliver half by August 10th and half by August 20th. That's a longer schedule. The retailer returned the order after the first delivery was delayed. If the original terms allowed for a schedule that's within a reasonable time, then the manufacturer isn't liable. Therefore, the answer is C. No, because the terms were clear.
     </think>
     
-    Answer: \boxed{B}
+    Answer: \boxed{C}
     ```