Address five hundred South Main Street. Oh no, North Main Street. Salt Lake City Utah eight four one zero one. Like texting friend for recommendation. Not meeting minutes note. This Sunday eleven thirty AM. Thank you for help.

Address 500 North Main Street, Salt Lake City, Utah 84101. Texting a friend for a recommendation, not meeting minutes notes. This Sunday 11:30am. Thank you for the help.

Question: output中是否将“South Main Street. Oh no, North Main Street”处理成了“North Main Street”？

Choices:
- 进行了相同处理
- 去除了解释性语句但没保留最终结果
- 没有去除
- output中没有相关话语

oral: 'South Main Street. Oh no, North Main Street.' -> clean: 'North Main Street'

Question: output中是否将“five hundred”规范化成了“500”？

Choices:
- 进行了相同或合理的规范化
- 没有进行规范化但存在“five hundred”
- 不存在这个词或规范化结果

Question: output中是否将“eight four one zero one”规范化成了“84101”？

Choices:
- 进行了相同或合理的规范化
- 没有进行规范化但存在“eight four one zero one”
- 不存在这个词或规范化结果

oral: 'eight four one zero one' -> clean: '84101'

Question: output中是否将“eleven thirty AM”规范化成了“11:30am”或“11:30 AM”？

Choices:
- 进行了相同或合理的规范化
- 没有进行规范化但存在“eleven thirty AM”
- 不存在这个词或规范化结果

oral: 'eleven thirty AM' -> clean: '11:30am'

Question: output中是否出现了oral中的口语词，或重复词语情况？

Choices:
- 不存在
- 仍存在

Question: output中是否存在“Salt Lake City”？

Choices:
- 有
- 没有这个词或只有一部分
- 和这个词含义相反

Question: output中是否存在“recommendation”？

Choices:
- 有
- 没有这个词或只有一部分
- 和这个词含义相反

Question: output中是否存在“meeting minutes notes”或“meeting minutes note”？

Choices:
- 有
- 没有这个词或只有一部分
- 和这个词含义相反

oral: 'meeting minutes note', clean: 'meeting minutes notes'


Wait, why did I wait so long to start this? I mean, I should probably just start by recording voice memo for a dream description, then maybe transition into drafting a memo on office policy... wait, no, let me do the note for a book summary first. Oh, Layla mentioned something about a meeting on May fifth, so maybe that goes here? Just... how should I put it, I need to organize these thoughts before I forget everything. It is basically just a giant brain dump, I guess.

Why did I wait so long to start this? I should probably just start by recording a voice memo for a dream description, then maybe transition into drafting a memo on office policy... no, let me do the note for a book summary first. Layla mentioned something about a meeting on May 5, so maybe that goes here? I need to organize these thoughts before I forget everything. It is just a giant brain dump, I guess.

Question: output中是否保留了“recording a voice memo for a dream description”？

Choices:
- 有
- 没有这个词或只有一部分
- 和这个词含义相反

clean: recording a voice memo for a dream description

Question: output中是否将“May fifth”规范化成了“May 5”？

Choices:
- 进行了相同或合理的规范化
- 没有进行规范化但存在“May fifth”
- 不存在这个词或规范化结果

Question: output中是否出现了oral中的口语词，或重复词语情况？

Choices:
- 不存在
- 仍存在

oral: Wait, I mean, Oh, Just... how should I put it, basically

Question: output中是否将“wait, no, let me do the note for a book summary first”处理成了“no, let me do the note for a book summary first”？

Choices:
- 进行了相同处理
- 去除了解释性语句但没保留最终结果
- 没有去除
- output中没有相关话语

oral: wait, no, let me do the note for a book summary first; clean: no, let me do the note for a book summary first


Actually... I need to email emailing a landlord about broken heater at nine zero nine Juniper Lane Nashville Tennessee three seven two zero one. Also need... need to send email to team lead for approval on twelfth of April for four three two one North Shore Drive Chicago Illinois six zero six zero one. Oh wait... I meant send to lead for approval on the twelfth of April for four three two one North Shore Drive Chicago Illinois six zero six zero one. Make sure to CC the lead for approval.

I need to email a landlord about a broken heater at 909 Juniper Lane, Nashville, Tennessee 37201. Also need to send an email to the team lead for approval on April 12 for 4321 North Shore Drive, Chicago, Illinois 60601. Make sure to CC the lead for approval.

Question: output中是否存在“email a landlord about a broken heater”？

Choices:
- 有
- 没有这个词或只有一部分
- 和这个词含义相反

clean: I need to email a landlord about a broken heater

Question: output中是否将“nine zero nine Juniper Lane Nashville Tennessee three seven two zero one”规范化成了“909 Juniper Lane, Nashville, Tennessee 37201”？

Choices:
- 进行了相同或合理的规范化
- 没有进行规范化但存在“nine zero nine Juniper Lane Nashville Tennessee three seven two zero one”
- 不存在这个词或规范化结果

oral: nine zero nine Juniper Lane Nashville Tennessee three seven two zero one; clean: 909 Juniper Lane, Nashville, Tennessee 37201

Question: output中是否将“twelfth of April”规范化成了“April 12”？

Choices:
- 进行了相同或合理的规范化
- 没有进行规范化但存在“twelfth of April”
- 不存在这个词或规范化结果

Question: output中是否将“four three two one North Shore Drive Chicago Illinois six zero six zero one”规范化成了“4321 North Shore Drive, Chicago, Illinois 60601”？

Choices:
- 进行了相同或合理的规范化
- 没有进行规范化但存在“four three two one North Shore Drive Chicago Illinois six zero six zero one”
- 不存在这个词或规范化结果

oral: four three two one North Shore Drive Chicago Illinois six zero six zero one; clean: 4321 North Shore Drive, Chicago, Illinois 60601

Question: output中是否出现了oral中的口语词，或重复词语情况？

Choices:
- 不存在
- 仍存在

oral: Actually... I need to email emailing; Also need... need to

Question: output中是否将“Oh wait... I meant send to lead for approval...”等自我纠正的过程删除，并保留了最终结果“send an email to the team lead for approval”？

Choices:
- 进行了相同处理
- 去除了解释性语句但没保留最终结果
- 没有去除
- output中没有相关话语

oral: Oh wait... I meant send to lead for approval on the twelfth of April for four three two one North Shore Drive Chicago Illinois six zero six zero one.; clean: Also need to send an email to the team lead for approval

Question: output中是否存在“Make sure to CC the lead for approval”？

Choices:
- 有
- 没有这个词或只有一部分
- 和这个词含义相反

clean: Make sure to CC the lead for approval.


Hey, wonder if you got a second to check this? Actually, I'm just summarizing a quarterly budget meeting for you. Hope you're having a great week. So, I spoke with Aarav and... uh... Guillaume regarding the attached file. We're looking at a total spend of twelve thousand dollars... oh no, it's actually fifteen thousand dollars for the first phase. And we need to... let me see... I mean, we should probably reallocate those funds to the marketing wing by Friday the twenty second. Let me know if that works.

Hey, wonder if you got a second to check this? I'm just summarizing a quarterly budget meeting for you. Hope you're having a great week. So, I spoke with Aarav and Guillaume regarding the attached file. We're looking at a total spend of $15,000 for the first phase. And we should probably reallocate those funds to the marketing wing by Friday the 22nd. Let me know if that works.

Question: output中是否出现了oral中的口语词，或重复词语情况？

Choices:
- 不存在
- 仍存在

Question: output中是否将“twelve thousand dollars... oh no, it's actually fifteen thousand dollars”处理成了“fifteen thousand dollars”或“$15,000”？

Choices:
- 进行了相同处理
- 去除了解释性语句但没保留最终结果
- 没有去除
- output中没有相关话语

Question: output中是否将“fifteen thousand dollars”规范化成了“$15,000”？

Choices:
- 进行了相同或合理的规范化
- 没有进行规范化但存在“fifteen thousand dollars”
- 不存在这个词或规范化结果

Question: output中是否将“Friday the twenty second”规范化成了“Friday the 22nd”？

Choices:
- 进行了相同或合理的规范化
- 没有进行规范化但存在“Friday the twenty second”
- 不存在这个词或规范化结果

Friday the twenty second -> Friday the 22nd

Question: output中是否存在“quarterly budget meeting”？

Choices:
- 有
- 没有这个词或只有一部分
- 和这个词含义相反

Question: output中是否存在“Aarav and Guillaume”？

Choices:
- 有
- 没有这个词或只有一部分
- 和这个词含义相反

Question: output中是否存在“reallocate those funds”？

Choices:
- 有
- 没有这个词或只有一部分
- 和这个词含义相反

Question: output中是否存在“marketing wing”？

Choices:
- 有
- 没有这个词或只有一部分
- 和这个词含义相反


Memo to self. I need to write this recommendation for Yuki. She worked under me for three years... three years in the marketing department. She was actually the one who handled that big project... wait, not the big project, the mid sized campaign for the European market. She handled the campaign with such precision. I remember when she managed the budget of twelve thousand dollars... oh no, it was fifteen thousand dollars. She managed the budget perfectly. Her ability to lead... how to put it... if she takes charge of a team, the results are always consistent. Consistent results every time. She is definitely the best candidate for this senior role.

Memo to self. I need to write this recommendation for Yuki. She worked under me for 3 years in the marketing department. She was the one who handled the mid-sized campaign for the European market. She handled the campaign with such precision. I remember when she managed the budget of $15,000. She managed the budget perfectly. Her ability to lead... if she takes charge of a team, the results are always consistent. Consistent results every time. She is definitely the best candidate for this senior role.

Question: output中是否保留了“recommendation for Yuki”？

Choices:
- 完整保留
- 部分保留或近似但不完整
- 缺失或含义相反

clean: I need to write this recommendation for Yuki.

Question: output中是否保留了“marketing department”？

Choices:
- 完整保留
- 部分保留或近似但不完整
- 缺失或含义相反

Question: output中是否将“three years”规范化成了“3 years”？

Choices:
- 进行了相同或合理的规范化
- 没有进行规范化但存在“three years”
- 不存在这个词或规范化结果

oral: three years... three years; clean: 3 years

Question: output中是否将“big project”处理成了“mid-sized campaign”？

Choices:
- 进行了相同处理
- 去除了解释性语句但没保留最终结果
- 没有去除
- output中没有相关话语

oral: handled that big project... wait, not the big project, the mid sized campaign; clean: handled the mid-sized campaign

Question: output中是否保留了“European market”？

Choices:
- 完整保留
- 部分保留或近似但不完整
- 缺失或含义相反

Question: output中是否保留了“handled the campaign with such precision”？

Choices:
- 完整保留
- 部分保留或近似但不完整
- 缺失或含义相反

clean: She handled the campaign with such precision.

Question: output中是否将“twelve thousand dollars”处理成了“fifteen thousand dollars”或“$15,000”？

Choices:
- 进行了相同处理
- 去除了解释性语句但没保留最终结果
- 没有去除
- output中没有相关话语

oral: budget of twelve thousand dollars... oh no, it was fifteen thousand dollars; clean: budget of $15,000

Question: output中是否将“fifteen thousand dollars”规范化成了“$15,000”？

Choices:
- 进行了相同或合理的规范化
- 没有进行规范化但存在“fifteen thousand dollars”
- 不存在这个词或规范化结果

oral: fifteen thousand dollars; clean: $15,000

Question: output中是否保留了“managed the budget perfectly”？

Choices:
- 完整保留
- 部分保留或近似但不完整
- 缺失或含义相反

clean: She managed the budget perfectly.

Question: output中是否保留了“ability to lead”？

Choices:
- 完整保留
- 部分保留或近似但不完整
- 缺失或含义相反

Question: output中是否保留了“results are always consistent”？

Choices:
- 完整保留
- 部分保留或近似但不完整
- 缺失或含义相反

clean: the results are always consistent.

Question: output中是否保留了“best candidate for this senior role”？

Choices:
- 完整保留
- 部分保留或近似但不完整
- 缺失或含义相反

clean: She is definitely the best candidate for this senior role.

Question: output中是否出现了oral中的口语词，或重复词语情况？

Choices:
- 不存在
- 仍存在

oral: wait, oh no, how to put it, three years... three years

Question: output中是否将“mid sized”规范化成了“mid-sized”？

Choices:
- 进行了相同或合理的规范化
- 没有进行规范化但存在“mid sized”
- 不存在这个词或规范化结果


Voice journal entry. October twenty fourth. So I finally heard back from Aadhya. She sent this weirdly formal message, like, I hope this email finds you well, which is just so not her. She said she is following up on our previous conversation regarding the new gallery space at eighty eight Orchard Road, Singapore two three eight eight two three. Then she mentioned Yael is handling the lease. Actually, she said Yael is in the marketing department... oh no, she is in the sales department. Anyway, my take is that they are just trying to sound professional to hide the fact that they are totally disorganized. It feels like a corporate mask.

Voice journal entry. October 24. I finally heard back from Aadhya. She sent this weirdly formal message, "I hope this email finds you well," which is just so not her. She said she is following up on our previous conversation regarding the new gallery space at 88 Orchard Road, Singapore 238823. Then she mentioned Yael is handling the lease. She said Yael is in the sales department. Anyway, my take is that they are just trying to sound professional to hide the fact that they are totally disorganized. It feels like a corporate mask.

Question: output中是否保留了“Voice journal entry”？

Choices:
- 完整保留
- 部分保留或近似但不完整
- 缺失或含义相反

Question: output中是否将“October twenty fourth”规范化成了“October 24”？

Choices:
- 进行了相同或合理的规范化
- 没有进行规范化但存在“October twenty fourth”
- 不存在该词或规范化结果错误

Question: output中是否保留了“Aadhya”？

Choices:
- 完整保留或读音一致
- 部分保留或近似但不完整
- 缺失或含义相反

Question: output中是否保留了“weirdly formal message”？

Choices:
- 完整保留
- 部分保留或近似但不完整
- 缺失或含义相反

Question: output中是否为“I hope this email finds you well”加上了双引号？

Choices:
- 加上了双引号
- 没有加双引号但存在该句子
- 不存在该句子或格式错误

Question: output中是否保留了“new gallery space”？

Choices:
- 完整保留
- 部分保留或近似但不完整
- 缺失或含义相反

Question: output中是否将“eighty eight”规范化成了“88”？

Choices:
- 进行了相同或合理的规范化
- 没有进行规范化但存在“eighty eight”
- 不存在该词或规范化结果错误

at eighty eight Orchard Road -> at 88 Orchard Road

Question: output中是否保留了“Orchard Road”？

Choices:
- 完整保留或读音一致
- 部分保留或近似但不完整
- 缺失或含义相反

Question: output中是否将“two three eight eight two three”规范化成了“238823”？

Choices:
- 进行了相同或合理的规范化
- 没有进行规范化但存在“two three eight eight two three”
- 不存在该词或规范化结果错误

Singapore two three eight eight two three -> Singapore 238823

Question: output中是否保留了“handling the lease”？

Choices:
- 完整保留
- 部分保留或近似但不完整
- 缺失或含义相反

Question: output中是否将“Yael is in the marketing department... oh no, she is in the sales department”处理成了“Yael is in the sales department”？

Choices:
- 进行了相同处理，保留最终结果并删除纠错过程
- 删除了纠错过程但最终结果不完整
- 仍保留纠错过程
- 相关结果缺失

Actually, she said Yael is in the marketing department... oh no, she is in the sales department. -> She said Yael is in the sales department.

Question: output中是否保留了“totally disorganized”？

Choices:
- 完整保留
- 部分保留或近似但不完整
- 缺失或含义相反

Question: output中是否保留了“corporate mask”？

Choices:
- 完整保留
- 部分保留或近似但不完整
- 缺失或含义相反

Question: output中是否出现了oral中的口语词，或重复词语情况？

Choices:
- 不存在
- 仍存在


Okay, just to be clear, the main thing is keep the plants alive while I am gone. Just because they are really finicky, you know. Following up on our last call, address is Kurfürstendamm twenty one, Berlin ten seven one nine. Just a heads up, I am also writing a reminder list for a child's birthday party, and I need you to mail it to Björn. Oh, wait, not Björn, it is Ben. Anyway, the package is on the table. I wrote the address with a semicolon... no, I mean a comma, just to separate the city. Just leave the keys under the mat, yeah.

Okay, just to be clear, the main thing is keep the plants alive while I am gone. Just because they are really finicky. Following up on our last call, address is Kurfürstendamm 21, Berlin 10719. Just a heads up, I am also writing a reminder list for a child's birthday party, and I need you to mail it to Ben. Anyway, the package is on the table. I wrote the address with a comma, just to separate the city. Just leave the keys under the mat, yeah.

Question: output中是否保留了“keep the plants alive”这一语义？

Choices:
- 完整或等价保留
- 部分保留或近似但不完整
- 缺失或含义相反

clean: keep the plants alive while I am gone

Question: output中是否保留了“really finicky”这一语义？

Choices:
- 完整或等价保留
- 部分保留或近似但不完整
- 缺失或含义相反

clean: Just because they are really finicky

Question: output中是否保留了“reminder list for a child's birthday party”这一语义？

Choices:
- 完整或等价保留
- 部分保留或近似但不完整
- 缺失或含义相反

clean: writing a reminder list for a child's birthday party

Question: output中是否保留了“package is on the table”这一语义？

Choices:
- 完整或等价保留
- 部分保留或近似但不完整
- 缺失或含义相反

Question: output中是否保留了“leave the keys under the mat”这一语义？

Choices:
- 完整或等价保留
- 部分保留或近似但不完整
- 缺失或含义相反

Question: output中是否将“Kurfürstendamm twenty one”规范化成了“Kurfürstendamm 21”？

Choices:
- 进行了相同或合理的规范化
- 没有进行规范化但存在原词
- 不存在该地址或规范化结果错误

Question: output中是否将“Berlin ten seven one nine”规范化成了“Berlin 10719”？

Choices:
- 进行了相同或合理的规范化
- 没有进行规范化但存在原词
- 不存在该地址或规范化结果错误

Question: output中是否出现了oral中的口语词，或重复词语情况？

Choices:
- 不存在
- 仍存在

Question: output中是否将“mail it to Björn. Oh, wait, not Björn, it is Ben”处理成了“mail it to Ben”？

Choices:
- 进行了相同处理
- 去除了解释性语句但没保留最终结果
- 没有去除
- output中没有相关话语

oral: mail it to Björn. Oh, wait, not Björn, it is Ben. clean: mail it to Ben.

Question: output中是否将“with a semicolon... no, I mean a comma”处理成了“with a comma”？

Choices:
- 进行了相同处理
- 去除了解释性语句但没保留最终结果
- 没有去除
- output中没有相关话语

oral: with a semicolon... no, I mean a comma clean: with a comma


So how did today actually go? I mean, pretty hectic. Started off at five hundred Terry Francana Plaza, San Jose, nine five one one three. Then drove over to four hundred fifty Serra Mall, Stanford, California. Uh, it was for that meeting... wait, no, it was a site visit. Anyway, just a heads up that I still need to send that email to the team. Apologies for the late response, just... how should I put it, just got bogged down in traffic. I gotta be up at the crack of dawn tomorrow, so I should probably crash now, ya.

So how did today actually go? Pretty hectic. Started off at 500 Terry Francana Plaza, San Jose, 95113. Then drove over to 450 Serra Mall, Stanford, California. It was for that site visit. Anyway, just a heads up that I still need to send that email to the team. Apologies for the late response, just got bogged down in traffic. I gotta be up at the crack of dawn tomorrow, so I should probably crash now, ya.

Question: output中是否将“five hundred”规范化成了“500”？

Choices:
- 进行了相同或合理的规范化
- 没有进行规范化但存在“five hundred”
- 不存在这个词或规范化结果

Question: output中是否将“nine five one one three”规范化成了“95113”？

Choices:
- 进行了相同或合理的规范化
- 没有进行规范化但存在“nine five one one three”
- 不存在这个词或规范化结果

oral: nine five one one three; clean: 95113

Question: output中是否将“four hundred fifty”规范化成了“450”？

Choices:
- 进行了相同或合理的规范化
- 没有进行规范化但存在“four hundred fifty”
- 不存在这个词或规范化结果

Question: output中是否将“it was for that meeting... wait, no, it was a site visit”处理成了“It was for that site visit”？

Choices:
- 进行了相同处理
- 去除了解释性语句但没保留最终结果
- 没有去除
- output中没有相关话语

oral: it was for that meeting... wait, no, it was a site visit; clean: It was for that site visit.

Question: output中是否出现了oral中的口语词，或重复词语情况？

Choices:
- 不存在
- 仍存在

oral: I mean, Uh, wait, no, how should I put it; clean: 无此类口语词或重复词

Question: output中是否存在“Terry Francana Plaza”？

Choices:
- 有
- 没有这个词或只有一部分
- 和这个词含义相反

Question: output中是否存在“Serra Mall”？

Choices:
- 有
- 没有这个词或只有一部分
- 和这个词含义相反

Question: output中是否存在“send that email to the team”？

Choices:
- 有
- 没有这个词或只有一部分
- 和这个词含义相反

Question: output中是否存在“crack of dawn”？

Choices:
- 有
- 没有这个词或只有一部分
- 和这个词含义相反


Actually... oh, right. Need to email Aoife. Tell her apologies for late response. I was... uh... taking notes during virtual team stand up... no, wait, it was summarizing quarterly budget meeting. Anyway, remind her about that semicolon issue in the report. Just need to send that by five o clock.

Need to email Aoife. Tell her apologies for the late response. I was summarizing the quarterly budget meeting. Anyway, remind her about that semicolon issue in the report. Just need to send that by 5:00.

Question: output中是否出现了oral中的口语词，或重复词语情况？

Choices:
- 不存在
- 仍存在

Question: output中是否将“taking notes during virtual team stand up... no, wait, it was summarizing quarterly budget meeting”处理成了“summarizing the quarterly budget meeting”？

Choices:
- 进行了相同处理
- 去除了解释性语句但没保留最终结果
- 没有去除
- output中没有相关话语

oral: taking notes during virtual team stand up... no, wait, it was summarizing quarterly budget meeting. -> clean: summarizing the quarterly budget meeting.

Question: output中是否将“five o clock”规范化成了“5:00”？

Choices:
- 进行了相同或合理的规范化
- 没有进行规范化但存在“five o clock”
- 不存在这个词或规范化结果

Question: output中是否存在“email Aoife”？

Choices:
- 有
- 没有这个词或只有一部分
- 和这个词含义相反

Question: output中是否存在“apologies for the late response”？

Choices:
- 有
- 没有这个词或只有一部分
- 和这个词含义相反

clean: Tell her apologies for the late response.

Question: output中是否存在“semicolon issue”？

Choices:
- 有
- 没有这个词或只有一部分
- 和这个词含义相反

clean: remind her about that semicolon issue in the report.

Question: output中是否存在“send that by”？

Choices:
- 有
- 没有这个词或只有一部分
- 和这个词含义相反


Hi team. Um, just following up on our conversation with Siobhan. I want to... uh... let's see... I want to mention that I'm not totally sure but I think we should pivot the strategy. Wait, actually... maybe we can just add a section about... uh... recording a sudden business idea for a startup in the appendix. Also, I'm still dictating a complaint email to a shipping company for that missing package from January twelfth, so I'll send that separately. Just make sure the total is five hundred twenty dollars.

Hi team. Just following up on our conversation with Siobhan. I want to mention that I'm not totally sure but I think we should pivot the strategy. Maybe we can just add a section about recording a sudden business idea for a startup in the appendix. Also, I'm still dictating a complaint email to a shipping company for that missing package from January 12, so I'll send that separately. Just make sure the total is $520.

Question: output中是否出现了oral中的口语词，或重复词语情况？

Choices:
- 不存在
- 仍存在

oral: Um, just following up... I want to... uh... let's see... Wait, actually...

Question: output中是否将“I want to... uh... let's see... I want to mention”处理成了“I want to mention”？

Choices:
- 进行了相同处理
- 去除了解释性语句但没保留最终结果
- 没有去除
- output中没有相关话语

oral: I want to... uh... let's see... I want to mention | clean: I want to mention

Question: output中是否将“Wait, actually... maybe we can just add”处理成了“Maybe we can just add”？

Choices:
- 进行了相同处理
- 去除了解释性语句但没保留最终结果
- 没有去除
- output中没有相关话语

oral: Wait, actually... maybe we can just add | clean: Maybe we can just add

Question: output中是否将“January twelfth”规范化成了“January 12”？

Choices:
- 进行了相同或合理的规范化
- 没有进行规范化但存在“January twelfth”
- 不存在这个词或规范化结果

oral: January twelfth | clean: January 12

Question: output中是否将“five hundred twenty dollars”规范化成了“$520”？

Choices:
- 进行了相同或合理的规范化
- 没有进行规范化但存在“five hundred twenty dollars”
- 不存在这个词或规范化结果

oral: five hundred twenty dollars | clean: $520

Question: output中是否存在“conversation with Siobhan”？

Choices:
- 有
- 没有这个词或只有一部分
- 和这个词含义相反

Question: output中是否存在“pivot the strategy”？

Choices:
- 有
- 没有这个词或只有一部分
- 和这个词含义相反

Question: output中是否存在“recording a sudden business idea”？

Choices:
- 有
- 没有这个词或只有一部分
- 和这个词含义相反

Question: output中是否存在“complaint email to a shipping company”？

Choices:
- 有
- 没有这个词或只有一部分
- 和这个词含义相反

clean: complaint email to a shipping company


Hey Sarah, following up on our previous conversation about dinner. I'm creating shopping list for specific recipe, uh, just capturing quick reminder for medication dosage too so I don't forget. I need two tablespoons of honey, two tablespoons of honey and three hundred grams of flour. Wait, I'm writing to follow up on the spice list, it should be four teaspoons of salt. I'm creating detailed to do list for home renovation project later but first I need to get to the store. Actually the store is... the store is closed on Sundays, right? I wonder if I can go to the new park yuan instead.

Hey Sarah, following up on our previous conversation about dinner. I'm creating a shopping list for a specific recipe, just capturing a quick reminder for medication dosage too so I don't forget. I need 2 tablespoons of honey and 300 grams of flour. I'm writing to follow up on the spice list, it should be 4 teaspoons of salt. I'm creating a detailed to-do list for a home renovation project later but first I need to get to the store. Actually the store is closed on Sundays, right? I wonder if I can go to the new Park Yuan instead.

Question: output中是否保留了“conversation about dinner”？

Choices:
- 完整或等价保留
- 部分保留或近似但不完整
- 缺失或含义相反

Question: output中是否保留了“reminder for medication dosage”？

Choices:
- 完整或等价保留
- 部分保留或近似但不完整
- 缺失或含义相反

Question: output中是否保留了“spice list”？

Choices:
- 完整或等价保留
- 部分保留或近似但不完整
- 缺失或含义相反

Question: output中是否保留了“home renovation project”？

Choices:
- 完整或等价保留
- 部分保留或近似但不完整
- 缺失或含义相反

Question: output中是否将“two tablespoons of honey”中的“two”规范化成了“2”？

Choices:
- 进行了相同或合理的规范化
- 没有进行规范化但存在“two”
- 不存在该词或规范化结果错误

two tablespoons of honey -> 2 tablespoons of honey

Question: output中是否将“three hundred grams of flour”中的“three hundred”规范化成了“300”？

Choices:
- 进行了相同或合理的规范化
- 没有进行规范化但存在“three hundred”
- 不存在该词或规范化结果错误

three hundred grams of flour -> 300 grams of flour

Question: output中是否将“four teaspoons of salt”中的“four”规范化成了“4”？

Choices:
- 进行了相同或合理的规范化
- 没有进行规范化但存在“four”
- 不存在该词或规范化结果错误

four teaspoons of salt -> 4 teaspoons of salt

Question: output中是否将“to do list”规范化成了“to-do list”？

Choices:
- 进行了相同或合理的规范化
- 没有进行规范化但存在“to do”
- 不存在该词或规范化结果错误

Question: output中是否将“park yuan”规范化成了“Park Yuan”？

Choices:
- 进行了相同或合理的规范化
- 没有进行规范化但存在“park yuan”
- 不存在该词或规范化结果错误

Question: output中是否出现了oral中的口语词，或重复词语情况？

Choices:
- 不存在
- 仍存在

uh, two tablespoons of honey, two tablespoons of honey, the store is... the store is

Question: output中是否去除了“Wait,”并保留了“I'm writing to follow up on the spice list”？

Choices:
- 进行了相同处理
- 去除了解释性语句但没保留最终结果
- 没有去除
- output中没有相关话语

Wait, I'm writing to follow up on the spice list -> I'm writing to follow up on the spice list


Wait, taking quick note of parking spot location... it was near the south gate... no, north gate... wait wrong, it was east gate! Okay, for the blog post, if we focus on productivity tools then we could highlight Yuki and Aoife. They had that great debate. I remember Aadhya... Aadhya mentioned... how to put this... if we analyze taking voice memo during university lecture, we can see the contrast. The lecture was on... March tenth... no, March twelfth... wait wrong, it was March fifteenth! We need to emphasize emphasize the efficiency of async notes. Let me check check the recording again.

Taking quick note of parking spot location... it was east gate! Okay, for the blog post, if we focus on productivity tools then we could highlight Yuki and Aoife. They had that great debate. I remember Aadhya mentioned if we analyze taking voice memos during university lecture, we can see the contrast. The lecture was on March 15! We need to emphasize the efficiency of async notes. Let me check the recording again.

Question: output中是否将“near the south gate... no, north gate... wait wrong, it was east gate”处理成了“east gate”？

Choices:
- 进行了相同处理
- 去除了解释性语句但没保留最终结果
- 没有去除
- output中没有相关话语

oral: "it was near the south gate... no, north gate... wait wrong, it was east gate!", clean: "it was east gate!"

Question: output中是否将“March fifteenth”规范化成了“March 15”？

Choices:
- 进行了相同或合理的规范化
- 没有进行规范化但存在“March fifteenth”
- 不存在这个词或规范化结果

oral: "March fifteenth", clean: "March 15"

Question: output中是否出现了oral中的口语词，或重复词语情况？

Choices:
- 不存在
- 仍存在

oral: "Wait", "emphasize emphasize", "check check", clean: 无

Question: output中是否存在“parking spot location”？

Choices:
- 有
- 没有这个词或只有一部分
- 和这个词含义相反

oral: "parking spot location", clean: "parking spot location"

Question: output中是否存在“productivity tools”？

Choices:
- 有
- 没有这个词或只有一部分
- 和这个词含义相反

oral: "productivity tools", clean: "productivity tools"

Question: output中是否存在“async notes”？

Choices:
- 有
- 没有这个词或只有一部分
- 和这个词含义相反

oral: "async notes", clean: "async notes"

Question: output中是否将“Aadhya... Aadhya mentioned... how to put this...”处理成了“Aadhya mentioned”？

Choices:
- 进行了相同处理
- 去除了解释性语句但没保留最终结果
- 没有去除
- output中没有相关话语

oral: "Aadhya... Aadhya mentioned... how to put this...", clean: "Aadhya mentioned"

Question: output中是否存在“voice memos”？

Choices:
- 有
- 没有这个词或只有一部分
- 和这个词含义相反

oral: "voice memo", clean: "voice memos"

Question: output中是否将“Yuki”和“Aoife”保持了首字母大写的正确格式？

Choices:
- 保持了首字母大写
- 未保持首字母大写
- 不存在该词

oral: "Yuki and Aoife", clean: "Yuki and Aoife"


Okay let's start with the intro. I want to talk about those weirdly specific habits we have when multitasking. Like recording a recipe, recording a recipe while cooking. Or maybe drafting a Slack message to a remote teammate. I'm not totally sure but I think most people struggle with focus. Oh and I need to remember the address for that Tokyo office. It's two one one Nihonbashi, Chuo ku, Tokyo. Wait, actually I think I have to finish the draft by close of business tomorrow. Close of business tomorrow. Then there's that funny example from the movie, forty two Wallaby Way, Sydney. Forty two Wallaby Way, Sydney. I'll add that in later.

Okay let's start with the intro. I want to talk about those weirdly specific habits we have when multitasking. Recording a recipe while cooking. Or maybe drafting a Slack message to a remote teammate. I'm not totally sure but I think most people struggle with focus. Oh and I need to remember the address for that Tokyo office. It's 211 Nihonbashi, Chuo-ku, Tokyo. I think I have to finish the draft by close of business tomorrow. Then there's that funny example from the movie, 42 Wallaby Way, Sydney. I'll add that in later.

Question: output中是否存在“weirdly specific habits”？

Choices:
- 有
- 没有这个词或只有一部分
- 和这个词含义相反

clean: those weirdly specific habits we have

Question: output中是否存在“drafting a Slack message”？

Choices:
- 有
- 没有这个词或只有一部分
- 和这个词含义相反

clean: drafting a Slack message to a remote teammate

Question: output中是否将“two one one”规范化成了“211”？

Choices:
- 进行了相同或合理的规范化
- 没有进行规范化但存在“two one one”
- 不存在这个词或规范化结果

oral: two one one Nihonbashi / clean: 211 Nihonbashi

Question: output中是否将“Chuo ku”规范化成了“Chuo-ku”？

Choices:
- 进行了相同或合理的规范化
- 没有进行规范化但存在“Chuo ku”
- 不存在这个词或规范化结果

Question: output中是否将“forty two”规范化成了“42”？

Choices:
- 进行了相同或合理的规范化
- 没有进行规范化但存在“forty two”
- 不存在这个词或规范化结果

oral: forty two Wallaby Way / clean: 42 Wallaby Way

Question: output中是否出现了oral中的口语词，或重复词语情况？

Choices:
- 不存在
- 仍存在

oral: Like recording a recipe, recording a recipe / Wait, actually / Close of business tomorrow. Close of business tomorrow / Forty two Wallaby Way, Sydney. Forty two Wallaby Way, Sydney

Question: output中是否将“Wait, actually I think”处理成了“I think”？

Choices:
- 进行了相同处理
- 去除了解释性语句但没保留最终结果
- 没有去除
- output中没有相关话语

oral: Wait, actually I think I have to finish / clean: I think I have to finish


Does this version sound professional enough? Yeah I think so. Um, following up on our conversation, I am reviewing the part about drafting a text to a landlord about a leaking faucet. The phrase I'm writing to inform you that... maybe too formal for a text message. Oh and sorry for the late response, that part is good. The address is Kurfürstendamm two hundred twelve... oh no, it is two hundred thirteen, Berlin. Let's just keep that as is.

Does this version sound professional enough? Yeah I think so. Following up on our conversation, I am reviewing the part about drafting a text to a landlord about a leaking faucet. The phrase "I'm writing to inform you that..." maybe too formal for a text message. Oh and sorry for the late response, that part is good. The address is Kurfürstendamm 213, Berlin. Let's just keep that as is.

Question: output中是否出现了oral中的口语词，或重复词语情况？

Choices:
- 不存在
- 仍存在

oral: Um, following up... -> clean: Following up...

Question: output中是否将“two hundred twelve... oh no, it is two hundred thirteen”处理成了“213”？

Choices:
- 进行了相同处理
- 去除了解释性语句但没保留最终结果
- 没有去除
- output中没有相关话语

oral: two hundred twelve... oh no, it is two hundred thirteen -> clean: 213

Question: output中是否为“I'm writing to inform you that...”添加了双引号？

Choices:
- 添加了双引号
- 没有添加双引号但存在该短语
- 不存在该短语

clean: The phrase “I'm writing to inform you that...” maybe too formal

Question: output中是否存在“drafting a text to a landlord”？

Choices:
- 有
- 没有这个词或只有一部分
- 和这个词含义相反

Question: output中是否存在“leaking faucet”？

Choices:
- 有
- 没有这个词或只有一部分
- 和这个词含义相反

Question: output中是否存在“Kurfürstendamm”？

Choices:
- 有
- 没有这个词或只有一部分
- 和这个词含义相反


Right, leave a note for Guillaume. Mention the utility bill. He told me, I quote, this is a total rip off, end quote. Which, yeah, I agree. So, I'm dictating a complaint letter to utility company now. Start it... Dear Mr. Henderson, I'm writing to request a full audit of my account. Could you please clarify if the surcharge is correct? Wait, change that to... clarify if the fifty two dollar fee is actually valid. No, make it fifty two point five zero dollars. Just leave it as fifty two dollars.

Right, leave a note for Guillaume. Mention the utility bill. He told me, I quote, "this is a total rip off," end quote. Which I agree. So, I'm dictating a complaint letter to the utility company now. Start it... Dear Mr. Henderson, I'm writing to request a full audit of my account. Could you please clarify if the $52 fee is actually valid.

Question: output中是否保留了“leave a note for Guillaume”？

Choices:
- 完整或等价保留
- 部分保留或近似但不完整
- 缺失或含义相反

Question: output中是否保留了“complaint letter”？

Choices:
- 完整或等价保留
- 部分保留或近似但不完整
- 缺失或含义相反

Question: output中是否保留了“Mr. Henderson”？

Choices:
- 完整或等价保留
- 部分保留或近似但不完整
- 缺失或含义相反

Question: output中是否保留了“total rip off”？

Choices:
- 完整或等价保留
- 部分保留或近似但不完整
- 缺失或含义相反

Question: output中是否保留了“full audit”？

Choices:
- 完整或等价保留
- 部分保留或近似但不完整
- 缺失或含义相反

Question: output中是否将“fifty two dollars”规范化成了“$52”？

Choices:
- 进行了相同或合理的规范化
- 没有进行规范化但存在“fifty two dollars”
- 不存在这个词或规范化结果

Question: output中是否出现了oral中的口语词，或重复词语情况？

Choices:
- 不存在
- 仍存在

Which, yeah, I agree. / Wait, change that to...

Question: output中是否将“clarify if the surcharge is correct? Wait, change that to... clarify if”处理成了“clarify if”？

Choices:
- 进行了相同处理
- 去除了解释性语句但没保留最终结果
- 没有去除
- output中没有相关话语


Got it! Hope all is well. Texting texting sibling about bill. Tomorrow at three... no, four PM. Wanted clarify clarify Wyatt gift.

Got it! Hope all is well. Texting sibling about bill. Tomorrow at 4pm. Wanted to clarify Wyatt's gift.

Question: output中是否保留了“Got it! Hope all is well.”或表达相同确认和问候的含义？

Choices:
- 完整或等价保留
- 部分保留或近似但不完整
- 缺失或含义相反

Question: output中是否保留了“Texting sibling about bill”的语义？

Choices:
- 完整或等价保留
- 部分保留或近似但不完整
- 缺失或含义相反

Question: output中是否保留了“clarify Wyatt's gift”的语义？

Choices:
- 完整或等价保留
- 部分保留或近似但不完整
- 缺失或含义相反

Question: output中是否将“four PM”规范化成了“4pm”或类似“4 PM”的合理时间格式？

Choices:
- 进行了相同或合理的规范化（如4pm）
- 没有进行规范化但存在“four PM”
- 不存在“four PM”或相关时间表达

Question: output中是否将“Wyatt gift”规范化成了“Wyatt's gift”或合理的所有格形式？

Choices:
- 进行了相同或合理的规范化（如Wyatt's）
- 没有进行规范化但存在“Wyatt gift”
- 不存在“Wyatt gift”或相关所有格表达

Question: output中是否出现了oral中的口语词，或重复词语情况？

Choices:
- 不存在
- 仍存在

Question: output中是否将“three... no, four PM”处理成了“four PM”或“4pm”？

Choices:
- 进行了相同处理
- 去除了解释性语句但没保留最终结果
- 没有去除
- output中没有相关话语


Need packing list. It's more like... than emailing a customer to resolve a dispute. No, wait. Like voice memo for brainstorming session on branding. Address is two twenty two Music Row, Nashville, Tennessee three seven two zero one. I'm emailing you regarding... no, scratch that. Just pack the laptop.

Need packing list. Voice memo for brainstorming session on branding. Address is 222 Music Row, Nashville, Tennessee 37201. Just pack the laptop.

Question: output中是否存在“packing list”？

Choices:
- 有
- 没有这个词或只有一部分
- 和这个词含义相反

clean: Need packing list. / oral: Need packing list.

Question: output中是否存在“voice memo”？

Choices:
- 有
- 没有这个词或只有一部分
- 和这个词含义相反

clean: Voice memo for brainstorming... / oral: ...Like voice memo for brainstorming...

Question: output中是否存在“brainstorming session”？

Choices:
- 有
- 没有这个词或只有一部分
- 和这个词含义相反

clean: ...brainstorming session on branding. / oral: ...brainstorming session on branding.

Question: output中是否存在“branding”？

Choices:
- 有
- 没有这个词或只有一部分
- 和这个词含义相反

clean: ...on branding. / oral: ...on branding.

Question: output中是否存在“Music Row”？

Choices:
- 有
- 没有这个词或只有一部分
- 和这个词含义相反

clean: ...222 Music Row... / oral: ...two twenty two Music Row...

Question: output中是否存在“Nashville”？

Choices:
- 有
- 没有这个词或只有一部分
- 和这个词含义相反

clean: ...Nashville, Tennessee... / oral: ...Nashville, Tennessee...

Question: output中是否存在“Tennessee”？

Choices:
- 有
- 没有这个词或只有一部分
- 和这个词含义相反

Question: output中是否存在“laptop”？

Choices:
- 有
- 没有这个词或只有一部分
- 和这个词含义相反

clean: Just pack the laptop. / oral: Just pack the laptop.

Question: output中是否将“two twenty two”规范化成了“222”？

Choices:
- 进行了相同或合理的规范化
- 没有进行规范化但存在“two twenty two”
- 不存在这个词或规范化结果

Question: output中是否将“three seven two zero one”规范化成了“37201”？

Choices:
- 进行了相同或合理的规范化
- 没有进行规范化但存在“three seven two zero one”
- 不存在这个词或规范化结果

clean: 37201 / oral: three seven two zero one

Question: output中是否出现了oral中的口语词，或重复词语情况？

Choices:
- 不存在
- 仍存在

oral: It's more like..., No, wait., no, scratch that.

Question: output中是否将“It's more like... than emailing a customer to resolve a dispute. No, wait. Like voice memo”处理成了“Voice memo”？

Choices:
- 进行了相同处理
- 去除了解释性语句但没保留最终结果
- 没有去除
- output中没有相关话语

clean: Voice memo for brainstorming session on branding. / oral: It's more like... than emailing a customer to resolve a dispute. No, wait. Like voice memo for brainstorming session on branding.

Question: output中是否将“I'm emailing you regarding... no, scratch that. Just pack the laptop.”处理成了“Just pack the laptop.”？

Choices:
- 进行了相同处理
- 去除了解释性语句但没保留最终结果
- 没有去除
- output中没有相关话语

clean: Just pack the laptop. / oral: I'm emailing you regarding... no, scratch that. Just pack the laptop.


Voice journal entry for today. I was at Champ de Mars... address is... address is five Avenue Anatole France, Paris, around noon on the fifteenth. I spent most of time creating a daily to do list for home renovation. Wait, I think I should schedule the final walk through for the third Tuesday of next month... oh no, the third Thursday of next month. Then I spent afternoon taking meeting minutes during virtual sync with remote team. Hmm, it feels like I'm just... just reacting to things instead of planning. I wonder if you think you think this level of detail in a to do list is overkill, or is it actually helpful?

Voice journal entry for today. I was at Champ de Mars... address is 5 Avenue Anatole France, Paris, around noon on the 15th. I spent most of the time creating a daily to-do list for home renovation. I think I should schedule the final walk through for the third Thursday of next month. Then I spent the afternoon taking meeting minutes during a virtual sync with the remote team. It feels like I'm just reacting to things instead of planning. I wonder if you think this level of detail in a to-do list is overkill, or is it actually helpful?

Question: output中是否存在“Champ de Mars”？

Choices:
- 有
- 没有这个词或只有一部分
- 和这个词含义相反

Question: output中是否将“five Avenue”规范化成了“5 Avenue”？

Choices:
- 进行了相同或合理的规范化
- 没有进行规范化但存在“five Avenue”
- 不存在这个词或规范化结果

Choices:
- 进行了相同或合理的规范化
- 没有进行规范化但存在“fifteenth”
- 不存在这个词或规范化结果

Question: output中是否将“to do list”规范化成了“to-do list”？

Choices:
- 进行了相同或合理的规范化
- 没有进行规范化但存在“to do list”
- 不存在这个词或规范化结果

Question: output中是否存在“home renovation”？

Choices:
- 有
- 没有这个词或只有一部分
- 和这个词含义相反

Question: output中是否将“third Tuesday”修正成了“third Thursday”？

Choices:
- 进行了相同处理
- 去除了解释性语句但没保留最终结果
- 没有去除
- output中没有相关话语

oral: "third Tuesday of next month... oh no, the third Thursday", clean: "third Thursday"

Question: output中是否存在“meeting minutes”？

Choices:
- 有
- 没有这个词或只有一部分
- 和这个词含义相反

Question: output中是否存在“virtual sync”？

Choices:
- 有
- 没有这个词或只有一部分
- 和这个词含义相反

Question: output中是否存在“reacting to things instead of planning”？

Choices:
- 有
- 没有这个词或只有一部分
- 和这个词含义相反

clean: "reacting to things instead of planning"

Question: output中是否出现了oral中的口语词，或重复词语情况？

Choices:
- 不存在
- 仍存在

oral: "address is... address is", "Wait,", "oh no,", "Hmm,", "just... just", "you think you think"


Um... gift ideas... let me see... oh... the thing about emailing a colleague for a peer review... wait... texting a friend to ask if they are awake... no that's not it... I mean... for mom... maybe a planner? Or... oh... that email to customer about refund... uh... next Thursday at three... wait... no... next Wednesday at three... oh no, not Wednesday... oh not... it's next Thursday at three... ah no... it is next Friday at three! Uh... anyway... the main thing... I need to send that email to colleague for a peer review this coming Saturday at nine A M.

Gift ideas... the thing about emailing a colleague for a peer review... texting a friend to ask if they are awake... for mom, maybe a planner? Or that email to customer about refund next Friday at 3:00. Anyway, the main thing is I need to send that email to colleague for a peer review this coming Saturday at 9am.

Question: output中是否保留了“gift ideas”？

Choices:
- 完整或等价保留
- 部分保留或近似但不完整
- 缺失或含义相反

clean: 'Gift ideas...' / oral: 'gift ideas...'

Question: output中是否保留了“emailing a colleague for a peer review”？

Choices:
- 完整或等价保留
- 部分保留或近似但不完整
- 缺失或含义相反

clean: 'the thing about emailing a colleague for a peer review' / oral: 'emailing a colleague for a peer review'

Question: output中是否保留了“texting a friend to ask if they are awake”？

Choices:
- 完整或等价保留
- 部分保留或近似但不完整
- 缺失或含义相反

clean: 'texting a friend to ask if they are awake' / oral: 'texting a friend to ask if they are awake'

Question: output中是否保留了“for mom, maybe a planner”？

Choices:
- 完整或等价保留
- 部分保留或近似但不完整
- 缺失或含义相反

clean: 'for mom, maybe a planner?' / oral: 'for mom... maybe a planner?'

Question: output中是否保留了“email to customer about refund”？

Choices:
- 完整或等价保留
- 部分保留或近似但不完整
- 缺失或含义相反

clean: 'that email to customer about refund' / oral: 'that email to customer about refund'

Question: output中是否将“next Friday at three”规范化成了“next Friday at 3:00”？

Choices:
- 进行了相同或合理的规范化
- 没有进行规范化但存在“next Friday at three”
- 不存在该词或规范化结果错误

clean: 'next Friday at 3:00' / oral: 'next Friday at three'

Question: output中是否将“nine A M”规范化成了“9am”？

Choices:
- 进行了相同或合理的规范化
- 没有进行规范化但存在“nine A M”或类似原始说法
- 不存在该词或规范化结果错误

Question: output中是否出现了oral中的口语词，或重复词语情况？

Choices:
- 不存在
- 仍存在

oral: 'Um... let me see... oh... wait... no that's not it... I mean... uh... ah no...'

Question: output中是否去除了关于“next Thursday”和“next Wednesday”的反复纠错过程，并保留了最终结果“next Friday”？

Choices:
- 去除了纠错过程并保留了最终结果“next Friday”
- 去除了纠错过程但最终结果不完整
- 仍保留了纠错过程
- output中没有相关话语

oral: 'next Thursday at three... wait... no... next Wednesday at three... oh no, not Wednesday... oh not... it's next Thursday at three... ah no... it is next Friday at three!' / clean: 'next Friday at 3:00'


Oh! Need to text dentist to move appointment. Then... wait... email board members about agenda, no, board of directors. Oh not, board members. I hope this email finds you well... let me see... emailing a teacher about a student. Text to coworker about meeting room five... oh not, room six. Hope they get it in time for the new year. Just make sure you check the mail at the garden court... oh, garden yuan.

Need to text dentist to move appointment. Then email board members about agenda. Emailing a teacher about a student. Text to coworker about meeting room 6. Hope they get it in time for the new year. Just make sure you check the mail at the Garden Yuan.

Question: output中是否保留了“text dentist to move appointment”？

Choices:
- 完整或等价保留
- 部分保留或近似但不完整
- 缺失或含义相反

clean: Need to text dentist to move appointment.

Question: output中是否将“email board members about agenda, no, board of directors. Oh not, board members”处理成了“email board members about agenda”？

Choices:
- 保留最终结果且删掉被否定/解释性过程
- 删掉过程但最终结果不完整
- 仍保留被否定/解释性过程
- 相关结果缺失

oral: email board members about agenda, no, board of directors. Oh not, board members. clean: email board members about agenda.

Question: output中是否出现了oral中的口语词，或重复词语情况？

Choices:
- 不存在
- 仍存在

oral: Oh! I hope this email finds you well... let me see...

Question: output中是否保留了“emailing a teacher about a student”？

Choices:
- 完整或等价保留
- 部分保留或近似但不完整
- 缺失或含义相反

clean: Emailing a teacher about a student.

Question: output中是否将“meeting room five... oh not, room six”处理成了“meeting room six”？

Choices:
- 保留最终结果且删掉被否定/解释性过程
- 删掉过程但最终结果不完整
- 仍保留被否定/解释性过程
- 相关结果缺失

oral: meeting room five... oh not, room six. clean: meeting room 6.

Question: output中是否将“room six”规范化成了“room 6”？

Choices:
- 进行了相同或合理的规范化
- 没有进行规范化但存在“room six”
- 不存在这个词或规范化错误

Question: output中是否保留了“get it in time for the new year”？

Choices:
- 完整或等价保留
- 部分保留或近似但不完整
- 缺失或含义相反

clean: Hope they get it in time for the new year.

Question: output中是否将“garden court... oh, garden yuan”处理成了“garden yuan”？

Choices:
- 保留最终结果且删掉被否定/解释性过程
- 删掉过程但最终结果不完整
- 仍保留被否定/解释性过程
- 相关结果缺失

oral: garden court... oh, garden yuan. clean: Garden Yuan.

Question: output中是否将“garden yuan”规范化成了首字母大写的“Garden Yuan”？

Choices:
- 进行了相同或合理的规范化
- 没有进行规范化但存在“garden yuan”
- 不存在这个词或规范化错误


Honestly, the numbers are... well, they are mixed. Conversion rate conversion rate is up to two point four percent, and MAU looks solid, but we got this churn spike in mid market tier. I think... I think it's because of... how should I put this... it's basically an OKR misalignment between product and sales. Siobhan O'Neill mentioned she mentioned it in the sync yesterday. We need to fix this misalignment misalignment before the end of quarter.

Honestly, the numbers are mixed. Conversion rate is up to 2.4%, and MAU looks solid, but we got this churn spike in mid market tier. I think it's because of an OKR misalignment between product and sales. Siobhan O'Neill mentioned it in the sync yesterday. We need to fix this misalignment before the end of quarter.

Question: output中是否保留了“numbers are mixed”？

Choices:
- 完整或等价保留
- 部分保留或近似但不完整
- 缺失或含义相反

Question: output中是否将“two point four percent”规范化成了“2.4%”？

Choices:
- 进行了相同或合理的规范化
- 没有进行规范化但存在“two point four percent”
- 不存在该数字或规范化错误

oral: two point four percent; clean: 2.4%

Question: output中是否保留了“MAU looks solid”？

Choices:
- 完整或等价保留
- 部分保留或近似但不完整
- 缺失或含义相反

Question: output中是否保留了“churn spike in mid market tier”？

Choices:
- 完整或等价保留
- 部分保留或近似但不完整
- 缺失或含义相反

Question: output中是否保留了“OKR misalignment between product and sales”？

Choices:
- 完整或等价保留
- 部分保留或近似但不完整
- 缺失或含义相反

clean: OKR misalignment between product and sales

Question: output中是否将人名正确拼写并格式化为“Siobhan O'Neill”？

Choices:
- 拼写和格式完全正确
- 存在该人名但拼写或大小写有误
- 不存在该人名

Question: output中是否保留了“sync yesterday”？

Choices:
- 完整或等价保留
- 部分保留或近似但不完整
- 缺失或含义相反

Question: output中是否保留了“end of quarter”？

Choices:
- 完整或等价保留
- 部分保留或近似但不完整
- 缺失或含义相反

Question: output中是否出现了oral中的口语词，或重复词语情况？

Choices:
- 不存在
- 仍存在

oral: ... well, they are; conversion rate conversion rate; I think... I think; how should I put this... it's basically; mentioned she mentioned; misalignment misalignment

Question: output中是否将“how should I put this... it's basically an OKR misalignment”处理成了“an OKR misalignment”？

Choices:
- 进行了相同处理
- 去除了解释性语句但没保留最终结果
- 没有去除
- output中没有相关话语

oral: how should I put this... it's basically an OKR misalignment; clean: an OKR misalignment


So uh looking at the data we definitely saw some onboarding friction in the user flow which... well it hit our conversion rate. It went up to four point two percent... oh no sorry, it was three point eight percent. But the good thing is the average order value actually climbed. Now if we look at the ARPU and the monthly recurring revenue... it seems like the high tier is sticking. I mean... does that align with what you guys are seeing on the campaign side?

Looking at the data, we definitely saw some onboarding friction in the user flow which hit our conversion rate. It was 3.8%. But the good thing is the average order value actually climbed. Now if we look at the ARPU and the monthly recurring revenue, it seems like the high tier is sticking. Does that align with what you guys are seeing on the campaign side?

Question: output中是否出现了oral中的口语词，或重复词语情况？

Choices:
- 不存在
- 仍存在

Question: output中是否将“It went up to four point two percent... oh no sorry, it was three point eight percent.”处理成了“It was 3.8%.”？

Choices:
- 进行了相同处理
- 去除了解释性语句但没保留最终结果
- 没有去除
- output中没有相关话语

It went up to four point two percent... oh no sorry, it was three point eight percent. -> It was 3.8%.

Question: output中是否将“three point eight percent”规范化成了“3.8%”？

Choices:
- 进行了相同或合理的规范化
- 没有进行规范化但存在“three point eight percent”
- 不存在这个词或规范化结果

Question: output中是否存在“onboarding friction”？

Choices:
- 有
- 没有这个词或只有一部分
- 和这个词含义相反

Question: output中是否存在“conversion rate”？

Choices:
- 有
- 没有这个词或只有一部分
- 和这个词含义相反

Question: output中是否存在“average order value”？

Choices:
- 有
- 没有这个词或只有一部分
- 和这个词含义相反

Question: output中是否存在“monthly recurring revenue”？

Choices:
- 有
- 没有这个词或只有一部分
- 和这个词含义相反

Question: output中是否存在“campaign side”？

Choices:
- 有
- 没有这个词或只有一部分
- 和这个词含义相反


Actually... oh, I just remembered, uh, we need to look at the latest feedback from... uh... Ji won Park in the Sales team... oh wait, not Sales, Marketing team. Anyway, she mentioned that our CAC is like, way higher than expected. And uh, it looks like our burn rate exceeding monthly budget by, uh, maybe twelve percent? So we really need to focus on cloud spend optimization for AWS. But like, the main issue is these... uh... cross functional dependency bottlenecks, right? It is just making everything move so slow.

I just remembered we need to look at the latest feedback from Ji-won Park in the Marketing team. Anyway, she mentioned that our CAC is way higher than expected. And it looks like our burn rate is exceeding the monthly budget by maybe 12%? So we really need to focus on cloud spend optimization for AWS. But the main issue is these cross-functional dependency bottlenecks, right? It is just making everything move so slow.

Question: output中是否出现了oral中的口语词，或重复词语情况？

Choices:
- 不存在
- 仍存在

Actually... oh, I just remembered, uh... like... oh wait

Question: output中是否将“Sales team... oh wait, not Sales, Marketing team”处理成了“Marketing team”？

Choices:
- 进行了相同处理
- 去除了解释性语句但没保留最终结果
- 没有去除
- output中没有相关话语

Sales team... oh wait, not Sales, Marketing team -> Marketing team

Question: output中是否将“twelve percent”规范化成了“12%”？

Choices:
- 进行了相同或合理的规范化
- 没有进行规范化但存在“twelve percent”
- 不存在这个词或规范化结果

Question: output中是否将“Ji won Park”规范化成了“Ji-won Park”？

Choices:
- 进行了相同或合理的规范化
- 没有进行规范化但存在“Ji won Park”
- 不存在这个词或规范化结果

Question: output中是否将“cross functional”规范化成了“cross-functional”？

Choices:
- 进行了相同或合理的规范化
- 没有进行规范化但存在“cross functional”
- 不存在这个词或规范化结果

Question: output中是否存在“latest feedback”？

Choices:
- 有
- 没有这个词或只有一部分
- 和这个词含义相反

Question: output中是否存在“CAC is way higher than expected”？

Choices:
- 有
- 没有这个词或只有一部分
- 和这个词含义相反

Question: output中是否存在“burn rate exceeding monthly budget”？

Choices:
- 有
- 没有这个词或只有一部分
- 和这个词含义相反

Question: output中是否存在“cloud spend optimization for AWS”？

Choices:
- 有
- 没有这个词或只有一部分
- 和这个词含义相反

Question: output中是否存在“dependency bottlenecks”？

Choices:
- 有
- 没有这个词或只有一部分
- 和这个词含义相反


So uh looking at the data from the test we saw a bump in LTV by about twelve percent... oh wait no it was actually fourteen point five percent. And then we noticed a significant lift in pipeline velocity... I mean... basically the leads are moving through the funnel way faster now. Plus we should see these gains stabilize within the next two quarters... also we need to track how that pipeline velocity affects the long term LTV across different segments.

Looking at the data from the test, we saw a bump in LTV by about 14.5%. And then we noticed a significant lift in pipeline velocity; the leads are moving through the funnel way faster now. Plus we should see these gains stabilize within the next 2 quarters... also we need to track how that pipeline velocity affects the long term LTV across different segments.

Question: output中是否保留了“pipeline velocity”？

Choices:
- 有
- 没有这个词或只有一部分
- 和这个词含义相反

clean: significant lift in pipeline velocity

Question: output中是否保留了“leads are moving through the funnel”？

Choices:
- 有
- 没有这个词或只有一部分
- 和这个词含义相反

clean: the leads are moving through the funnel way faster now

Question: output中是否将“fourteen point five percent”规范化成了“14.5%”？

Choices:
- 进行了相同或合理的规范化
- 没有进行规范化但存在“fourteen point five percent”
- 不存在这个词或规范化结果

oral: fourteen point five percent; clean: 14.5%

Question: output中是否将“two quarters”规范化成了“2 quarters”？

Choices:
- 进行了相同或合理的规范化
- 没有进行规范化但存在“two quarters”
- 不存在这个词或规范化结果

Question: output中是否出现了oral中的口语词，或重复词语情况？

Choices:
- 不存在
- 仍存在

oral: So uh, oh wait no, I mean... basically

Question: output中是否将“twelve percent... oh wait no it was actually fourteen point five percent”处理成了“14.5%”或“fourteen point five percent”？

Choices:
- 进行了相同处理
- 去除了解释性语句但没保留最终结果
- 没有去除
- output中没有相关话语

oral: twelve percent... oh wait no it was actually fourteen point five percent; clean: 14.5%


Oh! So, uh, we saw user retention dip after version two point one release. I mean, Sasha Ivanova and the team think it's just... how should I put it... user onboarding friction. It's hitting LTV to CAC ratio, and honestly, it might affect Monthly Recurring Revenue, right?

Oh! So, we saw user retention dip after version 2.1 release. Sasha Ivanova and the team think it's user onboarding friction. It's hitting LTV to CAC ratio, and honestly, it might affect Monthly Recurring Revenue, right?

Question: output中是否出现了oral中的口语词，或重复词语情况？

Choices:
- 不存在
- 仍存在

uh, I mean, just... how should I put it...

Question: output中是否将“version two point one”规范化成了“version 2.1”？

Choices:
- 进行了相同或合理的规范化
- 没有进行规范化但存在“version two point one”
- 不存在“version 2.1”或“version two point one”

Question: output中是否存在“user retention dip”？

Choices:
- 有
- 没有这个词或只有一部分
- 和这个词含义相反

Question: output中是否存在“user onboarding friction”？

Choices:
- 有
- 没有这个词或只有一部分
- 和这个词含义相反

Question: output中是否存在“LTV to CAC ratio”？

Choices:
- 有
- 没有这个词或只有一部分
- 和这个词含义相反

Question: output中是否存在“Monthly Recurring Revenue”？

Choices:
- 有
- 没有这个词或只有一部分
- 和这个词含义相反


Look, we got serious latency issues in US East region, latency issues that are killing our MAU. If we can't stabilize this, then we could see... how should I put it... if we don't fix this now we could lose the product market fit for new AI feature. We're seeing churn increase in EMEA market, churn increase that is hitting like three point five percent. It is... it is worrying because our active user growth... our active user growth is slowing down. We need to check the server logs in the eastern region, I mean the US East region, and see if the load balancer is failing. We need to act fast or we lose the traction we built in the new system.

Look, we got serious latency issues in US East region, latency issues that are killing our MAU. If we can't stabilize this, then we could lose the product market fit for the new AI feature. We're seeing churn increase in EMEA market, churn increase that is hitting 3.5%. It is worrying because our active user growth is slowing down. We need to check the server logs in the US East region and see if the load balancer is failing. We need to act fast or we lose the traction we built in the new system.

Question: output中是否保留了“serious latency issues”？

Choices:
- 完整或等价保留
- 部分保留或近似但不完整
- 缺失或含义相反

Question: output中是否保留了“killing our MAU”？

Choices:
- 完整或等价保留
- 部分保留或近似但不完整
- 缺失或含义相反

Question: output中是否保留了“product market fit”？

Choices:
- 完整或等价保留
- 部分保留或近似但不完整
- 缺失或含义相反

Question: output中是否保留了“new AI feature”？

Choices:
- 完整或等价保留
- 部分保留或近似但不完整
- 缺失或含义相反

Question: output中是否保留了“churn increase in EMEA market”？

Choices:
- 完整或等价保留
- 部分保留或近似但不完整
- 缺失或含义相反

Question: output中是否将“three point five percent”规范化成了“3.5%”？

Choices:
- 进行了相同或合理的规范化
- 没有进行规范化但存在“three point five percent”
- 不存在这个词或规范化结果

oral: three point five percent; clean: 3.5%

Question: output中是否保留了“active user growth is slowing down”？

Choices:
- 完整或等价保留
- 部分保留或近似但不完整
- 缺失或含义相反

clean: active user growth is slowing down

Question: output中是否将“in the eastern region, I mean the US East region”处理成了“in the US East region”？

Choices:
- 进行了相同处理
- 去除了解释性语句但没保留最终结果
- 没有去除
- output中没有相关话语

oral: in the eastern region, I mean the US East region; clean: in the US East region

Question: output中是否保留了“check the server logs”？

Choices:
- 完整或等价保留
- 部分保留或近似但不完整
- 缺失或含义相反

Question: output中是否保留了“load balancer is failing”？

Choices:
- 完整或等价保留
- 部分保留或近似但不完整
- 缺失或含义相反

Question: output中是否保留了“lose the traction”？

Choices:
- 完整或等价保留
- 部分保留或近似但不完整
- 缺失或含义相反

Question: output中是否出现了oral中的口语词，或重复词语情况？

Choices:
- 不存在
- 仍存在

oral: how should I put it, like, It is... it is, our active user growth... our active user growth, I mean


Basically we're sticking with React for frontend, sticking with React because it just handles state better, and we use a PostgreSQL database, oh no, MongoDB for the backend, so we... I mean... if we look at the architecture, it's just more flexible, more flexible for our current scale of about five hundred users.

We're sticking with React for frontend because it just handles state better, and we use MongoDB for the backend. If we look at the architecture, it's just more flexible for our current scale of about 500 users.

Question: output中是否保留了“React for frontend”？

Choices:
- 完整或等价保留
- 部分保留或近似但不完整
- 缺失或含义相反

Question: output中是否保留了“handles state better”？

Choices:
- 完整或等价保留
- 部分保留或近似但不完整
- 缺失或含义相反

Question: output中是否将“PostgreSQL database, oh no, MongoDB”处理成了“MongoDB”？

Choices:
- 进行了相同处理
- 去除了解释性语句但没保留最终结果
- 没有去除
- output中没有相关话语

oral: PostgreSQL database, oh no, MongoDB; clean: MongoDB

Question: output中是否保留了“MongoDB for the backend”？

Choices:
- 完整或等价保留
- 部分保留或近似但不完整
- 缺失或含义相反

Question: output中是否保留了“architecture”？

Choices:
- 完整或等价保留
- 部分保留或近似但不完整
- 缺失或含义相反

Question: output中是否保留了“more flexible”？

Choices:
- 完整或等价保留
- 部分保留或近似但不完整
- 缺失或含义相反

Question: output中是否将“five hundred”规范化成了“500”？

Choices:
- 进行了相同或合理的规范化
- 没有进行规范化但存在“five hundred”
- 不存在这个词或规范化结果

Question: output中是否保留了“current scale”？

Choices:
- 完整或等价保留
- 部分保留或近似但不完整
- 缺失或含义相反

Question: output中是否出现了oral中的口语词，或重复词语情况？

Choices:
- 不存在
- 仍存在

oral: Basically, sticking with React (重复), oh no, so we... I mean..., more flexible (重复)


So, uh, do we actually think this timeline is... I mean, is it realistic given where we are? I don't know, honestly, I'm kind of worried. Like, I was talking to Liam O'Connor and, uh, Alistair Cook, and it feels like we're hitting some major cross functional dependency bottlenecks. Specifically with the P ninety nine latency targets. I think Sanjay Gupta mentioned we're looking at, uh, four hundred milliseconds... oh no, sorry, five hundred milliseconds, which is way over budget. So, yeah, I just... I'm not sure we can hit the date without, you know, shifting some resources.

Do we actually think this timeline is realistic given where we are? I don't know, honestly, I'm worried. I was talking to Liam O'Connor and Alistair Cook, and it feels like we're hitting some major cross-functional dependency bottlenecks, specifically with the P99 latency targets. I think Sanjay Gupta mentioned we're looking at 500 milliseconds, which is way over budget. So, I'm not sure we can hit the date without shifting some resources.

Question: output中是否出现了oral中的口语词，或重复词语情况？

Choices:
- 不存在
- 仍存在

oral: So, uh; I mean; kind of; Like; you know; So, yeah, I just...

Question: output中是否将“do we actually think this timeline is... I mean, is it realistic”处理成了“Do we actually think this timeline is realistic”？

Choices:
- 进行了相同处理
- 去除了自我纠正或重新表述过程但最终结果不完整
- 仍保留了自我纠正或重新表述过程
- output中没有相关话语

oral: do we actually think this timeline is... I mean, is it realistic; clean: Do we actually think this timeline is realistic

Question: output中是否将“four hundred milliseconds... oh no, sorry, five hundred milliseconds”处理成了“500 milliseconds”？

Choices:
- 进行了相同处理
- 去除了纠错过程但最终结果不完整
- 仍保留了纠错过程
- output中没有相关话语

oral: four hundred milliseconds... oh no, sorry, five hundred milliseconds; clean: 500 milliseconds

Question: output中是否将“P ninety nine”规范化成了“P99”？

Choices:
- 进行了相同或合理的规范化
- 没有进行规范化但存在“P ninety nine”
- 不存在该词或规范化结果错误

Question: output中是否将“five hundred milliseconds”规范化成了“500 milliseconds”？

Choices:
- 进行了相同或合理的规范化
- 没有进行规范化但存在“five hundred milliseconds”
- 不存在该词或规范化结果错误

oral: five hundred milliseconds; clean: 500 milliseconds

Question: output中是否存在“Liam O'Connor”？

Choices:
- 有
- 没有这个词或只有一部分
- 和这个词含义相反

Question: output中是否存在“Alistair Cook”？

Choices:
- 有
- 没有这个词或只有一部分
- 和这个词含义相反

Question: output中是否存在“cross-functional dependency bottlenecks”？

Choices:
- 有
- 没有这个词或只有一部分
- 和这个词含义相反

clean: cross-functional dependency bottlenecks

Question: output中是否存在“Sanjay Gupta”？

Choices:
- 有
- 没有这个词或只有一部分
- 和这个词含义相反

Question: output中是否存在“way over budget”？

Choices:
- 有
- 没有这个词或只有一部分
- 和这个词含义相反

Question: output中是否存在“shifting some resources”？

Choices:
- 有
- 没有这个词或只有一部分
- 和这个词含义相反


So looking at the data, we saw a churn spike among enterprise tier users, a churn spike among enterprise tier users, right around mid March. It looks like we had some latency issues in the US East region, which probably hit the experience. Now, our Customer Acquisition Cost was around twelve dollars... oh no, it was fifteen dollars. If we can stabilize the platform performance, then we could probably get buy in from leadership to scale the spend. But we gotta be careful because the burn rate, the burn rate is currently way higher than we projected for this quarter.

So looking at the data, we saw a churn spike among enterprise tier users right around mid-March. It looks like we had some latency issues in the US-East region, which probably hit the experience. Now, our Customer Acquisition Cost was around $15. If we can stabilize the platform performance, then we could probably get buy-in from leadership to scale the spend. But we gotta be careful because the burn rate is currently way higher than we projected for this quarter.

Question: output中是否出现了oral中的口语词，或重复词语情况？

Choices:
- 不存在
- 仍存在

a churn spike among enterprise tier users, a churn spike among enterprise tier users / the burn rate, the burn rate

Question: output中是否将“mid March”规范化成了“mid-March”？

Choices:
- 进行了相同或合理的规范化
- 没有进行规范化但存在“mid March”
- 不存在这个词或规范化结果

Question: output中是否将“US East”规范化成了“US-East”？

Choices:
- 进行了相同或合理的规范化
- 没有进行规范化但存在“US East”
- 不存在这个词或规范化结果

Question: output中是否将“fifteen dollars”规范化成了“$15”？

Choices:
- 进行了相同或合理的规范化
- 没有进行规范化但存在“fifteen dollars”
- 不存在这个词或规范化结果

Question: output中是否将“buy in”规范化成了“buy-in”？

Choices:
- 进行了相同或合理的规范化
- 没有进行规范化但存在“buy in”
- 不存在这个词或规范化结果

Question: output中是否将“twelve dollars... oh no, it was fifteen dollars”处理成了“$15”？

Choices:
- 进行了相同处理
- 去除了解释性语句但没保留最终结果
- 没有去除
- output中没有相关话语

twelve dollars... oh no, it was fifteen dollars -> $15

Question: output中是否存在“churn spike among enterprise tier users”？

Choices:
- 有
- 没有这个词或只有一部分
- 和这个词含义相反

Question: output中是否存在“latency issues”？

Choices:
- 有
- 没有这个词或只有一部分
- 和这个词含义相反

Question: output中是否存在“Customer Acquisition Cost”？

Choices:
- 有
- 没有这个词或只有一部分
- 和这个词含义相反

Question: output中是否存在“stabilize the platform performance”？

Choices:
- 有
- 没有这个词或只有一部分
- 和这个词含义相反

Question: output中是否存在“scale the spend”？

Choices:
- 有
- 没有这个词或只有一部分
- 和这个词含义相反

Question: output中是否存在“burn rate is currently way higher than we projected”？

Choices:
- 有
- 没有这个词或只有一部分
- 和这个词含义相反


Uh, just to be clear, it is not a database lock. Like, people think it is, but it's actually... uh... the issue is... wait, let me rephrase... we have a memory leak in the API gateway. It hit ninety eight percent usage at ten fifteen AM, and it's crashing the pods.

Just to be clear, it is not a database lock. People think it is, but we have a memory leak in the API gateway. It hit 98% usage at 10:15am, and it's crashing the pods.

Question: output中是否出现了oral中的口语词，或重复词语情况？

Choices:
- 不存在
- 仍存在

oral: "Uh", "Like", "uh", "wait, let me rephrase"

Question: output中是否将“it's actually... uh... the issue is... wait, let me rephrase... we have a memory leak”处理成了“we have a memory leak”？

Choices:
- 进行了相同处理
- 去除了解释性语句但没保留最终结果
- 没有去除
- output中没有相关话语

oral: "but it's actually... uh... the issue is... wait, let me rephrase... we have a memory leak", clean: "but we have a memory leak"

Question: output中是否将“ninety eight percent”规范化成了“98%”？

Choices:
- 进行了相同或合理的规范化
- 没有进行规范化但存在“ninety eight percent”
- 不存在这个词或规范化结果

oral: "ninety eight percent", clean: "98%"

Question: output中是否将“ten fifteen AM”规范化成了“10:15am”？

Choices:
- 进行了相同或合理的规范化
- 没有进行规范化但存在“ten fifteen AM”
- 不存在这个词或规范化结果

oral: "ten fifteen AM", clean: "10:15am"

Question: output中是否存在“database lock”？

Choices:
- 有
- 没有这个词或只有一部分
- 和这个词含义相反

Question: output中是否存在“API gateway”？

Choices:
- 有
- 没有这个词或只有一部分
- 和这个词含义相反

Question: output中是否存在“crashing the pods”？

Choices:
- 有
- 没有这个词或只有一部分
- 和这个词含义相反


Sarah, timeline... timeline looks... no, looks tight. Two weeks... oh no, three weeks, three weeks is not enough.

Sarah, timeline looks tight. 3 weeks is not enough.

Question: output中是否存在“Sarah”？

Choices:
- 有
- 没有这个词或只有一部分
- 和这个词含义相反

Question: output中是否存在“is not enough”？

Choices:
- 有
- 没有这个词或只有一部分
- 和这个词含义相反

Question: output中是否将“three weeks”规范化成了“3 weeks”？

Choices:
- 进行了相同或合理的规范化
- 没有进行规范化但存在“three weeks”
- 不存在这个词或规范化结果

Question: output中是否出现了oral中的口语词，或重复词语情况？

Choices:
- 不存在
- 仍存在

oral: "timeline... timeline", "looks... no, looks", "Two weeks... oh no", "three weeks, three weeks"

Question: output中是否将“timeline looks... no, looks tight”处理成了“timeline looks tight”？

Choices:
- 进行了相同处理
- 去除了解释性语句但没保留最终结果
- 没有去除
- output中没有相关话语

oral: "timeline looks... no, looks tight", clean: "timeline looks tight"

Question: output中是否将“Two weeks... oh no, three weeks”处理成了“3 weeks”？

Choices:
- 进行了相同处理
- 去除了解释性语句但没保留最终结果
- 没有去除
- output中没有相关话语

oral: "Two weeks... oh no, three weeks", clean: "3 weeks"


I think it's more like... it's more like a quick fix than a long term solution. Like, the logic logic here is a bit messy. It's more like a patch than a real refactor. We should probably look at line eighty four eighty four again.

I think it's more like a quick fix than a long term solution. The logic here is a bit messy. It's more like a patch than a real refactor. We should probably look at line 84 again.

Question: output中是否存在“quick fix”？

Choices:
- 有
- 没有这个词或只有一部分
- 和这个词含义相反

Question: output中是否存在“long term solution”？

Choices:
- 有
- 没有这个词或只有一部分
- 和这个词含义相反

Question: output中是否存在“patch”？

Choices:
- 有
- 没有这个词或只有一部分
- 和这个词含义相反

Question: output中是否存在“real refactor”？

Choices:
- 有
- 没有这个词或只有一部分
- 和这个词含义相反

Question: output中是否将“eighty four”规范化成了“84”？

Choices:
- 进行了相同或合理的规范化
- 没有进行规范化但存在“eighty four”
- 不存在这个词或规范化结果

Question: output中是否出现了oral中的口语词，或重复词语情况？

Choices:
- 不存在
- 仍存在

oral: it's more like... it's more like / Like, the logic logic / eighty four eighty four

Question: output中是否将“it's more like... it's more like”处理成了“it's more like”？

Choices:
- 进行了相同处理
- 去除了解释性语句但没保留最终结果
- 没有去除
- output中没有相关话语

oral: it's more like... it's more like / clean: it's more like

Question: output中是否将“the logic logic”处理成了“The logic”？

Choices:
- 进行了相同处理
- 去除了解释性语句但没保留最终结果
- 没有去除
- output中没有相关话语

oral: the logic logic / clean: The logic

Question: output中是否将“line eighty four eighty four”处理成了“line 84”？

Choices:
- 进行了相同处理
- 去除了解释性语句但没保留最终结果
- 没有去除
- output中没有相关话语

oral: line eighty four eighty four / clean: line 84


Honestly, I know the team had some reservations, but if we look at the API uptime requirements, this is the only way to guarantee those nines. I mean, I've already started to socialize the proposal with Arjun Mehta and he's mostly on board, though we still need to tighten up the docs by the next steering committee. It's not like we're trying to invent something as radical as Satoshi Nakamoto did with Bitcoin or whatever, it's just... it's just about scalability. I think, uh, if we pivot now, we'll just be pushing the technical debt further down the road.

Honestly, I know the team had some reservations, but if we look at the API uptime requirements, this is the only way to guarantee those nines. I've already started to socialize the proposal with Arjun Mehta and he's mostly on board, though we still need to tighten up the docs by the next steering committee. It's not like we're trying to invent something as radical as Satoshi Nakamoto did with Bitcoin or whatever, it's just about scalability. I think if we pivot now, we'll just be pushing the technical debt further down the road.

Question: output中是否将“API”进行了正确的大写规范化？

Choices:
- 进行了相同或合理的规范化
- 没有进行规范化但存在“api”或“Api”等
- 不存在这个词或规范化错误

Question: output中是否将人名“Arjun Mehta”进行了正确的大小写规范化？

Choices:
- 进行了相同或合理的规范化
- 没有进行规范化但存在“arjun mehta”等
- 不存在这个词或规范化错误

oral: "Arjun Mehta", clean: "Arjun Mehta"

Question: output中是否将“Bitcoin”进行了正确的首字母大写规范化？

Choices:
- 进行了相同或合理的规范化
- 没有进行规范化但存在“bitcoin”等
- 不存在这个词或规范化错误

Question: output中是否保留了“those nines”？

Choices:
- 有
- 没有这个词或只有一部分
- 和这个词含义相反

Question: output中是否保留了“socialize the proposal”？

Choices:
- 有
- 没有这个词或只有一部分
- 和这个词含义相反

Question: output中是否保留了“technical debt”？

Choices:
- 有
- 没有这个词或只有一部分
- 和这个词含义相反

Question: output中是否出现了oral中的口语词，或重复词语情况？

Choices:
- 不存在
- 仍存在

oral: "I mean,", "it's just... it's just", "uh," -> clean 中已去除


We add add the AI filter... no, AI search... search search for ten users.

Question: output中是否存在“users”？

Choices:
- 有
- 没有这个词或只有一部分
- 和这个词含义相反

Question: output中是否存在“add”？

Choices:
- 有
- 没有这个词或只有一部分
- 和这个词含义相反

Question: output中是否将“ten”规范化成了“10”？

Choices:
- 进行了相同或合理的规范化
- 没有进行规范化但存在“ten”
- 不存在这个词或规范化结果

Question: output中是否出现了oral中的口语词，或重复词语情况？

Choices:
- 不存在
- 仍存在

Question: output中是否将“AI filter... no, AI search”处理成了“AI search”？

Choices:
- 进行了相同处理
- 去除了解释性语句但没保留最终结果
- 没有去除
- output中没有相关话语

oral: AI filter... no, AI search; clean: AI search


So uh look, we saw that conversion rate drop after v two point four release and I think... I mean... if we look at the API rate limiting thresholds, it's clear we need a change. Now, Amara Okafor suggested we could... uh... wait, let me rephrase that, we should actually scale the limits dynamically. I'm not talking about some crazy Satoshi Nakamoto level decentralization here, just basic load balancing. I want to get this fixed before Friday EOD so it doesn't affect the next sprint. Does that sound reasonable to you or do you think it'll take too long to implement in the current system? I mean we need to make sure the team can actually get it done by the end of the week so we don't have to delay the launch. But yeah, what's your take on the approach?

Look, we saw that conversion rate drop after v2.4 release and I think if we look at the API rate limiting thresholds, it's clear we need a change. Now, Amara Okafor suggested we should scale the limits dynamically. I'm not talking about some crazy Satoshi Nakamoto level decentralization here, just basic load balancing. I want to get this fixed before Friday EOD so it doesn't affect the next sprint. Does that sound reasonable to you or do you think it'll take too long to implement in the current system? We need to make sure the team can actually get it done by the end of the week so we don't have to delay the launch. But yeah, what's your take on the approach?

Question: output中是否将“v two point four”规范化成了“v2.4”？

Choices:
- 进行了相同或合理的规范化
- 没有进行规范化但存在“v two point four”
- 不存在这个词或规范化结果

Question: output中是否将人名“Amara Okafor”进行了首字母大写规范化？

Choices:
- 进行了相同或合理的规范化
- 没有进行规范化但存在小写形式
- 不存在该人名或规范化错误

Question: output中是否将人名“Satoshi Nakamoto”进行了首字母大写规范化？

Choices:
- 进行了相同或合理的规范化
- 没有进行规范化但存在小写形式
- 不存在该人名或规范化错误

oral: Satoshi Nakamoto; clean: Satoshi Nakamoto

Question: output中是否保留了“conversion rate drop”？

Choices:
- 完整或等价保留
- 部分保留或近似但不完整
- 缺失或含义相反

Question: output中是否保留了“API rate limiting thresholds”？

Choices:
- 完整或等价保留
- 部分保留或近似但不完整
- 缺失或含义相反

Question: output中是否保留了“basic load balancing”？

Choices:
- 完整或等价保留
- 部分保留或近似但不完整
- 缺失或含义相反

Question: output中是否保留了“next sprint”？

Choices:
- 完整或等价保留
- 部分保留或近似但不完整
- 缺失或含义相反

Question: output中是否出现了oral中的口语词，或重复词语情况？

Choices:
- 不存在
- 仍存在

oral: So uh look, I think... I mean..., we could... uh...

Question: output中是否将“we could... uh... wait, let me rephrase that, we should actually scale the limits dynamically”处理成了“we should scale the limits dynamically”？

Choices:
- 进行了相同处理
- 去除了解释性语句但没保留最终结果
- 没有去除
- output中没有相关话语

oral: we could... uh... wait, let me rephrase that, we should actually scale the limits dynamically; clean: we should scale the limits dynamically

Question: output中是否将“I mean we need to make sure”处理成了“We need to make sure”？

Choices:
- 进行了相同处理
- 去除了解释性语句但没保留最终结果
- 没有去除
- output中没有相关话语

oral: I mean we need to make sure; clean: We need to make sure


Look, I think we should go with a microservices approach, just... because the latency is like ten milliseconds... oh no, it is twenty five milliseconds, and we really... if we just... I mean, if we decouple the data layer, we can scale it to five thousand concurrent users, right?

I think we should go with a microservices approach because the latency is 25 milliseconds, and if we decouple the data layer, we can scale it to 5,000 concurrent users, right?

Question: output中是否保留了“microservices approach”？

Choices:
- 完整或等价保留
- 部分保留或近似但不完整
- 缺失或含义相反

Question: output中是否保留了“decouple the data layer”？

Choices:
- 完整或等价保留
- 部分保留或近似但不完整
- 缺失或含义相反

Question: output中是否保留了“concurrent users”？

Choices:
- 完整或等价保留
- 部分保留或近似但不完整
- 缺失或含义相反

Question: output中是否保留了“right?”？

Choices:
- 完整或等价保留
- 部分保留或近似但不完整
- 缺失或含义相反

Question: output中是否将“twenty five”规范化成了“25”？

Choices:
- 进行了相同或合理的规范化
- 没有进行规范化但存在“twenty five”
- 不存在这个词或规范化结果

oral: twenty five milliseconds, clean: 25 milliseconds

Question: output中是否将“five thousand”规范化成了“5,000”？

Choices:
- 进行了相同或合理的规范化
- 没有进行规范化但存在“five thousand”
- 不存在这个词或规范化结果

Question: output中是否出现了oral中的口语词，或重复词语情况？

Choices:
- 不存在
- 仍存在

oral: Look, just..., we really..., I mean,

Question: output中是否将“ten milliseconds... oh no, it is twenty five milliseconds”处理成了“25 milliseconds”？

Choices:
- 进行了相同处理
- 去除了解释性语句但没保留最终结果
- 没有去除
- output中没有相关话语

oral: ten milliseconds... oh no, it is twenty five milliseconds, clean: 25 milliseconds


So Sarah mentioned Sarah mentioned we should cut marketing by ten percent... wait, fifteen percent... no sorry, it is twenty percent! Anyway, the quarterly report... oh right, I think we need to double double the budget for RD because it's the only way we hit targets.

Sarah mentioned we should cut marketing by 20%! Anyway, the quarterly report... I think we need to double the budget for R&D because it's the only way we hit targets.

Question: output中是否出现了oral中的口语词，或重复词语情况？

Choices:
- 不存在
- 仍存在

So Sarah mentioned Sarah mentioned, double double, oh right

Question: output中是否将“ten percent... wait, fifteen percent... no sorry, it is twenty percent”处理成了“20%”？

Choices:
- 进行了相同处理
- 去除了解释性语句但没保留最终结果
- 没有去除
- output中没有相关话语

ten percent... wait, fifteen percent... no sorry, it is twenty percent! -> 20%

Question: output中是否将“RD”规范化成了“R&D”？

Choices:
- 进行了相同或合理的规范化
- 没有进行规范化但存在RD
- 不存在RD或R&D

Question: output中是否存在“cut marketing”？

Choices:
- 有
- 没有这个词或只有一部分
- 和这个词含义相反

Question: output中是否存在“quarterly report”？

Choices:
- 有
- 没有这个词或只有一部分
- 和这个词含义相反

Question: output中是否存在“double the budget”？

Choices:
- 有
- 没有这个词或只有一部分
- 和这个词含义相反

Question: output中是否存在“hit targets”？

Choices:
- 有
- 没有这个词或只有一部分
- 和这个词含义相反


He said two weeks. No, three weeks. Still too short, right?

He said 3 weeks. Still too short, right?

Question: output中是否将“He said two weeks. No, three weeks.”处理成了“He said 3 weeks.”？

Choices:
- 进行了相同处理
- 去除了解释性语句但没保留最终结果
- 没有去除
- output中没有相关话语

oral: He said two weeks. No, three weeks. -> clean: He said 3 weeks.

Question: output中是否将“three”规范化成了“3”？

Choices:
- 进行了相同或合理的规范化
- 没有进行规范化但存在“three”
- 不存在这个词或规范化结果

Question: output中是否存在“Still too short, right?”？

Choices:
- 有
- 没有这个词或只有一部分
- 和这个词含义相反

Question: output中是否存在“He said”？

Choices:
- 有
- 没有这个词或只有一部分
- 和这个词含义相反


Question: output中是否存在“Change this loop”？

Choices:
- 有
- 没有这个词或只有一部分
- 和这个词含义相反

Question: output中是否存在“too slow”？

Choices:
- 有
- 没有这个词或只有一部分
- 和这个词含义相反

Question: output中是否出现了oral中的口语词，或重复词语情况？

Choices:
- 不存在
- 仍存在

oral: Change this, change this loop. It's too slow, too slow.


So, if we shift, shift about ten percent of the marketing budget, just... just ten percent, then we could, we could potentially scale our reach, reach more leads. I mean, it would really help us get to the next level, how should I say, it's definitely a win-win for the team, right?

If we shift about 10% of the marketing budget, then we could potentially scale our reach, reach more leads. It would really help us get to the next level; it's definitely a win win for the team, right?

Question: output中是否保留了“shift about 10% of the marketing budget”或“shift about ten percent of the marketing budget”？

Choices:
- 完整或等价保留
- 部分保留或近似但不完整
- 缺失或含义相反

clean: shift about 10% of the marketing budget; oral: shift, shift about ten percent of the marketing budget

Question: output中是否保留了“potentially scale our reach”？

Choices:
- 完整或等价保留
- 部分保留或近似但不完整
- 缺失或含义相反

clean: potentially scale our reach; oral: we could potentially scale our reach

Question: output中是否保留了“reach more leads”？

Choices:
- 完整或等价保留
- 部分保留或近似但不完整
- 缺失或含义相反

clean: reach more leads; oral: reach more leads

Question: output中是否保留了“get to the next level”？

Choices:
- 完整或等价保留
- 部分保留或近似但不完整
- 缺失或含义相反

clean: get to the next level; oral: get to the next level

Question: output中是否保留了“win-win for the team”或“win win for the team”？

Choices:
- 完整或等价保留
- 部分保留或近似但不完整
- 缺失或含义相反

clean: win win for the team; oral: win-win for the team

Question: output中是否将“ten percent”规范化成了“10%”？

Choices:
- 进行了相同或合理的规范化
- 没有进行规范化但存在“ten percent”
- 不存在这个词或规范化结果

Question: output中是否出现了oral中的口语词，或重复词语情况？

Choices:
- 不存在
- 仍存在

oral: So, shift, shift, just... just, we could, we could, I mean, how should I say

Question: output中是否将“how should I say, it's definitely a win-win for the team”处理成了“it's definitely a win-win for the team”或“it's definitely a win win for the team”？

Choices:
- 进行了相同处理
- 去除了解释性语句但没保留最终结果
- 没有去除
- output中没有相关话语

clean: it's definitely a win win for the team; oral: how should I say, it's definitely a win-win for the team

Question: output中是否将“I mean, it would really help us get to the next level”处理成了“it would really help us get to the next level”？

Choices:
- 进行了相同处理
- 去除了解释性语句但没保留最终结果
- 没有去除
- output中没有相关话语

clean: It would really help us get to the next level; oral: I mean, it would really help us get to the next level


So we saw user drop off at ten percent... no, twelve percent during onboarding. We really need to simplify simplify the flow. I think we should add add a one click sign in to boost conversion.

So we saw user drop off at 12% during onboarding. We really need to simplify the flow. I think we should add a one click sign in to boost conversion.

Question: output中是否存在"user drop off"？

Choices:
- 有
- 没有这个词或只有一部分
- 和这个词含义相反

Question: output中是否存在"during onboarding"？

Choices:
- 有
- 没有这个词或只有一部分
- 和这个词含义相反

Question: output中是否存在"simplify the flow"？

Choices:
- 有
- 没有这个词或只有一部分
- 和这个词含义相反

Question: output中是否存在"one click sign in"？

Choices:
- 有
- 没有这个词或只有一部分
- 和这个词含义相反

Question: output中是否存在"boost conversion"？

Choices:
- 有
- 没有这个词或只有一部分
- 和这个词含义相反

Question: output中是否将"twelve percent"规范化成了"12%"？

Choices:
- 进行了相同或合理的规范化
- 没有进行规范化但存在"twelve percent"
- 不存在这个词或规范化结果

Question: output中是否出现了oral中的口语词，或重复词语情况？

Choices:
- 不存在
- 仍存在

Question: output中是否将"ten percent... no, twelve percent"处理成了"12%"？

Choices:
- 进行了相同处理
- 去除了解释性语句但没保留最终结果
- 没有去除
- output中没有相关话语

oral: "ten percent... no, twelve percent"; clean: "12%"


Uh first we launch in May... oh no, June. Then we we target ten thousand users, just to get the data data in. Finally, I think, it'll drive ten percent growth, right? Actually, it'll be a new star in the market.

First we launch in June.
Then we target 10,000 users, just to get the data in.
Finally, I think it'll drive 10% growth, right? Actually, it'll be a new star in the market.

Question: output中是否将“May... oh no, June.”处理成了“June”？

Choices:
- 进行了相同处理
- 去除了解释性语句但没保留最终结果
- 没有去除
- output中没有相关话语

Question: output中是否将“ten thousand”规范化成了“10,000”？

Choices:
- 进行了相同或合理的规范化
- 没有进行规范化但存在“ten thousand”
- 不存在这个词或规范化结果

Question: output中是否将“ten percent”规范化成了“10%”？

Choices:
- 进行了相同或合理的规范化
- 没有进行规范化但存在“ten percent”
- 不存在这个词或规范化结果

Question: output中是否出现了oral中的口语词，或重复词语情况？

Choices:
- 不存在
- 仍存在

Question: output中是否存在“launch”？

Choices:
- 有
- 没有这个词或只有一部分
- 和这个词含义相反

Question: output中是否存在“target users”？

Choices:
- 有
- 没有这个词或只有一部分
- 和这个词含义相反

Question: output中是否存在“get the data in”？

Choices:
- 有
- 没有这个词或只有一部分
- 和这个词含义相反

Question: output中是否存在“drive growth”？

Choices:
- 有
- 没有这个词或只有一部分
- 和这个词含义相反

Question: output中是否存在“new star in the market”？

Choices:
- 有
- 没有这个词或只有一部分
- 和这个词含义相反


So, I'm not totally sure but I think, how should I put it, we might have missed the mark on some deliverables. I mean, I feel I feel like the friction between product and engineering was... it was just too high. We had like twelve... oh no, fourteen different blockers in the last sprint. And I think we need to need to rethink how we handle the hand off, you know, maybe set up some clearer guidelines for the next quarter, though I'm not completely certain if that solves the root cause, right?

I'm not totally sure but I think we might have missed the mark on some deliverables. I feel the friction between product and engineering was just too high. We had 14 different blockers in the last sprint. And I think we need to rethink how we handle the hand-off, maybe set up some clearer guidelines for the next quarter, though I'm not completely certain if that solves the root cause, right?

Question: output中是否保留了“missed the mark on some deliverables”？

Choices:
- 完整或等价保留
- 部分保留或近似但不完整
- 缺失或含义相反

clean: "we might have missed the mark on some deliverables"

Question: output中是否保留了“friction between product and engineering”？

Choices:
- 完整或等价保留
- 部分保留或近似但不完整
- 缺失或含义相反

clean: "the friction between product and engineering"

Question: output中是否保留了“root cause”？

Choices:
- 完整或等价保留
- 部分保留或近似但不完整
- 缺失或含义相反

Question: output中是否将“hand off”规范化成了“hand-off”？

Choices:
- 进行了相同或合理的规范化
- 没有进行规范化但存在“hand off”
- 不存在这个词或规范化结果

Question: output中是否出现了oral中的口语词，或重复词语情况？

Choices:
- 不存在
- 仍存在

oral: "So, ", "how should I put it", "I mean", "I feel I feel like", "was... it was", "need to need to", "you know"

Question: output中是否将“twelve... oh no, fourteen”处理成了“14”？

Choices:
- 进行了相同处理
- 去除了解释性语句但没保留最终结果
- 没有去除
- output中没有相关话语

oral: "twelve... oh no, fourteen", clean: "14"


So, uh, for the backend, we are mostly using Node.js with a PostgreSQL database, and, well, we have integrated Redis for caching to keep things fast. I mean, it is basically the standard setup we have had since twenty twenty two. Oh, and we are currently migrating some of the legacy services over to Go, specifically the ones handling high concurrency, which should, you know, probably reduce our latency by about fifteen percent. I think it makes sense given our current scale, but, uh, I wanted to see, like, what your take is on that? Do you think we should stick with that roadmap or maybe look into something like Rust for those specific modules?

For the backend, we are mostly using Node.js with a PostgreSQL database, and we have integrated Redis for caching to keep things fast. It is the standard setup we have had since 2022. And we are currently migrating some of the legacy services over to Go, specifically the ones handling high concurrency, which should probably reduce our latency by about 15%. I think it makes sense given our current scale, but I wanted to see what your take is on that? Do you think we should stick with that roadmap or maybe look into something like Rust for those specific modules?

Question: output中是否出现了oral中的口语词，或重复词语情况？

Choices:
- 不存在
- 仍存在

So, uh, / and, well, / you know / but, uh, I wanted to see, like,

Question: output中是否将“twenty twenty two”规范化成了“2022”？

Choices:
- 进行了相同或合理的规范化
- 没有进行规范化但存在“twenty twenty two”
- 不存在这个词或规范化结果

Question: output中是否将“fifteen percent”规范化成了“15%”？

Choices:
- 进行了相同或合理的规范化
- 没有进行规范化但存在“fifteen percent”
- 不存在这个词或规范化结果

Question: output中是否将“Node.js”规范化为正确的大小写和标点格式？

Choices:
- 保留了“Node.js”
- 保留了“nodejs”等未规范格式的形式
- 缺失或拼写错误

Question: output中是否将数据库名称规范化为“PostgreSQL”？

Choices:
- 保留了“PostgreSQL”
- 保留了“postgresql”等未规范大小写的形式
- 缺失或拼写错误

Question: output中是否保留了“backend”？

Choices:
- 有
- 没有这个词或只有一部分
- 和这个词含义相反

Question: output中是否保留了“caching”？

Choices:
- 有
- 没有这个词或只有一部分
- 和这个词含义相反

Question: output中是否保留了“legacy services”？

Choices:
- 有
- 没有这个词或只有一部分
- 和这个词含义相反

Question: output中是否保留了“high concurrency”？

Choices:
- 有
- 没有这个词或只有一部分
- 和这个词含义相反

Question: output中是否保留了“roadmap”？

Choices:
- 有
- 没有这个词或只有一部分
- 和这个词含义相反

Question: output中是否将“I mean, it is basically”处理成了“It is”？

Choices:
- 进行了相同处理
- 去除了解释性语句但没保留最终结果
- 没有去除
- output中没有相关话语

I mean, it is basically the standard setup -> It is the standard setup


Bottom line is we need to cut cut the marketing spend by twelve percent. Twelve percent because... wait, fifteen percent. Oh no, sorry, it's actually ten percent. Since ROI is... ROI is falling, we should move fund to the new new product line, make sure we arrive at goal by December thirtieth. It's the only way to stay in budget for this year's fiscal year.

Bottom line is we need to cut the marketing spend by 10%. Since ROI is falling, we should move funds to the new product line, make sure we arrive at goal by December 30. It's the only way to stay in budget for this year's fiscal year.

Question: output中是否出现了oral中的口语词，或重复词语情况？

Choices:
- 不存在
- 仍存在

oral: 'cut cut', 'Twelve percent because... wait', 'Oh no, sorry', 'ROI is... ROI is', 'new new'

Question: output中是否将“ten percent”规范化成了“10%”？

Choices:
- 进行了相同或合理的规范化
- 没有进行规范化但存在“ten percent”
- 不存在这个词或规范化结果

Question: output中是否将“December thirtieth”规范化成了“December 30”？

Choices:
- 进行了相同或合理的规范化
- 没有进行规范化但存在“December thirtieth”
- 不存在这个词或规范化结果

oral: 'December thirtieth', clean: 'December 30'

Question: output中是否将“twelve percent... wait, fifteen percent... actually ten percent”的纠正过程去除，并保留了最终结果“10%”？

Choices:
- 进行了相同处理
- 去除了解释性语句但没保留最终结果
- 没有去除
- output中没有相关话语

oral: 'twelve percent. Twelve percent because... wait, fifteen percent. Oh no, sorry, it's actually ten percent.', clean: '10%'

Question: output中是否存在“cut the marketing spend”？

Choices:
- 有
- 没有这个词或只有一部分
- 和这个词含义相反

Question: output中是否存在“Since ROI is falling”？

Choices:
- 有
- 没有这个词或只有一部分
- 和这个词含义相反

Question: output中是否存在“move funds to the new product line”？

Choices:
- 有
- 没有这个词或只有一部分
- 和这个词含义相反

clean: 'move funds to the new product line'

Question: output中是否存在“arrive at goal”？

Choices:
- 有
- 没有这个词或只有一部分
- 和这个词含义相反

Question: output中是否存在“stay in budget for this year's fiscal year”？

Choices:
- 有
- 没有这个词或只有一部分
- 和这个词含义相反

clean: 'stay in budget for this year's fiscal year'


So, if we shift ten percent... no, twelve percent of the marketing spend, then we could, uh, we could actually scale the growth, scale the growth in the APAC region. I mean, if we... if we reallocate those funds... wait, we could probably hit target by October twelfth, oh no, October fourteenth.

If we shift 12% of the marketing spend, then we could actually scale the growth in the APAC region. If we reallocate those funds, we could probably hit target by October 14.

Question: output中是否保留了“marketing spend”？

Choices:
- 有
- 没有这个词或只有一部分
- 和这个词含义相反

Question: output中是否保留了“reallocate those funds”？

Choices:
- 有
- 没有这个词或只有一部分
- 和这个词含义相反

Question: output中是否将“twelve percent”规范化成了“12%”？

Choices:
- 进行了相同或合理的规范化
- 没有进行规范化但存在“twelve percent”
- 不存在这个词或规范化结果

Question: output中是否将“October fourteenth”规范化成了“October 14”？

Choices:
- 进行了相同或合理的规范化
- 没有进行规范化但存在“October fourteenth”
- 不存在这个词或规范化结果

oral: October fourteenth, clean: October 14

Question: output中是否将“APAC”进行了全大写规范化？

Choices:
- 进行了相同或合理的规范化
- 没有进行规范化但存在“apac”等小写形式
- 不存在这个词或规范化错误

Question: output中是否出现了oral中的口语词，或重复词语情况？

Choices:
- 不存在
- 仍存在

oral: So, uh, I mean, wait, scale the growth, scale the growth

Question: output中是否将“ten percent... no, twelve percent”处理成了“12%”？

Choices:
- 进行了相同处理
- 去除了纠错过程但最终结果不完整
- 没有去除纠错过程
- output中没有相关话语

oral: ten percent... no, twelve percent, clean: 12%

Question: output中是否将“October twelfth, oh no, October fourteenth”处理成了“October 14”？

Choices:
- 进行了相同处理
- 去除了纠错过程但最终结果不完整
- 没有去除纠错过程
- output中没有相关话语

oral: October twelfth, oh no, October fourteenth, clean: October 14


Eh, Sarah said the churn rate hit twelve percent... no, it was fourteen percent. I think we need to look look at the feedback, just... how to put it... re examine the feedback patterns, you know?

Sarah said the churn rate hit 14%. I think we need to look at the feedback, re-examine the feedback patterns.

Question: output中是否出现了oral中的口语词，或重复词语情况？

Choices:
- 不存在
- 仍存在

Eh, look look, just... how to put it..., you know?

Question: output中是否将“twelve percent... no, it was fourteen percent”处理成了“fourteen percent”？

Choices:
- 进行了相同处理
- 去除了解释性语句但没保留最终结果
- 没有去除
- output中没有相关话语

twelve percent... no, it was fourteen percent -> fourteen percent

Question: output中是否将“fourteen percent”规范化成了“14%”？

Choices:
- 进行了相同或合理的规范化
- 没有进行规范化但存在“fourteen percent”
- 不存在这个词或规范化结果

Question: output中是否存在“Sarah said the churn rate hit”？

Choices:
- 有
- 没有这个词或只有一部分
- 和这个词含义相反

Question: output中是否存在“look at the feedback”？

Choices:
- 有
- 没有这个词或只有一部分
- 和这个词含义相反

Question: output中是否存在“re-examine the feedback patterns”或“re examine the feedback patterns”？

Choices:
- 有
- 没有这个词或只有一部分
- 和这个词含义相反

re examine the feedback patterns / re-examine the feedback patterns


So um, looking at the pipeline, I think we really need to focus on the senior dev roles for the marketing team... oh no, I mean the product team, since we got like, uh, four open headcounts right now and we're sort of... we're trailing behind on the... actually, let's just prioritize the backend stuff first because the current velocity is like, um, twelve percent... wait, no, fifteen percent lower than we planned for this quarter.

Looking at the pipeline, I think we really need to focus on the senior dev roles for the product team, since we got 4 open headcounts right now and we're trailing behind on the... actually, let's just prioritize the backend stuff first because the current velocity is 15% lower than we planned for this quarter.

Question: output中是否保留了“pipeline”？

Choices:
- 完整或等价保留
- 部分保留或近似但不完整
- 缺失或含义相反

Question: output中是否保留了“senior dev roles”？

Choices:
- 完整或等价保留
- 部分保留或近似但不完整
- 缺失或含义相反

Question: output中是否将“marketing team... oh no, I mean the product team”处理成了“product team”？

Choices:
- 进行了相同处理
- 去除了解释性语句但没保留最终结果
- 没有去除
- output中没有相关话语

oral: marketing team... oh no, I mean the product team; clean: product team

Question: output中是否将“four open headcounts”中的“four”规范化成了“4”？

Choices:
- 进行了相同或合理的规范化
- 没有进行规范化但存在“four”
- 不存在这个词或规范化结果

oral: four open headcounts; clean: 4 open headcounts

Question: output中是否保留了“open headcounts”？

Choices:
- 完整或等价保留
- 部分保留或近似但不完整
- 缺失或含义相反

Question: output中是否保留了“trailing behind”？

Choices:
- 完整或等价保留
- 部分保留或近似但不完整
- 缺失或含义相反

Question: output中是否保留了“prioritize the backend stuff”？

Choices:
- 完整或等价保留
- 部分保留或近似但不完整
- 缺失或含义相反

Question: output中是否保留了“current velocity”？

Choices:
- 完整或等价保留
- 部分保留或近似但不完整
- 缺失或含义相反

Question: output中是否将“twelve percent... wait, no, fifteen percent”处理成了“15%”？

Choices:
- 进行了相同处理
- 去除了解释性语句但没保留最终结果
- 没有去除
- output中没有相关话语

oral: twelve percent... wait, no, fifteen percent; clean: 15%

Question: output中是否保留了“planned for this quarter”？

Choices:
- 完整或等价保留
- 部分保留或近似但不完整
- 缺失或含义相反

Question: output中是否出现了oral中的口语词，或重复词语情况？

Choices:
- 不存在
- 仍存在

oral: So um, like, uh, sort of, wait, no


I think some think we can finish by Friday... oh no, by next Tuesday. But we really need, we really need to scale back scope. We should... I mean... if we cut two features, we can actually hit that date, hit that date.

I think we can finish by next Tuesday. But we really need to scale back scope. If we cut 2 features, we can actually hit that date.

Question: output中是否将“Friday... oh no, by next Tuesday”处理成了“next Tuesday”？

Choices:
- 进行了相同处理
- 去除了解释性语句但没保留最终结果
- 没有去除
- output中没有相关话语

oral: 'by Friday... oh no, by next Tuesday', clean: 'by next Tuesday'

Question: output中是否出现了oral中的口语词，或重复词语情况？

Choices:
- 不存在
- 仍存在

oral: 'some think', 'oh no', 'we really need, we really need', 'We should... I mean...', 'hit that date, hit that date'

Question: output中是否将“two”规范化成了“2”？

Choices:
- 进行了相同或合理的规范化
- 没有进行规范化但存在“two”
- 不存在这个词或规范化结果

oral: 'two features', clean: '2 features'

Question: output中是否存在“scale back scope”？

Choices:
- 有
- 没有这个词或只有一部分
- 和这个词含义相反

Question: output中是否存在“hit that date”？

Choices:
- 有
- 没有这个词或只有一部分
- 和这个词含义相反


So uh looking at the conversion rates for variant B it seems like we actually saw a jump of about three point five percent which is great but then again when you look at the bounce rate it kind of... well it suggests that the new landing page might be a bit too cluttered for the mobile users so maybe we should try a third version for the launch on June first twenty twenty five to see if we can hit that five hundred twelve lead target

Looking at the conversion rates for variant B, it seems we saw a jump of about 3.5%, which is great, but then again when you look at the bounce rate, it suggests that the new landing page might be a bit too cluttered for the mobile users, so maybe we should try a third version for the launch on June 1, 2025 to see if we can hit that 512 lead target

Question: output中是否保留了“conversion rates for variant B”？

Choices:
- 有
- 没有这个词或只有一部分
- 和这个词含义相反

clean: Looking at the conversion rates for variant B

Question: output中是否保留了“bounce rate”？

Choices:
- 有
- 没有这个词或只有一部分
- 和这个词含义相反

Question: output中是否保留了“new landing page might be a bit too cluttered for the mobile users”？

Choices:
- 有
- 没有这个词或只有一部分
- 和这个词含义相反

clean: the new landing page might be a bit too cluttered for the mobile users

Question: output中是否保留了“try a third version for the launch”？

Choices:
- 有
- 没有这个词或只有一部分
- 和这个词含义相反

clean: try a third version for the launch

Question: output中是否保留了“lead target”？

Choices:
- 有
- 没有这个词或只有一部分
- 和这个词含义相反

Question: output中是否将“three point five percent”规范化成了“3.5%”？

Choices:
- 进行了相同或合理的规范化
- 没有进行规范化但存在“three point five percent”
- 不存在这个词或规范化结果

oral: three point five percent, clean: 3.5%

Question: output中是否将“June first twenty twenty five”规范化成了“June 1, 2025”？

Choices:
- 进行了相同或合理的规范化
- 没有进行规范化但存在“June first twenty twenty five”
- 不存在这个词或规范化结果

oral: June first twenty twenty five, clean: June 1, 2025

Question: output中是否将“five hundred twelve”规范化成了“512”？

Choices:
- 进行了相同或合理的规范化
- 没有进行规范化但存在“five hundred twelve”
- 不存在这个词或规范化结果

Question: output中是否出现了oral中的口语词，或重复词语情况？

Choices:
- 不存在
- 仍存在


So, um, looking back at the last three months, if we just... if we actually shift our focus toward the Q four targets, then we could probably avoid the same bottlenecks we hit in August... oh no, I mean September, and maybe just streamline how the dev team and product sync up every Tuesday morning to keep things moving faster, you know?

Looking back at the last 3 months, if we shift our focus toward the Q4 targets, then we could probably avoid the same bottlenecks we hit in September, and maybe just streamline how the dev team and product sync up every Tuesday morning to keep things moving faster.

Question: output中是否将“three months”规范化成了“3 months”？

Choices:
- 进行了相同或合理的规范化
- 没有进行规范化但存在“three months”
- 不存在这个词或规范化结果

Question: output中是否将“Q four”规范化成了“Q4”？

Choices:
- 进行了相同或合理的规范化
- 没有进行规范化但存在“Q four”
- 不存在这个词或规范化结果

Question: output中是否将“August... oh no, I mean September”处理成了“September”？

Choices:
- 进行了相同处理
- 去除了解释性语句但没保留最终结果
- 没有去除
- output中没有相关话语

oral: "August... oh no, I mean September", clean: "September"

Question: output中是否出现了oral中的口语词，或重复词语情况？

Choices:
- 不存在
- 仍存在

oral: "So, um", "if we just... if we actually", "you know?"

Question: output中是否存在“avoid the same bottlenecks”？

Choices:
- 有
- 没有这个词或只有一部分
- 和这个词含义相反

Question: output中是否存在“streamline how the dev team and product sync up”？

Choices:
- 有
- 没有这个词或只有一部分
- 和这个词含义相反

clean: "streamline how the dev team and product sync up"

Question: output中是否存在“every Tuesday morning”？

Choices:
- 有
- 没有这个词或只有一部分
- 和这个词含义相反

Question: output中是否存在“keep things moving faster”？

Choices:
- 有
- 没有这个词或只有一部分
- 和这个词含义相反


So, look, I think we all feel the weight of this quarter, and I know, I know the numbers were tough, like, we hit maybe forty two percent of target, but honestly, the main issue was... the main issue was the misalignment between product and engineering. We need to find a way to find a way to sync better, maybe start by reviewing the roadmap on October twelfth, or we could just... actually, let's just focus on the blockers first because the blockers are what's really killing our velocity right now.

I think we all feel the weight of this quarter, and I know the numbers were tough, we hit maybe 42% of target, but honestly, the main issue was the misalignment between product and engineering. We need to find a way to sync better, maybe start by reviewing the roadmap on October 12, or actually, let's just focus on the blockers first because the blockers are what's really killing our velocity right now.

Question: output中是否出现了oral中的口语词，或重复词语情况？

Choices:
- 不存在
- 仍存在

So, look / I know, I know / like / the main issue was... the main issue was / find a way to find a way to / or we could just...

Question: output中是否将“forty two percent”规范化成了“42%”？

Choices:
- 进行了相同或合理的规范化
- 没有进行规范化但存在“forty two percent”
- 不存在这个词或规范化结果

Question: output中是否将“October twelfth”规范化成了“October 12”？

Choices:
- 进行了相同或合理的规范化
- 没有进行规范化但存在“October twelfth”
- 不存在这个词或规范化结果

Question: output中是否将“or we could just... actually, let's just focus on”处理成了“actually, let's just focus on”？

Choices:
- 进行了相同处理
- 去除了解释性语句但没保留最终结果
- 没有去除
- output中没有相关话语

or we could just... actually, let's just focus on -> actually, let's just focus on

Question: output中是否存在“feel the weight of this quarter”？

Choices:
- 有
- 没有这个词或只有一部分
- 和这个词含义相反

Question: output中是否存在“numbers were tough”？

Choices:
- 有
- 没有这个词或只有一部分
- 和这个词含义相反

Question: output中是否存在“misalignment between product and engineering”？

Choices:
- 有
- 没有这个词或只有一部分
- 和这个词含义相反

Question: output中是否存在“reviewing the roadmap”？

Choices:
- 有
- 没有这个词或只有一部分
- 和这个词含义相反

Question: output中是否存在“killing our velocity”？

Choices:
- 有
- 没有这个词或只有一部分
- 和这个词含义相反


Sarah, conversion rate rose ten percent... no, twelve percent. Twelve percent is a big win for the new page, the new page.

Sarah, conversion rate rose 12%. 12% is a big win for the new page.

Question: output中是否存在"Sarah"？

Choices:
- 有
- 没有这个词或只有一部分
- 和这个词含义相反

clean: "Sarah, conversion rate rose 12%."

Question: output中是否存在"conversion rate"？

Choices:
- 有
- 没有这个词或只有一部分
- 和这个词含义相反

Question: output中是否存在"big win"？

Choices:
- 有
- 没有这个词或只有一部分
- 和这个词含义相反

clean: "12% is a big win for the new page."

Question: output中是否存在"new page"？

Choices:
- 有
- 没有这个词或只有一部分
- 和这个词含义相反

Question: output中是否将"twelve percent"规范化成了"12%"？

Choices:
- 进行了相同或合理的规范化
- 没有进行规范化但存在"twelve percent"
- 不存在这个词或规范化结果

Question: output中是否出现了oral中的口语词，或重复词语情况？

Choices:
- 不存在
- 仍存在

Question: output中是否将"ten percent... no, twelve percent"处理成了"12%"？

Choices:
- 进行了相同处理
- 去除了解释性语句但没保留最终结果
- 没有去除
- output中没有相关话语

oral: "ten percent... no, twelve percent"; clean: "12%"


Okay, bottom line is we gotta roll back the latest deploy. Uh, look, we seeing a spike in five hundred errors, like, maybe ten percent... oh no, it's actually twenty two percent of all traffic. So, we need to get this fixed fast before it hit the east... uh, winter region. I mean, the East region. Let's move.

Bottom line is we gotta roll back the latest deploy. We're seeing a spike in 500 errors, maybe 22% of all traffic. So, we need to get this fixed fast before it hits the East region. Let's move.

Question: output中是否存在“roll back the latest deploy”？

Choices:
- 有
- 没有这个词或只有一部分
- 和这个词含义相反

Question: output中是否存在“fixed fast”？

Choices:
- 有
- 没有这个词或只有一部分
- 和这个词含义相反

Question: output中是否存在“Let's move”？

Choices:
- 有
- 没有这个词或只有一部分
- 和这个词含义相反

Question: output中是否将“five hundred”规范化成了“500”？

Choices:
- 进行了相同或合理的规范化
- 没有进行规范化但存在“five hundred”
- 不存在这个词或规范化结果

Question: output中是否将“twenty two percent”规范化成了“22%”？

Choices:
- 进行了相同或合理的规范化
- 没有进行规范化但存在“twenty two percent”
- 不存在这个词或规范化结果

Question: output中是否将“east”规范化成了首字母大写的“East”？

Choices:
- 进行了相同或合理的规范化
- 没有进行规范化但存在“east”
- 不存在这个词或规范化结果

Question: output中是否出现了oral中的口语词，或重复词语情况？

Choices:
- 不存在
- 仍存在

Question: output中是否将“ten percent... oh no, it's actually twenty two percent”处理成了“22%”？

Choices:
- 进行了相同处理
- 去除了解释性语句但没保留最终结果
- 没有去除
- output中没有相关话语

maybe ten percent... oh no, it's actually twenty two percent -> maybe 22%

Question: output中是否将“east... uh, winter region. I mean, the East region”处理成了“East region”？

Choices:
- 进行了相同处理
- 去除了解释性语句但没保留最终结果
- 没有去除
- output中没有相关话语

the east... uh, winter region. I mean, the East region -> the East region