全年生产数据与图表看板
Claude Opus 5.5 第 2 代 更好
按原题要求比较实际成果
Claude Opus 5.5 第 2 代
打开成果与下载文件 ↗Claude Opus 5.5 初代
打开成果与下载文件 ↗裁判为什么这样判断
两位裁判各看两次，第二次交换 A、B 的位置。下面保留原文，并标明每次的 A、B 对应哪份成果。
GPT 6.1 的两次判断
第 1 次 · Claude Opus 5.5 第 2 代 更好
A：Claude Opus 5.5 第 2 代
B：Claude Opus 5.5 初代
原题要求 · A：材料不足，无法判断；B：未完全满足
本次提供的成果材料：A：1 份文件、8 张页面图；B：0 份文件、0 张页面图。文档文字与文件检查另行提供。
A provides both required worksheets, 48 weeks for nine consistently assigned operators, correct Week 1 inputs, automatic averages and totals, visible top/bottom conditional formatting, week-range dropdowns, and four chart objects. Its Week 1 KPIs correctly show 38,880 units, Operator 1 leading with 4,720, and Machine 3 leading with 13,300. B submitted no deliverable. A clearly wins, although full compliance cannot be confirmed from the available evidence.
裁判指出未能看到的材料：
- Native PivotTable definitions for A; labeled summary cells alone do not establish that they are actual PivotTables.
- A's rendered Dashboard pages or chart specifications to verify the requested chart types and quadrant arrangement.
第 2 次 · Claude Opus 5.5 第 2 代 更好
A：Claude Opus 5.5 初代
B：Claude Opus 5.5 第 2 代
原题要求 · A：未完全满足；B：材料不足，无法判断
本次提供的成果材料：A：0 份文件、0 张页面图；B：1 份文件、8 张页面图。文档文字与文件检查另行提供。
A submitted no deliverable. B provides both requested worksheets, all 48 weeks for nine operators with consistent machine/shift assignments, accurate Week 1 inputs, automatic averages and totals, visible top/bottom highlighting, and validated week selectors. Its Week 1 KPIs correctly show 38,880 total units, Operator 1 leading with 4,720, Machine 3 leading with 13,300, and 4,320 units per operator. Four charts are counted, but the available evidence does not establish every PivotTable and chart requirement.
裁判指出未能看到的材料：
- Dashboard chart renderings or definitions confirming the requested chart types and four-quadrant arrangement.
- Native PivotTable definitions and refresh behavior; labeled summary cells alone do not verify these.
- The submitted workbook filename confirming the required Dashboard Output title.
Claude Opus 5.5 的两次判断
第 1 次 · Claude Opus 5.5 第 2 代 更好
A：Claude Opus 5.5 第 2 代
B：Claude Opus 5.5 初代
原题要求 · A：满足；B：未完全满足
本次提供的成果材料：A：1 份文件、8 张页面图；B：0 份文件、0 张页面图。文档文字与文件检查另行提供。
Submission B provided no files, so it fails every requirement. Submission A is a substantive workbook, and its checked results are correct. Its 'Operator Output Data' sheet covers Week 1–48 in rows 5–436, with 9 operators per week. Machine and shift assignments match the input and stay constant across all weeks (Op1 M1 Day, Op2 M2 Night, etc.). All Week 1 daily values match the source file. Average Output and Total Output use formulas (AVERAGE and SUM wrapped in IF/COUNT). The rendered page shows conditional formatting marking Op1 (944/4,720) green as top performer and Op4 (760/3,800) red as bottom performer. The 'Dashboard' sheet has Start Week and End Week drop-downs (C6:C7) fed by a Week 1–48 list. These drive a 'Week Filter' helper column used as a filter in four pivot-style tables, which cover operator output, machine totals, Day/Night average output and a sorted YTD leaderboard. The pivot figures are correct: machines 12,935, 12,645 and 13,300; Day average 908.6 and Night average 808.25; leaderboard order Op1, Op5, Op9, Op3, Op7, Op6, Op2, Op8, Op4. The file check reports 4 charts. The KPI table is also correct: total 38,880; top operator Op1 at 4,720; top machine Machine 3 at 13,300; average per operator 4,320; Day 58.4% (22,715) and Night 41.6% (16,165). Weeks 2–48 are left blank as entry rows, which the task does not prohibit. A's remaining uncertainties are the items listed as missing evidence, but it is far more complete than B's empty submission.
裁判指出未能看到的材料：
- Workbook file name (whether it is titled 'Dashboard Output')
- Rendered Dashboard sheet: chart types (bar/pie/pie/bar), quadrant layout and KPI percentage formatting
- Confirmation that the Dashboard pivot-style tables are genuine PivotTable objects with a pivot cache, not static values
第 2 次 · Claude Opus 5.5 第 2 代 更好
A：Claude Opus 5.5 初代
B：Claude Opus 5.5 第 2 代
原题要求 · A：未完全满足；B：满足
本次提供的成果材料：A：0 份文件、0 张页面图；B：1 份文件、8 张页面图。文档文字与文件检查另行提供。
Submission A provided no files, so it delivers nothing. Submission B is a substantive workbook that meets the evidenced requirements.
**'Operator Output Data' sheet**
- It contains 432 data rows: Week 1 to Week 48 × Operators 1–9.
- Each operator keeps one machine and shift in every week (e.g., Op1 = Machine 1/Day, Op2 = Machine 2/Night), matching the input.
- The Week 1 Monday–Friday values match the attachment exactly for all nine operators.
- Average Output and Total Output are formulas (AVERAGE/SUM that show blank when there is no data).
- The rendered page shows conditional formatting: green for top (Op1 944.0 / 4,720) and red for bottom (Op4 760.0 / 3,800).
**'Dashboard' sheet**
- **Week selection:** C6 and C7 have data-validation lists for Start Week and End Week, using Week 1–48.
- **Four PivotTable-style blocks**, each with Week Filter/Week # page fields:
- (a) Operator totals summing to 38,880.
- (b) Machine totals: M1 12,935, M2 12,645, M3 13,300, which I verified.
- (c) Average Day/Night output: 908.6 and 808.25, both correct.
- (d) YTD leaderboard sorted descending, Op1 4,720 down to Op4 3,800.
- **Charts:** chart_count = 4, placed in a charts region.
- **KPI table:** all values check out.
- Total 38,880.
- Top operator Op1 at 4,720; top machine Machine 3 at 13,300.
- Average per operator 4,320.
- Day 58.4% (22,715) and Night 41.6% (16,165).
The extra 'Week Filter' helper column is harmless. B is clearly superior to an empty submission.
裁判指出未能看到的材料：
- Rendered pages of the Dashboard sheet were not provided, so chart types (bar vs pie) and the four-quadrant layout could not be visually verified
- Workbook filename ('Dashboard Output') not shown in the file checks
- Confirmation that the pivot blocks are genuine PivotTable objects (pivot caches) rather than static values
- Number formatting of the KPI shift-percentage cells (text dump shows raw decimals)
每位裁判先合并交换位置前后的判断；两位裁判方向一致时给出胜负或持平，否则保留分歧。