Prompt:
You are evaluating a scientific visualization for **causal consistency**.

The following specification is the **symbolic generator** — it fully specifies
what the output plot should look like:

```latex
f(x) = -1.359x^4 - 1.104x^3 + 1.774x^2 + 1.846x + 0.056

x \in [-3.0, 3.0]
```

I am showing you an image that claims to be the output of this generator.

---

## Your Task

1. Read the specification carefully. Reason about what the plot should look like
   (shape, orientation, color mapping, symmetry, value signs, etc.).
2. Examine the attached image.
3. Decide whether the image is **causally consistent** with the generator.

If the image is **not** consistent, classify the inconsistency using exactly one
of these labels:

| Label | Meaning |
|---|---|
| `colormap_inversion` | The colormap used is different from what the code specifies |
| `axis_swap` | Axes or data dimensions are transposed or mirrored |
| `sign_inversion` | Values are negated — peaks and troughs (or bar directions) are swapped |
| `amplitude_scale` | The value scale is wrong — the colorbar, y-axis range, or bar value labels do not match the formula's amplitudes |
| `phase_shift` | The pattern is shifted from its correct position |
| `frequency_doubling` | The number of oscillations or cycles is wrong |
| `dc_offset` | The curves or point cloud are shifted away from their correct baseline |
| `wrong_petal_count` | The number of petals/lobes differs from what the formula produces |
| `symmetry_mismatch` | The image contains asymmetry that the code cannot produce |
| `bar_order_swap` | Two bars have had their heights swapped — a bar's value label contradicts the code's heights list |
| `coefficient_scale` | Polynomial coefficients are scaled but the formula in the spec is unchanged |
| `wrong_gravity` | Trajectory uses a different gravitational constant than the spec |
| `wrong_launch_angle` | Trajectory uses a different launch angle than the spec |
| `wrong_iteration_depth` | L-system rendered with a different iteration count than the spec |
| `wrong_angle` | L-system rendered with a different turn angle than the spec |

---

## Response Format

Respond with **only** this JSON object and nothing else:

```json
{
  "consistent": true | false,
  "bug_type": "<one label from the table above, or null if consistent>",
  "reasoning": "<1–3 sentences: what you expected vs. what you see>"
}
```


Prompt:
You are evaluating a scientific visualization for **causal consistency**.

The following specification is the **symbolic generator** — it fully specifies
what the output plot should look like:

```latex
f(x) = 0.290x^4 - 0.794x^3 - 1.678x^2 + 1.818x - 1.313

x \in [-3.0, 3.0]
```

I am showing you an image that claims to be the output of this generator.

---

## Your Task

1. Read the specification carefully. Reason about what the plot should look like
   (shape, orientation, color mapping, symmetry, value signs, etc.).
2. Examine the attached image.
3. Decide whether the image is **causally consistent** with the generator.

If the image is **not** consistent, classify the inconsistency using exactly one
of these labels:

| Label | Meaning |
|---|---|
| `colormap_inversion` | The colormap used is different from what the code specifies |
| `axis_swap` | Axes or data dimensions are transposed or mirrored |
| `sign_inversion` | Values are negated — peaks and troughs (or bar directions) are swapped |
| `amplitude_scale` | The value scale is wrong — the colorbar, y-axis range, or bar value labels do not match the formula's amplitudes |
| `phase_shift` | The pattern is shifted from its correct position |
| `frequency_doubling` | The number of oscillations or cycles is wrong |
| `dc_offset` | The curves or point cloud are shifted away from their correct baseline |
| `wrong_petal_count` | The number of petals/lobes differs from what the formula produces |
| `symmetry_mismatch` | The image contains asymmetry that the code cannot produce |
| `bar_order_swap` | Two bars have had their heights swapped — a bar's value label contradicts the code's heights list |
| `coefficient_scale` | Polynomial coefficients are scaled but the formula in the spec is unchanged |
| `wrong_gravity` | Trajectory uses a different gravitational constant than the spec |
| `wrong_launch_angle` | Trajectory uses a different launch angle than the spec |
| `wrong_iteration_depth` | L-system rendered with a different iteration count than the spec |
| `wrong_angle` | L-system rendered with a different turn angle than the spec |

---

## Response Format

Respond with **only** this JSON object and nothing else:

```json
{
  "consistent": true | false,
  "bug_type": "<one label from the table above, or null if consistent>",
  "reasoning": "<1–3 sentences: what you expected vs. what you see>"
}
```


Prompt:
You are evaluating a scientific visualization for **causal consistency**.

The following specification is the **symbolic generator** — it fully specifies
what the output plot should look like:

```latex
f(x) = 0.969x^3 + 1.223x^2 - 0.856x + 0.131

x \in [-3.0, 3.0]
```

I am showing you an image that claims to be the output of this generator.

---

## Your Task

1. Read the specification carefully. Reason about what the plot should look like
   (shape, orientation, color mapping, symmetry, value signs, etc.).
2. Examine the attached image.
3. Decide whether the image is **causally consistent** with the generator.

If the image is **not** consistent, classify the inconsistency using exactly one
of these labels:

| Label | Meaning |
|---|---|
| `colormap_inversion` | The colormap used is different from what the code specifies |
| `axis_swap` | Axes or data dimensions are transposed or mirrored |
| `sign_inversion` | Values are negated — peaks and troughs (or bar directions) are swapped |
| `amplitude_scale` | The value scale is wrong — the colorbar, y-axis range, or bar value labels do not match the formula's amplitudes |
| `phase_shift` | The pattern is shifted from its correct position |
| `frequency_doubling` | The number of oscillations or cycles is wrong |
| `dc_offset` | The curves or point cloud are shifted away from their correct baseline |
| `wrong_petal_count` | The number of petals/lobes differs from what the formula produces |
| `symmetry_mismatch` | The image contains asymmetry that the code cannot produce |
| `bar_order_swap` | Two bars have had their heights swapped — a bar's value label contradicts the code's heights list |
| `coefficient_scale` | Polynomial coefficients are scaled but the formula in the spec is unchanged |
| `wrong_gravity` | Trajectory uses a different gravitational constant than the spec |
| `wrong_launch_angle` | Trajectory uses a different launch angle than the spec |
| `wrong_iteration_depth` | L-system rendered with a different iteration count than the spec |
| `wrong_angle` | L-system rendered with a different turn angle than the spec |

---

## Response Format

Respond with **only** this JSON object and nothing else:

```json
{
  "consistent": true | false,
  "bug_type": "<one label from the table above, or null if consistent>",
  "reasoning": "<1–3 sentences: what you expected vs. what you see>"
}
```


Prompt:
You are evaluating a scientific visualization for **causal consistency**.

The following specification is the **symbolic generator** — it fully specifies
what the output plot should look like:

```latex
f(x) = -1.790x^2 + 0.281x - 0.190

x \in [-3.0, 3.0]
```

I am showing you an image that claims to be the output of this generator.

---

## Your Task

1. Read the specification carefully. Reason about what the plot should look like
   (shape, orientation, color mapping, symmetry, value signs, etc.).
2. Examine the attached image.
3. Decide whether the image is **causally consistent** with the generator.

If the image is **not** consistent, classify the inconsistency using exactly one
of these labels:

| Label | Meaning |
|---|---|
| `colormap_inversion` | The colormap used is different from what the code specifies |
| `axis_swap` | Axes or data dimensions are transposed or mirrored |
| `sign_inversion` | Values are negated — peaks and troughs (or bar directions) are swapped |
| `amplitude_scale` | The value scale is wrong — the colorbar, y-axis range, or bar value labels do not match the formula's amplitudes |
| `phase_shift` | The pattern is shifted from its correct position |
| `frequency_doubling` | The number of oscillations or cycles is wrong |
| `dc_offset` | The curves or point cloud are shifted away from their correct baseline |
| `wrong_petal_count` | The number of petals/lobes differs from what the formula produces |
| `symmetry_mismatch` | The image contains asymmetry that the code cannot produce |
| `bar_order_swap` | Two bars have had their heights swapped — a bar's value label contradicts the code's heights list |
| `coefficient_scale` | Polynomial coefficients are scaled but the formula in the spec is unchanged |
| `wrong_gravity` | Trajectory uses a different gravitational constant than the spec |
| `wrong_launch_angle` | Trajectory uses a different launch angle than the spec |
| `wrong_iteration_depth` | L-system rendered with a different iteration count than the spec |
| `wrong_angle` | L-system rendered with a different turn angle than the spec |

---

## Response Format

Respond with **only** this JSON object and nothing else:

```json
{
  "consistent": true | false,
  "bug_type": "<one label from the table above, or null if consistent>",
  "reasoning": "<1–3 sentences: what you expected vs. what you see>"
}
```


Prompt:
You are evaluating a scientific visualization for **causal consistency**.

The following specification is the **symbolic generator** — it fully specifies
what the output plot should look like:

```latex
f(x) = -1.931x^2 - 1.875x - 0.749

x \in [-3.0, 3.0]
```

I am showing you an image that claims to be the output of this generator.

---

## Your Task

1. Read the specification carefully. Reason about what the plot should look like
   (shape, orientation, color mapping, symmetry, value signs, etc.).
2. Examine the attached image.
3. Decide whether the image is **causally consistent** with the generator.

If the image is **not** consistent, classify the inconsistency using exactly one
of these labels:

| Label | Meaning |
|---|---|
| `colormap_inversion` | The colormap used is different from what the code specifies |
| `axis_swap` | Axes or data dimensions are transposed or mirrored |
| `sign_inversion` | Values are negated — peaks and troughs (or bar directions) are swapped |
| `amplitude_scale` | The value scale is wrong — the colorbar, y-axis range, or bar value labels do not match the formula's amplitudes |
| `phase_shift` | The pattern is shifted from its correct position |
| `frequency_doubling` | The number of oscillations or cycles is wrong |
| `dc_offset` | The curves or point cloud are shifted away from their correct baseline |
| `wrong_petal_count` | The number of petals/lobes differs from what the formula produces |
| `symmetry_mismatch` | The image contains asymmetry that the code cannot produce |
| `bar_order_swap` | Two bars have had their heights swapped — a bar's value label contradicts the code's heights list |
| `coefficient_scale` | Polynomial coefficients are scaled but the formula in the spec is unchanged |
| `wrong_gravity` | Trajectory uses a different gravitational constant than the spec |
| `wrong_launch_angle` | Trajectory uses a different launch angle than the spec |
| `wrong_iteration_depth` | L-system rendered with a different iteration count than the spec |
| `wrong_angle` | L-system rendered with a different turn angle than the spec |

---

## Response Format

Respond with **only** this JSON object and nothing else:

```json
{
  "consistent": true | false,
  "bug_type": "<one label from the table above, or null if consistent>",
  "reasoning": "<1–3 sentences: what you expected vs. what you see>"
}
```


Prompt:
You are evaluating a scientific visualization for **causal consistency**.

The following specification is the **symbolic generator** — it fully specifies
what the output plot should look like:

```latex
r(\theta) = 1.051 \left|\cos\left(\frac{7\theta}{2}\right)\right|

\theta \in [0, 2\pi]
```

I am showing you an image that claims to be the output of this generator.

---

## Your Task

1. Read the specification carefully. Reason about what the plot should look like
   (shape, orientation, color mapping, symmetry, value signs, etc.).
2. Examine the attached image.
3. Decide whether the image is **causally consistent** with the generator.

If the image is **not** consistent, classify the inconsistency using exactly one
of these labels:

| Label | Meaning |
|---|---|
| `colormap_inversion` | The colormap used is different from what the code specifies |
| `axis_swap` | Axes or data dimensions are transposed or mirrored |
| `sign_inversion` | Values are negated — peaks and troughs (or bar directions) are swapped |
| `amplitude_scale` | The value scale is wrong — the colorbar, y-axis range, or bar value labels do not match the formula's amplitudes |
| `phase_shift` | The pattern is shifted from its correct position |
| `frequency_doubling` | The number of oscillations or cycles is wrong |
| `dc_offset` | The curves or point cloud are shifted away from their correct baseline |
| `wrong_petal_count` | The number of petals/lobes differs from what the formula produces |
| `symmetry_mismatch` | The image contains asymmetry that the code cannot produce |
| `bar_order_swap` | Two bars have had their heights swapped — a bar's value label contradicts the code's heights list |
| `coefficient_scale` | Polynomial coefficients are scaled but the formula in the spec is unchanged |
| `wrong_gravity` | Trajectory uses a different gravitational constant than the spec |
| `wrong_launch_angle` | Trajectory uses a different launch angle than the spec |
| `wrong_iteration_depth` | L-system rendered with a different iteration count than the spec |
| `wrong_angle` | L-system rendered with a different turn angle than the spec |

---

## Response Format

Respond with **only** this JSON object and nothing else:

```json
{
  "consistent": true | false,
  "bug_type": "<one label from the table above, or null if consistent>",
  "reasoning": "<1–3 sentences: what you expected vs. what you see>"
}
```


Prompt:
You are evaluating a scientific visualization for **causal consistency**.

The following specification is the **symbolic generator** — it fully specifies
what the output plot should look like:

```latex
r(\theta) = 1.252 \left|\cos\left(\frac{5\theta}{2}\right)\right|

\theta \in [0, 2\pi]
```

I am showing you an image that claims to be the output of this generator.

---

## Your Task

1. Read the specification carefully. Reason about what the plot should look like
   (shape, orientation, color mapping, symmetry, value signs, etc.).
2. Examine the attached image.
3. Decide whether the image is **causally consistent** with the generator.

If the image is **not** consistent, classify the inconsistency using exactly one
of these labels:

| Label | Meaning |
|---|---|
| `colormap_inversion` | The colormap used is different from what the code specifies |
| `axis_swap` | Axes or data dimensions are transposed or mirrored |
| `sign_inversion` | Values are negated — peaks and troughs (or bar directions) are swapped |
| `amplitude_scale` | The value scale is wrong — the colorbar, y-axis range, or bar value labels do not match the formula's amplitudes |
| `phase_shift` | The pattern is shifted from its correct position |
| `frequency_doubling` | The number of oscillations or cycles is wrong |
| `dc_offset` | The curves or point cloud are shifted away from their correct baseline |
| `wrong_petal_count` | The number of petals/lobes differs from what the formula produces |
| `symmetry_mismatch` | The image contains asymmetry that the code cannot produce |
| `bar_order_swap` | Two bars have had their heights swapped — a bar's value label contradicts the code's heights list |
| `coefficient_scale` | Polynomial coefficients are scaled but the formula in the spec is unchanged |
| `wrong_gravity` | Trajectory uses a different gravitational constant than the spec |
| `wrong_launch_angle` | Trajectory uses a different launch angle than the spec |
| `wrong_iteration_depth` | L-system rendered with a different iteration count than the spec |
| `wrong_angle` | L-system rendered with a different turn angle than the spec |

---

## Response Format

Respond with **only** this JSON object and nothing else:

```json
{
  "consistent": true | false,
  "bug_type": "<one label from the table above, or null if consistent>",
  "reasoning": "<1–3 sentences: what you expected vs. what you see>"
}
```


Prompt:
You are evaluating a scientific visualization for **causal consistency**.

The following specification is the **symbolic generator** — it fully specifies
what the output plot should look like:

```latex
r(\theta) = 1.425 \left|\cos\left(\frac{5\theta}{2}\right)\right|

\theta \in [0, 2\pi]
```

I am showing you an image that claims to be the output of this generator.

---

## Your Task

1. Read the specification carefully. Reason about what the plot should look like
   (shape, orientation, color mapping, symmetry, value signs, etc.).
2. Examine the attached image.
3. Decide whether the image is **causally consistent** with the generator.

If the image is **not** consistent, classify the inconsistency using exactly one
of these labels:

| Label | Meaning |
|---|---|
| `colormap_inversion` | The colormap used is different from what the code specifies |
| `axis_swap` | Axes or data dimensions are transposed or mirrored |
| `sign_inversion` | Values are negated — peaks and troughs (or bar directions) are swapped |
| `amplitude_scale` | The value scale is wrong — the colorbar, y-axis range, or bar value labels do not match the formula's amplitudes |
| `phase_shift` | The pattern is shifted from its correct position |
| `frequency_doubling` | The number of oscillations or cycles is wrong |
| `dc_offset` | The curves or point cloud are shifted away from their correct baseline |
| `wrong_petal_count` | The number of petals/lobes differs from what the formula produces |
| `symmetry_mismatch` | The image contains asymmetry that the code cannot produce |
| `bar_order_swap` | Two bars have had their heights swapped — a bar's value label contradicts the code's heights list |
| `coefficient_scale` | Polynomial coefficients are scaled but the formula in the spec is unchanged |
| `wrong_gravity` | Trajectory uses a different gravitational constant than the spec |
| `wrong_launch_angle` | Trajectory uses a different launch angle than the spec |
| `wrong_iteration_depth` | L-system rendered with a different iteration count than the spec |
| `wrong_angle` | L-system rendered with a different turn angle than the spec |

---

## Response Format

Respond with **only** this JSON object and nothing else:

```json
{
  "consistent": true | false,
  "bug_type": "<one label from the table above, or null if consistent>",
  "reasoning": "<1–3 sentences: what you expected vs. what you see>"
}
```


Prompt:
You are evaluating a scientific visualization for **causal consistency**.

The following specification is the **symbolic generator** — it fully specifies
what the output plot should look like:

```latex
r(\theta) = 1.501 \left|\cos\left(\frac{5\theta}{2}\right)\right|

\theta \in [0, 2\pi]
```

I am showing you an image that claims to be the output of this generator.

---

## Your Task

1. Read the specification carefully. Reason about what the plot should look like
   (shape, orientation, color mapping, symmetry, value signs, etc.).
2. Examine the attached image.
3. Decide whether the image is **causally consistent** with the generator.

If the image is **not** consistent, classify the inconsistency using exactly one
of these labels:

| Label | Meaning |
|---|---|
| `colormap_inversion` | The colormap used is different from what the code specifies |
| `axis_swap` | Axes or data dimensions are transposed or mirrored |
| `sign_inversion` | Values are negated — peaks and troughs (or bar directions) are swapped |
| `amplitude_scale` | The value scale is wrong — the colorbar, y-axis range, or bar value labels do not match the formula's amplitudes |
| `phase_shift` | The pattern is shifted from its correct position |
| `frequency_doubling` | The number of oscillations or cycles is wrong |
| `dc_offset` | The curves or point cloud are shifted away from their correct baseline |
| `wrong_petal_count` | The number of petals/lobes differs from what the formula produces |
| `symmetry_mismatch` | The image contains asymmetry that the code cannot produce |
| `bar_order_swap` | Two bars have had their heights swapped — a bar's value label contradicts the code's heights list |
| `coefficient_scale` | Polynomial coefficients are scaled but the formula in the spec is unchanged |
| `wrong_gravity` | Trajectory uses a different gravitational constant than the spec |
| `wrong_launch_angle` | Trajectory uses a different launch angle than the spec |
| `wrong_iteration_depth` | L-system rendered with a different iteration count than the spec |
| `wrong_angle` | L-system rendered with a different turn angle than the spec |

---

## Response Format

Respond with **only** this JSON object and nothing else:

```json
{
  "consistent": true | false,
  "bug_type": "<one label from the table above, or null if consistent>",
  "reasoning": "<1–3 sentences: what you expected vs. what you see>"
}
```


Prompt:
You are evaluating a scientific visualization for **causal consistency**.

The following specification is the **symbolic generator** — it fully specifies
what the output plot should look like:

```latex
r(\theta) = 1.474 \left|\cos\left(\frac{3\theta}{2}\right)\right|

\theta \in [0, 2\pi]
```

I am showing you an image that claims to be the output of this generator.

---

## Your Task

1. Read the specification carefully. Reason about what the plot should look like
   (shape, orientation, color mapping, symmetry, value signs, etc.).
2. Examine the attached image.
3. Decide whether the image is **causally consistent** with the generator.

If the image is **not** consistent, classify the inconsistency using exactly one
of these labels:

| Label | Meaning |
|---|---|
| `colormap_inversion` | The colormap used is different from what the code specifies |
| `axis_swap` | Axes or data dimensions are transposed or mirrored |
| `sign_inversion` | Values are negated — peaks and troughs (or bar directions) are swapped |
| `amplitude_scale` | The value scale is wrong — the colorbar, y-axis range, or bar value labels do not match the formula's amplitudes |
| `phase_shift` | The pattern is shifted from its correct position |
| `frequency_doubling` | The number of oscillations or cycles is wrong |
| `dc_offset` | The curves or point cloud are shifted away from their correct baseline |
| `wrong_petal_count` | The number of petals/lobes differs from what the formula produces |
| `symmetry_mismatch` | The image contains asymmetry that the code cannot produce |
| `bar_order_swap` | Two bars have had their heights swapped — a bar's value label contradicts the code's heights list |
| `coefficient_scale` | Polynomial coefficients are scaled but the formula in the spec is unchanged |
| `wrong_gravity` | Trajectory uses a different gravitational constant than the spec |
| `wrong_launch_angle` | Trajectory uses a different launch angle than the spec |
| `wrong_iteration_depth` | L-system rendered with a different iteration count than the spec |
| `wrong_angle` | L-system rendered with a different turn angle than the spec |

---

## Response Format

Respond with **only** this JSON object and nothing else:

```json
{
  "consistent": true | false,
  "bug_type": "<one label from the table above, or null if consistent>",
  "reasoning": "<1–3 sentences: what you expected vs. what you see>"
}
```


Prompt:
You are evaluating a scientific visualization for **causal consistency**.

The following specification is the **symbolic generator** — it fully specifies
what the output plot should look like:

```latex
r(\theta) = 0.922 \left|\cos\left(\frac{4\theta}{2}\right)\right|

\theta \in [0, 2\pi]
```

I am showing you an image that claims to be the output of this generator.

---

## Your Task

1. Read the specification carefully. Reason about what the plot should look like
   (shape, orientation, color mapping, symmetry, value signs, etc.).
2. Examine the attached image.
3. Decide whether the image is **causally consistent** with the generator.

If the image is **not** consistent, classify the inconsistency using exactly one
of these labels:

| Label | Meaning |
|---|---|
| `colormap_inversion` | The colormap used is different from what the code specifies |
| `axis_swap` | Axes or data dimensions are transposed or mirrored |
| `sign_inversion` | Values are negated — peaks and troughs (or bar directions) are swapped |
| `amplitude_scale` | The value scale is wrong — the colorbar, y-axis range, or bar value labels do not match the formula's amplitudes |
| `phase_shift` | The pattern is shifted from its correct position |
| `frequency_doubling` | The number of oscillations or cycles is wrong |
| `dc_offset` | The curves or point cloud are shifted away from their correct baseline |
| `wrong_petal_count` | The number of petals/lobes differs from what the formula produces |
| `symmetry_mismatch` | The image contains asymmetry that the code cannot produce |
| `bar_order_swap` | Two bars have had their heights swapped — a bar's value label contradicts the code's heights list |
| `coefficient_scale` | Polynomial coefficients are scaled but the formula in the spec is unchanged |
| `wrong_gravity` | Trajectory uses a different gravitational constant than the spec |
| `wrong_launch_angle` | Trajectory uses a different launch angle than the spec |
| `wrong_iteration_depth` | L-system rendered with a different iteration count than the spec |
| `wrong_angle` | L-system rendered with a different turn angle than the spec |

---

## Response Format

Respond with **only** this JSON object and nothing else:

```json
{
  "consistent": true | false,
  "bug_type": "<one label from the table above, or null if consistent>",
  "reasoning": "<1–3 sentences: what you expected vs. what you see>"
}
```


Prompt:
You are evaluating a scientific visualization for **causal consistency**.

The following specification is the **symbolic generator** — it fully specifies
what the output plot should look like:

```latex
r(\theta) = 1.956 \left|\cos\left(\frac{5\theta}{2}\right)\right|

\theta \in [0, 2\pi]
```

I am showing you an image that claims to be the output of this generator.

---

## Your Task

1. Read the specification carefully. Reason about what the plot should look like
   (shape, orientation, color mapping, symmetry, value signs, etc.).
2. Examine the attached image.
3. Decide whether the image is **causally consistent** with the generator.

If the image is **not** consistent, classify the inconsistency using exactly one
of these labels:

| Label | Meaning |
|---|---|
| `colormap_inversion` | The colormap used is different from what the code specifies |
| `axis_swap` | Axes or data dimensions are transposed or mirrored |
| `sign_inversion` | Values are negated — peaks and troughs (or bar directions) are swapped |
| `amplitude_scale` | The value scale is wrong — the colorbar, y-axis range, or bar value labels do not match the formula's amplitudes |
| `phase_shift` | The pattern is shifted from its correct position |
| `frequency_doubling` | The number of oscillations or cycles is wrong |
| `dc_offset` | The curves or point cloud are shifted away from their correct baseline |
| `wrong_petal_count` | The number of petals/lobes differs from what the formula produces |
| `symmetry_mismatch` | The image contains asymmetry that the code cannot produce |
| `bar_order_swap` | Two bars have had their heights swapped — a bar's value label contradicts the code's heights list |
| `coefficient_scale` | Polynomial coefficients are scaled but the formula in the spec is unchanged |
| `wrong_gravity` | Trajectory uses a different gravitational constant than the spec |
| `wrong_launch_angle` | Trajectory uses a different launch angle than the spec |
| `wrong_iteration_depth` | L-system rendered with a different iteration count than the spec |
| `wrong_angle` | L-system rendered with a different turn angle than the spec |

---

## Response Format

Respond with **only** this JSON object and nothing else:

```json
{
  "consistent": true | false,
  "bug_type": "<one label from the table above, or null if consistent>",
  "reasoning": "<1–3 sentences: what you expected vs. what you see>"
}
```


Prompt:
You are evaluating a scientific visualization for **causal consistency**.

The following specification is the **symbolic generator** — it fully specifies
what the output plot should look like:

```latex
r(\theta) = 1.363 \left|\cos\left(\frac{5\theta}{2}\right)\right|

\theta \in [0, 2\pi]
```

I am showing you an image that claims to be the output of this generator.

---

## Your Task

1. Read the specification carefully. Reason about what the plot should look like
   (shape, orientation, color mapping, symmetry, value signs, etc.).
2. Examine the attached image.
3. Decide whether the image is **causally consistent** with the generator.

If the image is **not** consistent, classify the inconsistency using exactly one
of these labels:

| Label | Meaning |
|---|---|
| `colormap_inversion` | The colormap used is different from what the code specifies |
| `axis_swap` | Axes or data dimensions are transposed or mirrored |
| `sign_inversion` | Values are negated — peaks and troughs (or bar directions) are swapped |
| `amplitude_scale` | The value scale is wrong — the colorbar, y-axis range, or bar value labels do not match the formula's amplitudes |
| `phase_shift` | The pattern is shifted from its correct position |
| `frequency_doubling` | The number of oscillations or cycles is wrong |
| `dc_offset` | The curves or point cloud are shifted away from their correct baseline |
| `wrong_petal_count` | The number of petals/lobes differs from what the formula produces |
| `symmetry_mismatch` | The image contains asymmetry that the code cannot produce |
| `bar_order_swap` | Two bars have had their heights swapped — a bar's value label contradicts the code's heights list |
| `coefficient_scale` | Polynomial coefficients are scaled but the formula in the spec is unchanged |
| `wrong_gravity` | Trajectory uses a different gravitational constant than the spec |
| `wrong_launch_angle` | Trajectory uses a different launch angle than the spec |
| `wrong_iteration_depth` | L-system rendered with a different iteration count than the spec |
| `wrong_angle` | L-system rendered with a different turn angle than the spec |

---

## Response Format

Respond with **only** this JSON object and nothing else:

```json
{
  "consistent": true | false,
  "bug_type": "<one label from the table above, or null if consistent>",
  "reasoning": "<1–3 sentences: what you expected vs. what you see>"
}
```


Prompt:
You are evaluating a scientific visualization for **causal consistency**.

The following specification is the **symbolic generator** — it fully specifies
what the output plot should look like:

```latex
r(\theta) = 1.059 \left|\cos\left(\frac{6\theta}{2}\right)\right|

\theta \in [0, 2\pi]
```

I am showing you an image that claims to be the output of this generator.

---

## Your Task

1. Read the specification carefully. Reason about what the plot should look like
   (shape, orientation, color mapping, symmetry, value signs, etc.).
2. Examine the attached image.
3. Decide whether the image is **causally consistent** with the generator.

If the image is **not** consistent, classify the inconsistency using exactly one
of these labels:

| Label | Meaning |
|---|---|
| `colormap_inversion` | The colormap used is different from what the code specifies |
| `axis_swap` | Axes or data dimensions are transposed or mirrored |
| `sign_inversion` | Values are negated — peaks and troughs (or bar directions) are swapped |
| `amplitude_scale` | The value scale is wrong — the colorbar, y-axis range, or bar value labels do not match the formula's amplitudes |
| `phase_shift` | The pattern is shifted from its correct position |
| `frequency_doubling` | The number of oscillations or cycles is wrong |
| `dc_offset` | The curves or point cloud are shifted away from their correct baseline |
| `wrong_petal_count` | The number of petals/lobes differs from what the formula produces |
| `symmetry_mismatch` | The image contains asymmetry that the code cannot produce |
| `bar_order_swap` | Two bars have had their heights swapped — a bar's value label contradicts the code's heights list |
| `coefficient_scale` | Polynomial coefficients are scaled but the formula in the spec is unchanged |
| `wrong_gravity` | Trajectory uses a different gravitational constant than the spec |
| `wrong_launch_angle` | Trajectory uses a different launch angle than the spec |
| `wrong_iteration_depth` | L-system rendered with a different iteration count than the spec |
| `wrong_angle` | L-system rendered with a different turn angle than the spec |

---

## Response Format

Respond with **only** this JSON object and nothing else:

```json
{
  "consistent": true | false,
  "bug_type": "<one label from the table above, or null if consistent>",
  "reasoning": "<1–3 sentences: what you expected vs. what you see>"
}
```


Prompt:
You are evaluating a scientific visualization for **causal consistency**.

The following specification is the **symbolic generator** — it fully specifies
what the output plot should look like:

```latex
r(\theta) = 0.806 \left|\cos\left(\frac{7\theta}{2}\right)\right|

\theta \in [0, 2\pi]
```

I am showing you an image that claims to be the output of this generator.

---

## Your Task

1. Read the specification carefully. Reason about what the plot should look like
   (shape, orientation, color mapping, symmetry, value signs, etc.).
2. Examine the attached image.
3. Decide whether the image is **causally consistent** with the generator.

If the image is **not** consistent, classify the inconsistency using exactly one
of these labels:

| Label | Meaning |
|---|---|
| `colormap_inversion` | The colormap used is different from what the code specifies |
| `axis_swap` | Axes or data dimensions are transposed or mirrored |
| `sign_inversion` | Values are negated — peaks and troughs (or bar directions) are swapped |
| `amplitude_scale` | The value scale is wrong — the colorbar, y-axis range, or bar value labels do not match the formula's amplitudes |
| `phase_shift` | The pattern is shifted from its correct position |
| `frequency_doubling` | The number of oscillations or cycles is wrong |
| `dc_offset` | The curves or point cloud are shifted away from their correct baseline |
| `wrong_petal_count` | The number of petals/lobes differs from what the formula produces |
| `symmetry_mismatch` | The image contains asymmetry that the code cannot produce |
| `bar_order_swap` | Two bars have had their heights swapped — a bar's value label contradicts the code's heights list |
| `coefficient_scale` | Polynomial coefficients are scaled but the formula in the spec is unchanged |
| `wrong_gravity` | Trajectory uses a different gravitational constant than the spec |
| `wrong_launch_angle` | Trajectory uses a different launch angle than the spec |
| `wrong_iteration_depth` | L-system rendered with a different iteration count than the spec |
| `wrong_angle` | L-system rendered with a different turn angle than the spec |

---

## Response Format

Respond with **only** this JSON object and nothing else:

```json
{
  "consistent": true | false,
  "bug_type": "<one label from the table above, or null if consistent>",
  "reasoning": "<1–3 sentences: what you expected vs. what you see>"
}
```


Prompt:
You are evaluating a scientific visualization for **causal consistency**.

The following specification is the **symbolic generator** — it fully specifies
what the output plot should look like:

```text
Projectile motion:
  x(t) = v₀ cos(θ) · t
  y(t) = v₀ sin(θ) · t − ½ g t²

Parameters:
  v₀ = 12.688 m/s
  θ  = 41.74°
  g  = 9.800 m/s²
  t  ∈ [0, 1.689 s]
```

I am showing you an image that claims to be the output of this generator.

---

## Your Task

1. Read the specification carefully. Reason about what the plot should look like
   (shape, orientation, color mapping, symmetry, value signs, etc.).
2. Examine the attached image.
3. Decide whether the image is **causally consistent** with the generator.

If the image is **not** consistent, classify the inconsistency using exactly one
of these labels:

| Label | Meaning |
|---|---|
| `colormap_inversion` | The colormap used is different from what the code specifies |
| `axis_swap` | Axes or data dimensions are transposed or mirrored |
| `sign_inversion` | Values are negated — peaks and troughs (or bar directions) are swapped |
| `amplitude_scale` | The value scale is wrong — the colorbar, y-axis range, or bar value labels do not match the formula's amplitudes |
| `phase_shift` | The pattern is shifted from its correct position |
| `frequency_doubling` | The number of oscillations or cycles is wrong |
| `dc_offset` | The curves or point cloud are shifted away from their correct baseline |
| `wrong_petal_count` | The number of petals/lobes differs from what the formula produces |
| `symmetry_mismatch` | The image contains asymmetry that the code cannot produce |
| `bar_order_swap` | Two bars have had their heights swapped — a bar's value label contradicts the code's heights list |
| `coefficient_scale` | Polynomial coefficients are scaled but the formula in the spec is unchanged |
| `wrong_gravity` | Trajectory uses a different gravitational constant than the spec |
| `wrong_launch_angle` | Trajectory uses a different launch angle than the spec |
| `wrong_iteration_depth` | L-system rendered with a different iteration count than the spec |
| `wrong_angle` | L-system rendered with a different turn angle than the spec |

---

## Response Format

Respond with **only** this JSON object and nothing else:

```json
{
  "consistent": true | false,
  "bug_type": "<one label from the table above, or null if consistent>",
  "reasoning": "<1–3 sentences: what you expected vs. what you see>"
}
```


Prompt:
You are evaluating a scientific visualization for **causal consistency**.

The following specification is the **symbolic generator** — it fully specifies
what the output plot should look like:

```text
Projectile motion:
  x(t) = v₀ cos(θ) · t
  y(t) = v₀ sin(θ) · t − ½ g t²

Parameters:
  v₀ = 8.125 m/s
  θ  = 59.16°
  g  = 9.800 m/s²
  t  ∈ [0, 1.313 s]
```

I am showing you an image that claims to be the output of this generator.

---

## Your Task

1. Read the specification carefully. Reason about what the plot should look like
   (shape, orientation, color mapping, symmetry, value signs, etc.).
2. Examine the attached image.
3. Decide whether the image is **causally consistent** with the generator.

If the image is **not** consistent, classify the inconsistency using exactly one
of these labels:

| Label | Meaning |
|---|---|
| `colormap_inversion` | The colormap used is different from what the code specifies |
| `axis_swap` | Axes or data dimensions are transposed or mirrored |
| `sign_inversion` | Values are negated — peaks and troughs (or bar directions) are swapped |
| `amplitude_scale` | The value scale is wrong — the colorbar, y-axis range, or bar value labels do not match the formula's amplitudes |
| `phase_shift` | The pattern is shifted from its correct position |
| `frequency_doubling` | The number of oscillations or cycles is wrong |
| `dc_offset` | The curves or point cloud are shifted away from their correct baseline |
| `wrong_petal_count` | The number of petals/lobes differs from what the formula produces |
| `symmetry_mismatch` | The image contains asymmetry that the code cannot produce |
| `bar_order_swap` | Two bars have had their heights swapped — a bar's value label contradicts the code's heights list |
| `coefficient_scale` | Polynomial coefficients are scaled but the formula in the spec is unchanged |
| `wrong_gravity` | Trajectory uses a different gravitational constant than the spec |
| `wrong_launch_angle` | Trajectory uses a different launch angle than the spec |
| `wrong_iteration_depth` | L-system rendered with a different iteration count than the spec |
| `wrong_angle` | L-system rendered with a different turn angle than the spec |

---

## Response Format

Respond with **only** this JSON object and nothing else:

```json
{
  "consistent": true | false,
  "bug_type": "<one label from the table above, or null if consistent>",
  "reasoning": "<1–3 sentences: what you expected vs. what you see>"
}
```


Prompt:
You are evaluating a scientific visualization for **causal consistency**.

The following specification is the **symbolic generator** — it fully specifies
what the output plot should look like:

```text
Projectile motion:
  x(t) = v₀ cos(θ) · t
  y(t) = v₀ sin(θ) · t − ½ g t²

Parameters:
  v₀ = 14.264 m/s
  θ  = 63.54°
  g  = 9.800 m/s²
  t  ∈ [0, 2.324 s]
```

I am showing you an image that claims to be the output of this generator.

---

## Your Task

1. Read the specification carefully. Reason about what the plot should look like
   (shape, orientation, color mapping, symmetry, value signs, etc.).
2. Examine the attached image.
3. Decide whether the image is **causally consistent** with the generator.

If the image is **not** consistent, classify the inconsistency using exactly one
of these labels:

| Label | Meaning |
|---|---|
| `colormap_inversion` | The colormap used is different from what the code specifies |
| `axis_swap` | Axes or data dimensions are transposed or mirrored |
| `sign_inversion` | Values are negated — peaks and troughs (or bar directions) are swapped |
| `amplitude_scale` | The value scale is wrong — the colorbar, y-axis range, or bar value labels do not match the formula's amplitudes |
| `phase_shift` | The pattern is shifted from its correct position |
| `frequency_doubling` | The number of oscillations or cycles is wrong |
| `dc_offset` | The curves or point cloud are shifted away from their correct baseline |
| `wrong_petal_count` | The number of petals/lobes differs from what the formula produces |
| `symmetry_mismatch` | The image contains asymmetry that the code cannot produce |
| `bar_order_swap` | Two bars have had their heights swapped — a bar's value label contradicts the code's heights list |
| `coefficient_scale` | Polynomial coefficients are scaled but the formula in the spec is unchanged |
| `wrong_gravity` | Trajectory uses a different gravitational constant than the spec |
| `wrong_launch_angle` | Trajectory uses a different launch angle than the spec |
| `wrong_iteration_depth` | L-system rendered with a different iteration count than the spec |
| `wrong_angle` | L-system rendered with a different turn angle than the spec |

---

## Response Format

Respond with **only** this JSON object and nothing else:

```json
{
  "consistent": true | false,
  "bug_type": "<one label from the table above, or null if consistent>",
  "reasoning": "<1–3 sentences: what you expected vs. what you see>"
}
```


Prompt:
You are evaluating a scientific visualization for **causal consistency**.

The following specification is the **symbolic generator** — it fully specifies
what the output plot should look like:

```text
Projectile motion:
  x(t) = v₀ cos(θ) · t
  y(t) = v₀ sin(θ) · t − ½ g t²

Parameters:
  v₀ = 13.164 m/s
  θ  = 57.42°
  g  = 9.800 m/s²
  t  ∈ [0, 1.996 s]
```

I am showing you an image that claims to be the output of this generator.

---

## Your Task

1. Read the specification carefully. Reason about what the plot should look like
   (shape, orientation, color mapping, symmetry, value signs, etc.).
2. Examine the attached image.
3. Decide whether the image is **causally consistent** with the generator.

If the image is **not** consistent, classify the inconsistency using exactly one
of these labels:

| Label | Meaning |
|---|---|
| `colormap_inversion` | The colormap used is different from what the code specifies |
| `axis_swap` | Axes or data dimensions are transposed or mirrored |
| `sign_inversion` | Values are negated — peaks and troughs (or bar directions) are swapped |
| `amplitude_scale` | The value scale is wrong — the colorbar, y-axis range, or bar value labels do not match the formula's amplitudes |
| `phase_shift` | The pattern is shifted from its correct position |
| `frequency_doubling` | The number of oscillations or cycles is wrong |
| `dc_offset` | The curves or point cloud are shifted away from their correct baseline |
| `wrong_petal_count` | The number of petals/lobes differs from what the formula produces |
| `symmetry_mismatch` | The image contains asymmetry that the code cannot produce |
| `bar_order_swap` | Two bars have had their heights swapped — a bar's value label contradicts the code's heights list |
| `coefficient_scale` | Polynomial coefficients are scaled but the formula in the spec is unchanged |
| `wrong_gravity` | Trajectory uses a different gravitational constant than the spec |
| `wrong_launch_angle` | Trajectory uses a different launch angle than the spec |
| `wrong_iteration_depth` | L-system rendered with a different iteration count than the spec |
| `wrong_angle` | L-system rendered with a different turn angle than the spec |

---

## Response Format

Respond with **only** this JSON object and nothing else:

```json
{
  "consistent": true | false,
  "bug_type": "<one label from the table above, or null if consistent>",
  "reasoning": "<1–3 sentences: what you expected vs. what you see>"
}
```


Prompt:
You are evaluating a scientific visualization for **causal consistency**.

The following specification is the **symbolic generator** — it fully specifies
what the output plot should look like:

```text
Projectile motion:
  x(t) = v₀ cos(θ) · t
  y(t) = v₀ sin(θ) · t − ½ g t²

Parameters:
  v₀ = 16.119 m/s
  θ  = 60.54°
  g  = 9.800 m/s²
  t  ∈ [0, 2.680 s]
```

I am showing you an image that claims to be the output of this generator.

---

## Your Task

1. Read the specification carefully. Reason about what the plot should look like
   (shape, orientation, color mapping, symmetry, value signs, etc.).
2. Examine the attached image.
3. Decide whether the image is **causally consistent** with the generator.

If the image is **not** consistent, classify the inconsistency using exactly one
of these labels:

| Label | Meaning |
|---|---|
| `colormap_inversion` | The colormap used is different from what the code specifies |
| `axis_swap` | Axes or data dimensions are transposed or mirrored |
| `sign_inversion` | Values are negated — peaks and troughs (or bar directions) are swapped |
| `amplitude_scale` | The value scale is wrong — the colorbar, y-axis range, or bar value labels do not match the formula's amplitudes |
| `phase_shift` | The pattern is shifted from its correct position |
| `frequency_doubling` | The number of oscillations or cycles is wrong |
| `dc_offset` | The curves or point cloud are shifted away from their correct baseline |
| `wrong_petal_count` | The number of petals/lobes differs from what the formula produces |
| `symmetry_mismatch` | The image contains asymmetry that the code cannot produce |
| `bar_order_swap` | Two bars have had their heights swapped — a bar's value label contradicts the code's heights list |
| `coefficient_scale` | Polynomial coefficients are scaled but the formula in the spec is unchanged |
| `wrong_gravity` | Trajectory uses a different gravitational constant than the spec |
| `wrong_launch_angle` | Trajectory uses a different launch angle than the spec |
| `wrong_iteration_depth` | L-system rendered with a different iteration count than the spec |
| `wrong_angle` | L-system rendered with a different turn angle than the spec |

---

## Response Format

Respond with **only** this JSON object and nothing else:

```json
{
  "consistent": true | false,
  "bug_type": "<one label from the table above, or null if consistent>",
  "reasoning": "<1–3 sentences: what you expected vs. what you see>"
}
```


Prompt:
You are evaluating a scientific visualization for **causal consistency**.

The following specification is the **symbolic generator** — it fully specifies
what the output plot should look like:

```text
Projectile motion:
  x(t) = v₀ cos(θ) · t
  y(t) = v₀ sin(θ) · t − ½ g t²

Parameters:
  v₀ = 13.521 m/s
  θ  = 44.11°
  g  = 9.800 m/s²
  t  ∈ [0, 1.871 s]
```

I am showing you an image that claims to be the output of this generator.

---

## Your Task

1. Read the specification carefully. Reason about what the plot should look like
   (shape, orientation, color mapping, symmetry, value signs, etc.).
2. Examine the attached image.
3. Decide whether the image is **causally consistent** with the generator.

If the image is **not** consistent, classify the inconsistency using exactly one
of these labels:

| Label | Meaning |
|---|---|
| `colormap_inversion` | The colormap used is different from what the code specifies |
| `axis_swap` | Axes or data dimensions are transposed or mirrored |
| `sign_inversion` | Values are negated — peaks and troughs (or bar directions) are swapped |
| `amplitude_scale` | The value scale is wrong — the colorbar, y-axis range, or bar value labels do not match the formula's amplitudes |
| `phase_shift` | The pattern is shifted from its correct position |
| `frequency_doubling` | The number of oscillations or cycles is wrong |
| `dc_offset` | The curves or point cloud are shifted away from their correct baseline |
| `wrong_petal_count` | The number of petals/lobes differs from what the formula produces |
| `symmetry_mismatch` | The image contains asymmetry that the code cannot produce |
| `bar_order_swap` | Two bars have had their heights swapped — a bar's value label contradicts the code's heights list |
| `coefficient_scale` | Polynomial coefficients are scaled but the formula in the spec is unchanged |
| `wrong_gravity` | Trajectory uses a different gravitational constant than the spec |
| `wrong_launch_angle` | Trajectory uses a different launch angle than the spec |
| `wrong_iteration_depth` | L-system rendered with a different iteration count than the spec |
| `wrong_angle` | L-system rendered with a different turn angle than the spec |

---

## Response Format

Respond with **only** this JSON object and nothing else:

```json
{
  "consistent": true | false,
  "bug_type": "<one label from the table above, or null if consistent>",
  "reasoning": "<1–3 sentences: what you expected vs. what you see>"
}
```


Prompt:
You are evaluating a scientific visualization for **causal consistency**.

The following specification is the **symbolic generator** — it fully specifies
what the output plot should look like:

```text
Projectile motion:
  x(t) = v₀ cos(θ) · t
  y(t) = v₀ sin(θ) · t − ½ g t²

Parameters:
  v₀ = 10.590 m/s
  θ  = 61.69°
  g  = 9.800 m/s²
  t  ∈ [0, 1.739 s]
```

I am showing you an image that claims to be the output of this generator.

---

## Your Task

1. Read the specification carefully. Reason about what the plot should look like
   (shape, orientation, color mapping, symmetry, value signs, etc.).
2. Examine the attached image.
3. Decide whether the image is **causally consistent** with the generator.

If the image is **not** consistent, classify the inconsistency using exactly one
of these labels:

| Label | Meaning |
|---|---|
| `colormap_inversion` | The colormap used is different from what the code specifies |
| `axis_swap` | Axes or data dimensions are transposed or mirrored |
| `sign_inversion` | Values are negated — peaks and troughs (or bar directions) are swapped |
| `amplitude_scale` | The value scale is wrong — the colorbar, y-axis range, or bar value labels do not match the formula's amplitudes |
| `phase_shift` | The pattern is shifted from its correct position |
| `frequency_doubling` | The number of oscillations or cycles is wrong |
| `dc_offset` | The curves or point cloud are shifted away from their correct baseline |
| `wrong_petal_count` | The number of petals/lobes differs from what the formula produces |
| `symmetry_mismatch` | The image contains asymmetry that the code cannot produce |
| `bar_order_swap` | Two bars have had their heights swapped — a bar's value label contradicts the code's heights list |
| `coefficient_scale` | Polynomial coefficients are scaled but the formula in the spec is unchanged |
| `wrong_gravity` | Trajectory uses a different gravitational constant than the spec |
| `wrong_launch_angle` | Trajectory uses a different launch angle than the spec |
| `wrong_iteration_depth` | L-system rendered with a different iteration count than the spec |
| `wrong_angle` | L-system rendered with a different turn angle than the spec |

---

## Response Format

Respond with **only** this JSON object and nothing else:

```json
{
  "consistent": true | false,
  "bug_type": "<one label from the table above, or null if consistent>",
  "reasoning": "<1–3 sentences: what you expected vs. what you see>"
}
```


Prompt:
You are evaluating a scientific visualization for **causal consistency**.

The following specification is the **symbolic generator** — it fully specifies
what the output plot should look like:

```text
Projectile motion:
  x(t) = v₀ cos(θ) · t
  y(t) = v₀ sin(θ) · t − ½ g t²

Parameters:
  v₀ = 11.954 m/s
  θ  = 35.80°
  g  = 9.800 m/s²
  t  ∈ [0, 1.424 s]
```

I am showing you an image that claims to be the output of this generator.

---

## Your Task

1. Read the specification carefully. Reason about what the plot should look like
   (shape, orientation, color mapping, symmetry, value signs, etc.).
2. Examine the attached image.
3. Decide whether the image is **causally consistent** with the generator.

If the image is **not** consistent, classify the inconsistency using exactly one
of these labels:

| Label | Meaning |
|---|---|
| `colormap_inversion` | The colormap used is different from what the code specifies |
| `axis_swap` | Axes or data dimensions are transposed or mirrored |
| `sign_inversion` | Values are negated — peaks and troughs (or bar directions) are swapped |
| `amplitude_scale` | The value scale is wrong — the colorbar, y-axis range, or bar value labels do not match the formula's amplitudes |
| `phase_shift` | The pattern is shifted from its correct position |
| `frequency_doubling` | The number of oscillations or cycles is wrong |
| `dc_offset` | The curves or point cloud are shifted away from their correct baseline |
| `wrong_petal_count` | The number of petals/lobes differs from what the formula produces |
| `symmetry_mismatch` | The image contains asymmetry that the code cannot produce |
| `bar_order_swap` | Two bars have had their heights swapped — a bar's value label contradicts the code's heights list |
| `coefficient_scale` | Polynomial coefficients are scaled but the formula in the spec is unchanged |
| `wrong_gravity` | Trajectory uses a different gravitational constant than the spec |
| `wrong_launch_angle` | Trajectory uses a different launch angle than the spec |
| `wrong_iteration_depth` | L-system rendered with a different iteration count than the spec |
| `wrong_angle` | L-system rendered with a different turn angle than the spec |

---

## Response Format

Respond with **only** this JSON object and nothing else:

```json
{
  "consistent": true | false,
  "bug_type": "<one label from the table above, or null if consistent>",
  "reasoning": "<1–3 sentences: what you expected vs. what you see>"
}
```


Prompt:
You are evaluating a scientific visualization for **causal consistency**.

The following specification is the **symbolic generator** — it fully specifies
what the output plot should look like:

```text
Projectile motion:
  x(t) = v₀ cos(θ) · t
  y(t) = v₀ sin(θ) · t − ½ g t²

Parameters:
  v₀ = 13.968 m/s
  θ  = 38.95°
  g  = 9.800 m/s²
  t  ∈ [0, 1.526 s]
```

I am showing you an image that claims to be the output of this generator.

---

## Your Task

1. Read the specification carefully. Reason about what the plot should look like
   (shape, orientation, color mapping, symmetry, value signs, etc.).
2. Examine the attached image.
3. Decide whether the image is **causally consistent** with the generator.

If the image is **not** consistent, classify the inconsistency using exactly one
of these labels:

| Label | Meaning |
|---|---|
| `colormap_inversion` | The colormap used is different from what the code specifies |
| `axis_swap` | Axes or data dimensions are transposed or mirrored |
| `sign_inversion` | Values are negated — peaks and troughs (or bar directions) are swapped |
| `amplitude_scale` | The value scale is wrong — the colorbar, y-axis range, or bar value labels do not match the formula's amplitudes |
| `phase_shift` | The pattern is shifted from its correct position |
| `frequency_doubling` | The number of oscillations or cycles is wrong |
| `dc_offset` | The curves or point cloud are shifted away from their correct baseline |
| `wrong_petal_count` | The number of petals/lobes differs from what the formula produces |
| `symmetry_mismatch` | The image contains asymmetry that the code cannot produce |
| `bar_order_swap` | Two bars have had their heights swapped — a bar's value label contradicts the code's heights list |
| `coefficient_scale` | Polynomial coefficients are scaled but the formula in the spec is unchanged |
| `wrong_gravity` | Trajectory uses a different gravitational constant than the spec |
| `wrong_launch_angle` | Trajectory uses a different launch angle than the spec |
| `wrong_iteration_depth` | L-system rendered with a different iteration count than the spec |
| `wrong_angle` | L-system rendered with a different turn angle than the spec |

---

## Response Format

Respond with **only** this JSON object and nothing else:

```json
{
  "consistent": true | false,
  "bug_type": "<one label from the table above, or null if consistent>",
  "reasoning": "<1–3 sentences: what you expected vs. what you see>"
}
```


Prompt:
You are evaluating a scientific visualization for **causal consistency**.

The following specification is the **symbolic generator** — it fully specifies
what the output plot should look like:

```text
Projectile motion:
  x(t) = v₀ cos(θ) · t
  y(t) = v₀ sin(θ) · t − ½ g t²

Parameters:
  v₀ = 9.063 m/s
  θ  = 33.45°
  g  = 9.800 m/s²
  t  ∈ [0, 1.018 s]
```

I am showing you an image that claims to be the output of this generator.

---

## Your Task

1. Read the specification carefully. Reason about what the plot should look like
   (shape, orientation, color mapping, symmetry, value signs, etc.).
2. Examine the attached image.
3. Decide whether the image is **causally consistent** with the generator.

If the image is **not** consistent, classify the inconsistency using exactly one
of these labels:

| Label | Meaning |
|---|---|
| `colormap_inversion` | The colormap used is different from what the code specifies |
| `axis_swap` | Axes or data dimensions are transposed or mirrored |
| `sign_inversion` | Values are negated — peaks and troughs (or bar directions) are swapped |
| `amplitude_scale` | The value scale is wrong — the colorbar, y-axis range, or bar value labels do not match the formula's amplitudes |
| `phase_shift` | The pattern is shifted from its correct position |
| `frequency_doubling` | The number of oscillations or cycles is wrong |
| `dc_offset` | The curves or point cloud are shifted away from their correct baseline |
| `wrong_petal_count` | The number of petals/lobes differs from what the formula produces |
| `symmetry_mismatch` | The image contains asymmetry that the code cannot produce |
| `bar_order_swap` | Two bars have had their heights swapped — a bar's value label contradicts the code's heights list |
| `coefficient_scale` | Polynomial coefficients are scaled but the formula in the spec is unchanged |
| `wrong_gravity` | Trajectory uses a different gravitational constant than the spec |
| `wrong_launch_angle` | Trajectory uses a different launch angle than the spec |
| `wrong_iteration_depth` | L-system rendered with a different iteration count than the spec |
| `wrong_angle` | L-system rendered with a different turn angle than the spec |

---

## Response Format

Respond with **only** this JSON object and nothing else:

```json
{
  "consistent": true | false,
  "bug_type": "<one label from the table above, or null if consistent>",
  "reasoning": "<1–3 sentences: what you expected vs. what you see>"
}
```


Prompt:
You are evaluating a scientific visualization for **causal consistency**.

The following specification is the **symbolic generator** — it fully specifies
what the output plot should look like:

```text
Harmonic oscillator:
  x(t) = A cos(ωt + φ)

Parameters:
  A = 1.915
  ω = 2.096 rad/s
  φ = 2.739 rad
  t ∈ [0, 5.994 s]
```

I am showing you an image that claims to be the output of this generator.

---

## Your Task

1. Read the specification carefully. Reason about what the plot should look like
   (shape, orientation, color mapping, symmetry, value signs, etc.).
2. Examine the attached image.
3. Decide whether the image is **causally consistent** with the generator.

If the image is **not** consistent, classify the inconsistency using exactly one
of these labels:

| Label | Meaning |
|---|---|
| `colormap_inversion` | The colormap used is different from what the code specifies |
| `axis_swap` | Axes or data dimensions are transposed or mirrored |
| `sign_inversion` | Values are negated — peaks and troughs (or bar directions) are swapped |
| `amplitude_scale` | The value scale is wrong — the colorbar, y-axis range, or bar value labels do not match the formula's amplitudes |
| `phase_shift` | The pattern is shifted from its correct position |
| `frequency_doubling` | The number of oscillations or cycles is wrong |
| `dc_offset` | The curves or point cloud are shifted away from their correct baseline |
| `wrong_petal_count` | The number of petals/lobes differs from what the formula produces |
| `symmetry_mismatch` | The image contains asymmetry that the code cannot produce |
| `bar_order_swap` | Two bars have had their heights swapped — a bar's value label contradicts the code's heights list |
| `coefficient_scale` | Polynomial coefficients are scaled but the formula in the spec is unchanged |
| `wrong_gravity` | Trajectory uses a different gravitational constant than the spec |
| `wrong_launch_angle` | Trajectory uses a different launch angle than the spec |
| `wrong_iteration_depth` | L-system rendered with a different iteration count than the spec |
| `wrong_angle` | L-system rendered with a different turn angle than the spec |

---

## Response Format

Respond with **only** this JSON object and nothing else:

```json
{
  "consistent": true | false,
  "bug_type": "<one label from the table above, or null if consistent>",
  "reasoning": "<1–3 sentences: what you expected vs. what you see>"
}
```


Prompt:
You are evaluating a scientific visualization for **causal consistency**.

The following specification is the **symbolic generator** — it fully specifies
what the output plot should look like:

```text
Harmonic oscillator:
  x(t) = A cos(ωt + φ)

Parameters:
  A = 0.978
  ω = 0.941 rad/s
  φ = 2.212 rad
  t ∈ [0, 13.351 s]
```

I am showing you an image that claims to be the output of this generator.

---

## Your Task

1. Read the specification carefully. Reason about what the plot should look like
   (shape, orientation, color mapping, symmetry, value signs, etc.).
2. Examine the attached image.
3. Decide whether the image is **causally consistent** with the generator.

If the image is **not** consistent, classify the inconsistency using exactly one
of these labels:

| Label | Meaning |
|---|---|
| `colormap_inversion` | The colormap used is different from what the code specifies |
| `axis_swap` | Axes or data dimensions are transposed or mirrored |
| `sign_inversion` | Values are negated — peaks and troughs (or bar directions) are swapped |
| `amplitude_scale` | The value scale is wrong — the colorbar, y-axis range, or bar value labels do not match the formula's amplitudes |
| `phase_shift` | The pattern is shifted from its correct position |
| `frequency_doubling` | The number of oscillations or cycles is wrong |
| `dc_offset` | The curves or point cloud are shifted away from their correct baseline |
| `wrong_petal_count` | The number of petals/lobes differs from what the formula produces |
| `symmetry_mismatch` | The image contains asymmetry that the code cannot produce |
| `bar_order_swap` | Two bars have had their heights swapped — a bar's value label contradicts the code's heights list |
| `coefficient_scale` | Polynomial coefficients are scaled but the formula in the spec is unchanged |
| `wrong_gravity` | Trajectory uses a different gravitational constant than the spec |
| `wrong_launch_angle` | Trajectory uses a different launch angle than the spec |
| `wrong_iteration_depth` | L-system rendered with a different iteration count than the spec |
| `wrong_angle` | L-system rendered with a different turn angle than the spec |

---

## Response Format

Respond with **only** this JSON object and nothing else:

```json
{
  "consistent": true | false,
  "bug_type": "<one label from the table above, or null if consistent>",
  "reasoning": "<1–3 sentences: what you expected vs. what you see>"
}
```


Prompt:
You are evaluating a scientific visualization for **causal consistency**.

The following specification is the **symbolic generator** — it fully specifies
what the output plot should look like:

```text
Harmonic oscillator:
  x(t) = A cos(ωt + φ)

Parameters:
  A = 0.835
  ω = 1.141 rad/s
  φ = 3.038 rad
  t ∈ [0, 11.017 s]
```

I am showing you an image that claims to be the output of this generator.

---

## Your Task

1. Read the specification carefully. Reason about what the plot should look like
   (shape, orientation, color mapping, symmetry, value signs, etc.).
2. Examine the attached image.
3. Decide whether the image is **causally consistent** with the generator.

If the image is **not** consistent, classify the inconsistency using exactly one
of these labels:

| Label | Meaning |
|---|---|
| `colormap_inversion` | The colormap used is different from what the code specifies |
| `axis_swap` | Axes or data dimensions are transposed or mirrored |
| `sign_inversion` | Values are negated — peaks and troughs (or bar directions) are swapped |
| `amplitude_scale` | The value scale is wrong — the colorbar, y-axis range, or bar value labels do not match the formula's amplitudes |
| `phase_shift` | The pattern is shifted from its correct position |
| `frequency_doubling` | The number of oscillations or cycles is wrong |
| `dc_offset` | The curves or point cloud are shifted away from their correct baseline |
| `wrong_petal_count` | The number of petals/lobes differs from what the formula produces |
| `symmetry_mismatch` | The image contains asymmetry that the code cannot produce |
| `bar_order_swap` | Two bars have had their heights swapped — a bar's value label contradicts the code's heights list |
| `coefficient_scale` | Polynomial coefficients are scaled but the formula in the spec is unchanged |
| `wrong_gravity` | Trajectory uses a different gravitational constant than the spec |
| `wrong_launch_angle` | Trajectory uses a different launch angle than the spec |
| `wrong_iteration_depth` | L-system rendered with a different iteration count than the spec |
| `wrong_angle` | L-system rendered with a different turn angle than the spec |

---

## Response Format

Respond with **only** this JSON object and nothing else:

```json
{
  "consistent": true | false,
  "bug_type": "<one label from the table above, or null if consistent>",
  "reasoning": "<1–3 sentences: what you expected vs. what you see>"
}
```


Prompt:
You are evaluating a scientific visualization for **causal consistency**.

The following specification is the **symbolic generator** — it fully specifies
what the output plot should look like:

```text
Harmonic oscillator:
  x(t) = A cos(ωt + φ)

Parameters:
  A = 1.416
  ω = 1.601 rad/s
  φ = 0.407 rad
  t ∈ [0, 7.851 s]
```

I am showing you an image that claims to be the output of this generator.

---

## Your Task

1. Read the specification carefully. Reason about what the plot should look like
   (shape, orientation, color mapping, symmetry, value signs, etc.).
2. Examine the attached image.
3. Decide whether the image is **causally consistent** with the generator.

If the image is **not** consistent, classify the inconsistency using exactly one
of these labels:

| Label | Meaning |
|---|---|
| `colormap_inversion` | The colormap used is different from what the code specifies |
| `axis_swap` | Axes or data dimensions are transposed or mirrored |
| `sign_inversion` | Values are negated — peaks and troughs (or bar directions) are swapped |
| `amplitude_scale` | The value scale is wrong — the colorbar, y-axis range, or bar value labels do not match the formula's amplitudes |
| `phase_shift` | The pattern is shifted from its correct position |
| `frequency_doubling` | The number of oscillations or cycles is wrong |
| `dc_offset` | The curves or point cloud are shifted away from their correct baseline |
| `wrong_petal_count` | The number of petals/lobes differs from what the formula produces |
| `symmetry_mismatch` | The image contains asymmetry that the code cannot produce |
| `bar_order_swap` | Two bars have had their heights swapped — a bar's value label contradicts the code's heights list |
| `coefficient_scale` | Polynomial coefficients are scaled but the formula in the spec is unchanged |
| `wrong_gravity` | Trajectory uses a different gravitational constant than the spec |
| `wrong_launch_angle` | Trajectory uses a different launch angle than the spec |
| `wrong_iteration_depth` | L-system rendered with a different iteration count than the spec |
| `wrong_angle` | L-system rendered with a different turn angle than the spec |

---

## Response Format

Respond with **only** this JSON object and nothing else:

```json
{
  "consistent": true | false,
  "bug_type": "<one label from the table above, or null if consistent>",
  "reasoning": "<1–3 sentences: what you expected vs. what you see>"
}
```


Prompt:
You are evaluating a scientific visualization for **causal consistency**.

The following specification is the **symbolic generator** — it fully specifies
what the output plot should look like:

```text
Harmonic oscillator:
  x(t) = A cos(ωt + φ)

Parameters:
  A = 0.937
  ω = 1.406 rad/s
  φ = 0.178 rad
  t ∈ [0, 8.938 s]
```

I am showing you an image that claims to be the output of this generator.

---

## Your Task

1. Read the specification carefully. Reason about what the plot should look like
   (shape, orientation, color mapping, symmetry, value signs, etc.).
2. Examine the attached image.
3. Decide whether the image is **causally consistent** with the generator.

If the image is **not** consistent, classify the inconsistency using exactly one
of these labels:

| Label | Meaning |
|---|---|
| `colormap_inversion` | The colormap used is different from what the code specifies |
| `axis_swap` | Axes or data dimensions are transposed or mirrored |
| `sign_inversion` | Values are negated — peaks and troughs (or bar directions) are swapped |
| `amplitude_scale` | The value scale is wrong — the colorbar, y-axis range, or bar value labels do not match the formula's amplitudes |
| `phase_shift` | The pattern is shifted from its correct position |
| `frequency_doubling` | The number of oscillations or cycles is wrong |
| `dc_offset` | The curves or point cloud are shifted away from their correct baseline |
| `wrong_petal_count` | The number of petals/lobes differs from what the formula produces |
| `symmetry_mismatch` | The image contains asymmetry that the code cannot produce |
| `bar_order_swap` | Two bars have had their heights swapped — a bar's value label contradicts the code's heights list |
| `coefficient_scale` | Polynomial coefficients are scaled but the formula in the spec is unchanged |
| `wrong_gravity` | Trajectory uses a different gravitational constant than the spec |
| `wrong_launch_angle` | Trajectory uses a different launch angle than the spec |
| `wrong_iteration_depth` | L-system rendered with a different iteration count than the spec |
| `wrong_angle` | L-system rendered with a different turn angle than the spec |

---

## Response Format

Respond with **only** this JSON object and nothing else:

```json
{
  "consistent": true | false,
  "bug_type": "<one label from the table above, or null if consistent>",
  "reasoning": "<1–3 sentences: what you expected vs. what you see>"
}
```


Prompt:
You are evaluating a scientific visualization for **causal consistency**.

The following specification is the **symbolic generator** — it fully specifies
what the output plot should look like:

```text
Harmonic oscillator:
  x(t) = A cos(ωt + φ)

Parameters:
  A = 0.816
  ω = 2.098 rad/s
  φ = 2.949 rad
  t ∈ [0, 5.990 s]
```

I am showing you an image that claims to be the output of this generator.

---

## Your Task

1. Read the specification carefully. Reason about what the plot should look like
   (shape, orientation, color mapping, symmetry, value signs, etc.).
2. Examine the attached image.
3. Decide whether the image is **causally consistent** with the generator.

If the image is **not** consistent, classify the inconsistency using exactly one
of these labels:

| Label | Meaning |
|---|---|
| `colormap_inversion` | The colormap used is different from what the code specifies |
| `axis_swap` | Axes or data dimensions are transposed or mirrored |
| `sign_inversion` | Values are negated — peaks and troughs (or bar directions) are swapped |
| `amplitude_scale` | The value scale is wrong — the colorbar, y-axis range, or bar value labels do not match the formula's amplitudes |
| `phase_shift` | The pattern is shifted from its correct position |
| `frequency_doubling` | The number of oscillations or cycles is wrong |
| `dc_offset` | The curves or point cloud are shifted away from their correct baseline |
| `wrong_petal_count` | The number of petals/lobes differs from what the formula produces |
| `symmetry_mismatch` | The image contains asymmetry that the code cannot produce |
| `bar_order_swap` | Two bars have had their heights swapped — a bar's value label contradicts the code's heights list |
| `coefficient_scale` | Polynomial coefficients are scaled but the formula in the spec is unchanged |
| `wrong_gravity` | Trajectory uses a different gravitational constant than the spec |
| `wrong_launch_angle` | Trajectory uses a different launch angle than the spec |
| `wrong_iteration_depth` | L-system rendered with a different iteration count than the spec |
| `wrong_angle` | L-system rendered with a different turn angle than the spec |

---

## Response Format

Respond with **only** this JSON object and nothing else:

```json
{
  "consistent": true | false,
  "bug_type": "<one label from the table above, or null if consistent>",
  "reasoning": "<1–3 sentences: what you expected vs. what you see>"
}
```


Prompt:
You are evaluating a scientific visualization for **causal consistency**.

The following specification is the **symbolic generator** — it fully specifies
what the output plot should look like:

```text
Harmonic oscillator:
  x(t) = A cos(ωt + φ)

Parameters:
  A = 1.252
  ω = 1.044 rad/s
  φ = 0.144 rad
  t ∈ [0, 12.037 s]
```

I am showing you an image that claims to be the output of this generator.

---

## Your Task

1. Read the specification carefully. Reason about what the plot should look like
   (shape, orientation, color mapping, symmetry, value signs, etc.).
2. Examine the attached image.
3. Decide whether the image is **causally consistent** with the generator.

If the image is **not** consistent, classify the inconsistency using exactly one
of these labels:

| Label | Meaning |
|---|---|
| `colormap_inversion` | The colormap used is different from what the code specifies |
| `axis_swap` | Axes or data dimensions are transposed or mirrored |
| `sign_inversion` | Values are negated — peaks and troughs (or bar directions) are swapped |
| `amplitude_scale` | The value scale is wrong — the colorbar, y-axis range, or bar value labels do not match the formula's amplitudes |
| `phase_shift` | The pattern is shifted from its correct position |
| `frequency_doubling` | The number of oscillations or cycles is wrong |
| `dc_offset` | The curves or point cloud are shifted away from their correct baseline |
| `wrong_petal_count` | The number of petals/lobes differs from what the formula produces |
| `symmetry_mismatch` | The image contains asymmetry that the code cannot produce |
| `bar_order_swap` | Two bars have had their heights swapped — a bar's value label contradicts the code's heights list |
| `coefficient_scale` | Polynomial coefficients are scaled but the formula in the spec is unchanged |
| `wrong_gravity` | Trajectory uses a different gravitational constant than the spec |
| `wrong_launch_angle` | Trajectory uses a different launch angle than the spec |
| `wrong_iteration_depth` | L-system rendered with a different iteration count than the spec |
| `wrong_angle` | L-system rendered with a different turn angle than the spec |

---

## Response Format

Respond with **only** this JSON object and nothing else:

```json
{
  "consistent": true | false,
  "bug_type": "<one label from the table above, or null if consistent>",
  "reasoning": "<1–3 sentences: what you expected vs. what you see>"
}
```


Prompt:
You are evaluating a scientific visualization for **causal consistency**.

The following specification is the **symbolic generator** — it fully specifies
what the output plot should look like:

```text
Harmonic oscillator:
  x(t) = A cos(ωt + φ)

Parameters:
  A = 1.006
  ω = 1.625 rad/s
  φ = 1.087 rad
  t ∈ [0, 7.733 s]
```

I am showing you an image that claims to be the output of this generator.

---

## Your Task

1. Read the specification carefully. Reason about what the plot should look like
   (shape, orientation, color mapping, symmetry, value signs, etc.).
2. Examine the attached image.
3. Decide whether the image is **causally consistent** with the generator.

If the image is **not** consistent, classify the inconsistency using exactly one
of these labels:

| Label | Meaning |
|---|---|
| `colormap_inversion` | The colormap used is different from what the code specifies |
| `axis_swap` | Axes or data dimensions are transposed or mirrored |
| `sign_inversion` | Values are negated — peaks and troughs (or bar directions) are swapped |
| `amplitude_scale` | The value scale is wrong — the colorbar, y-axis range, or bar value labels do not match the formula's amplitudes |
| `phase_shift` | The pattern is shifted from its correct position |
| `frequency_doubling` | The number of oscillations or cycles is wrong |
| `dc_offset` | The curves or point cloud are shifted away from their correct baseline |
| `wrong_petal_count` | The number of petals/lobes differs from what the formula produces |
| `symmetry_mismatch` | The image contains asymmetry that the code cannot produce |
| `bar_order_swap` | Two bars have had their heights swapped — a bar's value label contradicts the code's heights list |
| `coefficient_scale` | Polynomial coefficients are scaled but the formula in the spec is unchanged |
| `wrong_gravity` | Trajectory uses a different gravitational constant than the spec |
| `wrong_launch_angle` | Trajectory uses a different launch angle than the spec |
| `wrong_iteration_depth` | L-system rendered with a different iteration count than the spec |
| `wrong_angle` | L-system rendered with a different turn angle than the spec |

---

## Response Format

Respond with **only** this JSON object and nothing else:

```json
{
  "consistent": true | false,
  "bug_type": "<one label from the table above, or null if consistent>",
  "reasoning": "<1–3 sentences: what you expected vs. what you see>"
}
```


Prompt:
You are evaluating a scientific visualization for **causal consistency**.

The following specification is the **symbolic generator** — it fully specifies
what the output plot should look like:

```text
Harmonic oscillator:
  x(t) = A cos(ωt + φ)

Parameters:
  A = 1.876
  ω = 1.291 rad/s
  φ = 1.004 rad
  t ∈ [0, 9.735 s]
```

I am showing you an image that claims to be the output of this generator.

---

## Your Task

1. Read the specification carefully. Reason about what the plot should look like
   (shape, orientation, color mapping, symmetry, value signs, etc.).
2. Examine the attached image.
3. Decide whether the image is **causally consistent** with the generator.

If the image is **not** consistent, classify the inconsistency using exactly one
of these labels:

| Label | Meaning |
|---|---|
| `colormap_inversion` | The colormap used is different from what the code specifies |
| `axis_swap` | Axes or data dimensions are transposed or mirrored |
| `sign_inversion` | Values are negated — peaks and troughs (or bar directions) are swapped |
| `amplitude_scale` | The value scale is wrong — the colorbar, y-axis range, or bar value labels do not match the formula's amplitudes |
| `phase_shift` | The pattern is shifted from its correct position |
| `frequency_doubling` | The number of oscillations or cycles is wrong |
| `dc_offset` | The curves or point cloud are shifted away from their correct baseline |
| `wrong_petal_count` | The number of petals/lobes differs from what the formula produces |
| `symmetry_mismatch` | The image contains asymmetry that the code cannot produce |
| `bar_order_swap` | Two bars have had their heights swapped — a bar's value label contradicts the code's heights list |
| `coefficient_scale` | Polynomial coefficients are scaled but the formula in the spec is unchanged |
| `wrong_gravity` | Trajectory uses a different gravitational constant than the spec |
| `wrong_launch_angle` | Trajectory uses a different launch angle than the spec |
| `wrong_iteration_depth` | L-system rendered with a different iteration count than the spec |
| `wrong_angle` | L-system rendered with a different turn angle than the spec |

---

## Response Format

Respond with **only** this JSON object and nothing else:

```json
{
  "consistent": true | false,
  "bug_type": "<one label from the table above, or null if consistent>",
  "reasoning": "<1–3 sentences: what you expected vs. what you see>"
}
```


Prompt:
You are evaluating a scientific visualization for **causal consistency**.

The following specification is the **symbolic generator** — it fully specifies
what the output plot should look like:

```text
Harmonic oscillator:
  x(t) = A cos(ωt + φ)

Parameters:
  A = 0.767
  ω = 2.339 rad/s
  φ = 0.969 rad
  t ∈ [0, 5.373 s]
```

I am showing you an image that claims to be the output of this generator.

---

## Your Task

1. Read the specification carefully. Reason about what the plot should look like
   (shape, orientation, color mapping, symmetry, value signs, etc.).
2. Examine the attached image.
3. Decide whether the image is **causally consistent** with the generator.

If the image is **not** consistent, classify the inconsistency using exactly one
of these labels:

| Label | Meaning |
|---|---|
| `colormap_inversion` | The colormap used is different from what the code specifies |
| `axis_swap` | Axes or data dimensions are transposed or mirrored |
| `sign_inversion` | Values are negated — peaks and troughs (or bar directions) are swapped |
| `amplitude_scale` | The value scale is wrong — the colorbar, y-axis range, or bar value labels do not match the formula's amplitudes |
| `phase_shift` | The pattern is shifted from its correct position |
| `frequency_doubling` | The number of oscillations or cycles is wrong |
| `dc_offset` | The curves or point cloud are shifted away from their correct baseline |
| `wrong_petal_count` | The number of petals/lobes differs from what the formula produces |
| `symmetry_mismatch` | The image contains asymmetry that the code cannot produce |
| `bar_order_swap` | Two bars have had their heights swapped — a bar's value label contradicts the code's heights list |
| `coefficient_scale` | Polynomial coefficients are scaled but the formula in the spec is unchanged |
| `wrong_gravity` | Trajectory uses a different gravitational constant than the spec |
| `wrong_launch_angle` | Trajectory uses a different launch angle than the spec |
| `wrong_iteration_depth` | L-system rendered with a different iteration count than the spec |
| `wrong_angle` | L-system rendered with a different turn angle than the spec |

---

## Response Format

Respond with **only** this JSON object and nothing else:

```json
{
  "consistent": true | false,
  "bug_type": "<one label from the table above, or null if consistent>",
  "reasoning": "<1–3 sentences: what you expected vs. what you see>"
}
```


Prompt:
You are evaluating a scientific visualization for **causal consistency**.

The following specification is the **symbolic generator** — it fully specifies
what the output plot should look like:

```text
L-system:
  Axiom: F
  Rules:
    F → F-F+F+FF-F-F+F
  Angle: 90°
  Iterations: 3
  Step length: 1.157
```

I am showing you an image that claims to be the output of this generator.

---

## Your Task

1. Read the specification carefully. Reason about what the plot should look like
   (shape, orientation, color mapping, symmetry, value signs, etc.).
2. Examine the attached image.
3. Decide whether the image is **causally consistent** with the generator.

If the image is **not** consistent, classify the inconsistency using exactly one
of these labels:

| Label | Meaning |
|---|---|
| `colormap_inversion` | The colormap used is different from what the code specifies |
| `axis_swap` | Axes or data dimensions are transposed or mirrored |
| `sign_inversion` | Values are negated — peaks and troughs (or bar directions) are swapped |
| `amplitude_scale` | The value scale is wrong — the colorbar, y-axis range, or bar value labels do not match the formula's amplitudes |
| `phase_shift` | The pattern is shifted from its correct position |
| `frequency_doubling` | The number of oscillations or cycles is wrong |
| `dc_offset` | The curves or point cloud are shifted away from their correct baseline |
| `wrong_petal_count` | The number of petals/lobes differs from what the formula produces |
| `symmetry_mismatch` | The image contains asymmetry that the code cannot produce |
| `bar_order_swap` | Two bars have had their heights swapped — a bar's value label contradicts the code's heights list |
| `coefficient_scale` | Polynomial coefficients are scaled but the formula in the spec is unchanged |
| `wrong_gravity` | Trajectory uses a different gravitational constant than the spec |
| `wrong_launch_angle` | Trajectory uses a different launch angle than the spec |
| `wrong_iteration_depth` | L-system rendered with a different iteration count than the spec |
| `wrong_angle` | L-system rendered with a different turn angle than the spec |

---

## Response Format

Respond with **only** this JSON object and nothing else:

```json
{
  "consistent": true | false,
  "bug_type": "<one label from the table above, or null if consistent>",
  "reasoning": "<1–3 sentences: what you expected vs. what you see>"
}
```


Prompt:
You are evaluating a scientific visualization for **causal consistency**.

The following specification is the **symbolic generator** — it fully specifies
what the output plot should look like:

```text
L-system:
  Axiom: F
  Rules:
    F → F-F+F+FF-F-F+F
  Angle: 90°
  Iterations: 4
  Step length: 1.147
```

I am showing you an image that claims to be the output of this generator.

---

## Your Task

1. Read the specification carefully. Reason about what the plot should look like
   (shape, orientation, color mapping, symmetry, value signs, etc.).
2. Examine the attached image.
3. Decide whether the image is **causally consistent** with the generator.

If the image is **not** consistent, classify the inconsistency using exactly one
of these labels:

| Label | Meaning |
|---|---|
| `colormap_inversion` | The colormap used is different from what the code specifies |
| `axis_swap` | Axes or data dimensions are transposed or mirrored |
| `sign_inversion` | Values are negated — peaks and troughs (or bar directions) are swapped |
| `amplitude_scale` | The value scale is wrong — the colorbar, y-axis range, or bar value labels do not match the formula's amplitudes |
| `phase_shift` | The pattern is shifted from its correct position |
| `frequency_doubling` | The number of oscillations or cycles is wrong |
| `dc_offset` | The curves or point cloud are shifted away from their correct baseline |
| `wrong_petal_count` | The number of petals/lobes differs from what the formula produces |
| `symmetry_mismatch` | The image contains asymmetry that the code cannot produce |
| `bar_order_swap` | Two bars have had their heights swapped — a bar's value label contradicts the code's heights list |
| `coefficient_scale` | Polynomial coefficients are scaled but the formula in the spec is unchanged |
| `wrong_gravity` | Trajectory uses a different gravitational constant than the spec |
| `wrong_launch_angle` | Trajectory uses a different launch angle than the spec |
| `wrong_iteration_depth` | L-system rendered with a different iteration count than the spec |
| `wrong_angle` | L-system rendered with a different turn angle than the spec |

---

## Response Format

Respond with **only** this JSON object and nothing else:

```json
{
  "consistent": true | false,
  "bug_type": "<one label from the table above, or null if consistent>",
  "reasoning": "<1–3 sentences: what you expected vs. what you see>"
}
```


Prompt:
You are evaluating a scientific visualization for **causal consistency**.

The following specification is the **symbolic generator** — it fully specifies
what the output plot should look like:

```text
L-system:
  Axiom: F
  Rules:
    F → F+F-F-F+F
  Angle: 90°
  Iterations: 3
  Step length: 1.100
```

I am showing you an image that claims to be the output of this generator.

---

## Your Task

1. Read the specification carefully. Reason about what the plot should look like
   (shape, orientation, color mapping, symmetry, value signs, etc.).
2. Examine the attached image.
3. Decide whether the image is **causally consistent** with the generator.

If the image is **not** consistent, classify the inconsistency using exactly one
of these labels:

| Label | Meaning |
|---|---|
| `colormap_inversion` | The colormap used is different from what the code specifies |
| `axis_swap` | Axes or data dimensions are transposed or mirrored |
| `sign_inversion` | Values are negated — peaks and troughs (or bar directions) are swapped |
| `amplitude_scale` | The value scale is wrong — the colorbar, y-axis range, or bar value labels do not match the formula's amplitudes |
| `phase_shift` | The pattern is shifted from its correct position |
| `frequency_doubling` | The number of oscillations or cycles is wrong |
| `dc_offset` | The curves or point cloud are shifted away from their correct baseline |
| `wrong_petal_count` | The number of petals/lobes differs from what the formula produces |
| `symmetry_mismatch` | The image contains asymmetry that the code cannot produce |
| `bar_order_swap` | Two bars have had their heights swapped — a bar's value label contradicts the code's heights list |
| `coefficient_scale` | Polynomial coefficients are scaled but the formula in the spec is unchanged |
| `wrong_gravity` | Trajectory uses a different gravitational constant than the spec |
| `wrong_launch_angle` | Trajectory uses a different launch angle than the spec |
| `wrong_iteration_depth` | L-system rendered with a different iteration count than the spec |
| `wrong_angle` | L-system rendered with a different turn angle than the spec |

---

## Response Format

Respond with **only** this JSON object and nothing else:

```json
{
  "consistent": true | false,
  "bug_type": "<one label from the table above, or null if consistent>",
  "reasoning": "<1–3 sentences: what you expected vs. what you see>"
}
```


Prompt:
You are evaluating a scientific visualization for **causal consistency**.

The following specification is the **symbolic generator** — it fully specifies
what the output plot should look like:

```text
L-system:
  Axiom: F
  Rules:
    F → F+F-F-F+F
  Angle: 90°
  Iterations: 3
  Step length: 1.123
```

I am showing you an image that claims to be the output of this generator.

---

## Your Task

1. Read the specification carefully. Reason about what the plot should look like
   (shape, orientation, color mapping, symmetry, value signs, etc.).
2. Examine the attached image.
3. Decide whether the image is **causally consistent** with the generator.

If the image is **not** consistent, classify the inconsistency using exactly one
of these labels:

| Label | Meaning |
|---|---|
| `colormap_inversion` | The colormap used is different from what the code specifies |
| `axis_swap` | Axes or data dimensions are transposed or mirrored |
| `sign_inversion` | Values are negated — peaks and troughs (or bar directions) are swapped |
| `amplitude_scale` | The value scale is wrong — the colorbar, y-axis range, or bar value labels do not match the formula's amplitudes |
| `phase_shift` | The pattern is shifted from its correct position |
| `frequency_doubling` | The number of oscillations or cycles is wrong |
| `dc_offset` | The curves or point cloud are shifted away from their correct baseline |
| `wrong_petal_count` | The number of petals/lobes differs from what the formula produces |
| `symmetry_mismatch` | The image contains asymmetry that the code cannot produce |
| `bar_order_swap` | Two bars have had their heights swapped — a bar's value label contradicts the code's heights list |
| `coefficient_scale` | Polynomial coefficients are scaled but the formula in the spec is unchanged |
| `wrong_gravity` | Trajectory uses a different gravitational constant than the spec |
| `wrong_launch_angle` | Trajectory uses a different launch angle than the spec |
| `wrong_iteration_depth` | L-system rendered with a different iteration count than the spec |
| `wrong_angle` | L-system rendered with a different turn angle than the spec |

---

## Response Format

Respond with **only** this JSON object and nothing else:

```json
{
  "consistent": true | false,
  "bug_type": "<one label from the table above, or null if consistent>",
  "reasoning": "<1–3 sentences: what you expected vs. what you see>"
}
```


Prompt:
You are evaluating a scientific visualization for **causal consistency**.

The following specification is the **symbolic generator** — it fully specifies
what the output plot should look like:

```text
L-system:
  Axiom: F
  Rules:
    F → F-F+F+FF-F-F+F
  Angle: 90°
  Iterations: 4
  Step length: 0.863
```

I am showing you an image that claims to be the output of this generator.

---

## Your Task

1. Read the specification carefully. Reason about what the plot should look like
   (shape, orientation, color mapping, symmetry, value signs, etc.).
2. Examine the attached image.
3. Decide whether the image is **causally consistent** with the generator.

If the image is **not** consistent, classify the inconsistency using exactly one
of these labels:

| Label | Meaning |
|---|---|
| `colormap_inversion` | The colormap used is different from what the code specifies |
| `axis_swap` | Axes or data dimensions are transposed or mirrored |
| `sign_inversion` | Values are negated — peaks and troughs (or bar directions) are swapped |
| `amplitude_scale` | The value scale is wrong — the colorbar, y-axis range, or bar value labels do not match the formula's amplitudes |
| `phase_shift` | The pattern is shifted from its correct position |
| `frequency_doubling` | The number of oscillations or cycles is wrong |
| `dc_offset` | The curves or point cloud are shifted away from their correct baseline |
| `wrong_petal_count` | The number of petals/lobes differs from what the formula produces |
| `symmetry_mismatch` | The image contains asymmetry that the code cannot produce |
| `bar_order_swap` | Two bars have had their heights swapped — a bar's value label contradicts the code's heights list |
| `coefficient_scale` | Polynomial coefficients are scaled but the formula in the spec is unchanged |
| `wrong_gravity` | Trajectory uses a different gravitational constant than the spec |
| `wrong_launch_angle` | Trajectory uses a different launch angle than the spec |
| `wrong_iteration_depth` | L-system rendered with a different iteration count than the spec |
| `wrong_angle` | L-system rendered with a different turn angle than the spec |

---

## Response Format

Respond with **only** this JSON object and nothing else:

```json
{
  "consistent": true | false,
  "bug_type": "<one label from the table above, or null if consistent>",
  "reasoning": "<1–3 sentences: what you expected vs. what you see>"
}
```