{
"summary": {
"total_cases": 160,
"processed_cases": 130,
"correct_cases": 10,
"accuracy": 0.07692307692307693
},
"results": [
{
"task_id": 103,
"task_intent": "Display the list of issues in the kkroening/ffmpeg-python repository that have labels related to questions",
"expected_ids": [
"US2"
],
"actual_ids": [
"US1",
"US1",
"US2"
],
"correct": false,
"model": "aiproxy/deepseek-reasoner",
"model_output": "\nOkay, let's tackle this task. The user wants to display the list of issues in the kkroening/ffmpeg-python repository on GitLab that have labels related to questions. \n\nFirst, I need to figure out the steps a GUI agent would take. Starting with navigation: the user would need to go to the specific repository. So, navigating to the repository's page is the first step. That aligns with US1 (Navigate To Page/Section).\n\nOnce on the repository page, the next step is to find the section where issues are listed. GitLab typically has a sidebar with options like Issues, Merge Requests, etc. So navigating to the Issues section is next, which is US1 again.\n\nNow, the user needs to filter these issues by labels related to questions. GitLab allows filtering issues using labels. The agent would use the filter feature, select the appropriate label(s) that are questions. This step is about filtering data, so US2 (Search/Filter/Sort Data) applies here.\n\nAfter applying the filter, the list of issues with those labels should be displayed. The agent might need to execute the filter action, maybe by clicking a button or just having the filter apply automatically. If it's automatic, then maybe no execution step is needed. But if there's a 'Apply' button, then US4 (Execute Action/Process) would be used. However, in many cases, the filter updates dynamically as you select labels, so maybe US4 isn't needed here. But to be safe, maybe include it as a step.\n\nWait, the example given in the universal strategies for US2 is \"Filter issues by the label 'Bug'.\" So perhaps in that case, selecting the label is part of US2, and no separate execution step is needed. So maybe the steps are: navigate to repo, navigate to issues, filter by label. So three steps, using US1, US1, US2.\n\nBut the user's output example for a similar task included US1, US3, US4. Hmm. Let me check the example again. The example task was generating a report with a date range. The strategies were navigate, configure parameters, execute. So in that case, configuring the date range (US3) and then executing (US4). \n\nIn this current task, filtering by label is part of US2. So perhaps the steps are:\n\n1. Navigate to the kkroening/ffmpeg-python repository (US1)\n2. Navigate to the Issues section (US1)\n3. Filter issues by labels related to questions (US2)\n\nBut maybe the filtering involves selecting the label from a dropdown or entering the label name, which would be part of US2. So the strategies would be those three steps. \n\nAlternatively, if after applying the filter, you need to click a button to apply the filter, then US4 would be needed. But in GitLab's interface, when you select a label from the filter, it automatically applies, so maybe no execution step. \n\nSo the final strategies would be:\n\n- Navigate to the kkroening/ffmpeg-python repository (US1)\n- Navigate to the Issues section (US1)\n- Filter the issues by labels related to questions (US2)\n\nTherefore, the universal strategies used are US1, US1, US2. But since the strategies list can't have duplicates, the universal_strategies and their IDs would list US1 once, but the steps can have multiple instances. Wait, the output example had \"Navigate To Page/Section\" once even though there were two navigation steps. Wait, looking at the output example:\n\nIn the example, the strategies were:\n\n1. Navigate to Bestsellers Report (US1)\n2. Configure Report Parameters for January 2023 (US3)\n3. Generate and Review Bestsellers Report (US4)\n\nThe universal_strategies list was [\"Navigate To Page/Section\", \"Configure Parameters/Settings\", \"Execute Action/Process\"], and the IDs [\"US1\", \"US3\", \"US4\"]. So each step's strategy is listed, even if the same US is used multiple times. Wait, no. Wait in the example, the three steps each used different US. So in the current case, if two steps are US1, then the universal_strategies list would have \"Navigate To Page/Section\" twice? But in the output example, the strategies array can have multiple steps using the same US, but the universal_strategies array lists each US used, even if repeated. Wait, no. Let me check the output example again.\n\nThe output example's strategies array had three steps, each mapped to a different US. So the universal_strategies array had three entries, each unique. But in the current case, two steps use US1. So the universal_strategies array would include \"Navigate To Page/Section\" twice? Or does the array list unique USs? The output example's universal_strategies array had the same order as the steps. So if two steps use US1, the array would list it twice. But looking at the example:\n\nOriginal task: \"What are the top-3 best-selling product in Jan 2023\"\n\nStrategies:\n\n1. Navigate to Bestsellers Report (US1)\n2. Configure Report Parameters for January 2023 (US3)\n3. Generate and Review Bestsellers Report (US4)\n\nSo the universal_strategies array is [\"Navigate To Page/Section\", \"Configure Parameters/Settings\", \"Execute Action/Process\"], and the IDs [\"US1\", \"US3\", \"US4\"].\n\nSo each step's US is listed in order, even if repeated. So in the current case, if two steps are US1, then the universal_strategies array would have two entries of US1. But in the current task, the steps are:\n\n1. Navigate to the repository (US1)\n2. Navigate to the Issues section (US1)\n3. Filter by labels (US2)\n\nSo the universal_strategies array would be [\"Navigate To Page/Section\", \"Navigate To Page/Section\", \"Search/Filter/Sort Data\"], and the IDs [\"US1\", \"US1\", \"US2\"].\n\nBut in the output example, the strategies array's steps are mapped to a US, but the universal_strategies array lists each US in order. So even if a US is used multiple times, it's listed each time. So in this case, the universal_strategies array would have US1 twice and US2 once.\n\nBut looking at the output example, the user's example had three steps with three unique USs, so the array had three entries. But in this case, two steps use US1. So the universal_strategies array would list US1 for each occurrence.\n\nBut perhaps the user's example is just one possible case, and the actual answer should list each US in order, even if repeated.\n\nSo the answer would be:\n\nstrategies: [\n \"Navigate to the kkroening/ffmpeg-python repository\",\n \"Navigate to the Issues section\",\n \"Filter issues by labels related to questions\"\n],\nuniversal_strategies: [\n \"Navigate To Page/Section\",\n \"Navigate To Page/Section\",\n \"Search/Filter/Sort Data\"\n],\nuniversal_strategy_ids: [\"US1\", \"US1\", \"US2\"]\n\nBut maybe the system expects to list each unique US once. Wait, the output example's universal_strategies array had the same order as the steps. So if a step uses US1, then the array includes it each time. So in this case, two US1 entries. But perhaps the system expects that. Let me check the instructions again.\n\nThe output requirements say: \"include your final strategy design, alongside the referenced universal strategies and their IDs.\" So the universal_strategies and their IDs should correspond to each step. So each step's strategy is mapped to a US, and the universal_strategies array lists them in order. So even if a US is used multiple times, it's listed each time.\n\nTherefore, the correct answer would have three strategies, each mapped to their respective US1, US1, US2. So the universal_strategies array would have three entries, two US1 and one US2.\n\nBut in the example given, the user's answer had three steps with three different USs, so the array had three entries. So in this case, the answer should follow the same structure.\n\nSo the final answer would be as follows.\n\n\n```json\n{\n \"task_id\": 103,\n \"strategies\": [\n \"Navigate to the kkroening/ffmpeg-python repository\",\n \"Navigate to the Issues section\",\n \"Filter issues by labels related to questions\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategies\": [\n \"Navigate To Page/Section\",\n \"Navigate To Page/Section\",\n \"Search/Filter/Sort Data\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategy_ids\": [\"US1\", \"US1\", \"US2\"]\n}\n```",
"model_reasoning": null
},
{
"task_id": 109,
"task_intent": "Presents the monthly count of successful orders from Jan to December 2022 in MM:COUNT format",
"expected_ids": [
"US1",
"US3",
"US4"
],
"actual_ids": [
"US1",
"US3",
"US4",
"US6"
],
"correct": false,
"model": "aiproxy/deepseek-reasoner",
"model_output": "\nOkay, let's tackle this task. The user wants the monthly count of successful orders from January to December 2022 in MM:COUNT format. First, I need to figure out the steps a GUI agent would take on a shopping admin site.\n\nStarting with navigation. The agent probably needs to go to a reports section, maybe the Orders Report page. That's US1: Navigate To Page/Section.\n\nNext, configuring the parameters. The report needs to cover the entire year 2022, so setting the date range from January 1 to December 31, 2022. Also, filtering to only include successful orders. That's US3: Configure Parameters/Settings.\n\nThen, generating the report. Clicking the generate or run report action. That's US4: Execute Action/Process.\n\nOnce the report is there, the agent needs to extract the data. For each month, get the count. But since the output needs monthly counts, maybe the report can be grouped by month. So the agent would retrieve each month's count. That's US6: Extract/Retrieve Information.\n\nWait, but the report might list all orders, so maybe the agent needs to sort or group by month. Alternatively, the report might have a monthly breakdown. If not, the agent might have to adjust parameters to group by month. But the user's task is to present the count for each month, so the agent needs to ensure the report is structured that way. Maybe another configuration for grouping by month. So perhaps another step under US3.\n\nAlternatively, maybe after generating the report, the agent has to process each month's data. But the main steps would be navigate, configure dates and status, generate, then extract the monthly counts. So strategies would be:\n\n1. Navigate to the Orders Report section (US1)\n2. Configure the report parameters for the date range and filter successful orders (US3)\n3. Generate the report (US4)\n4. Extract the monthly counts (US6)\n\nBut wait, the output example for task 4 had three steps. Here, maybe the extraction is part of the process. So the strategies would be:\n\n- Navigate to the Orders Report page.\n- Configure the date range from Jan to Dec 2022 and filter by successful orders.\n- Generate the report to view monthly counts.\n- Extract each month's successful order count.\n\nBut the output example had three steps\". Maybe combine configure and generate? Or perhaps the extraction is part of viewing the data. Hmm. Let me check the universal strategies. US6 is Extract/Retrieve Information, which is about reading and capturing data. So that's a separate step.\n\nSo the strategies would be:\n\n1. Navigate to the Orders Report page (US1)\n2. Configure parameters for date range and status (US3)\n3. Generate the report (US4)\n4. Extract monthly counts (US6)\n\nBut the user wants the output in MM:COUNT format. So the agent needs to retrieve each month's count. If the report is already grouped by month, then extraction is straightforward. Otherwise, the agent might need to process the data, but according to the universal strategies, US6 is for extracting info. So that's a valid step.\n\nSo the strategies array would have four steps. But looking at the output example, sometimes steps are combined. For example, in the example, \"Generate and Review Bestsellers Report\" is one step. Maybe here, \"Generate the report and view monthly counts\" could be a step. But according to the universal strategies, generating is US4, and viewing details is US5. But in this case, after generating, the data is displayed, so extraction (US6) is needed.\n\nSo the strategies would be:\n\n- Navigate To Page/Section (US1)\n- Configure Parameters/Settings (US3)\n- Execute Action/Process (US4)\n- Extract/Retrieve Information (US6)\n\nThus, four strategies. But the output example had three. Maybe the extraction is part of the execute step? No, because executing is generating the report, and extraction is a separate action. So the answer should include all four steps. Let me check the universal strategies again.\n\nYes, US6 is for extracting. So the strategies would be:\n\n1. Navigate to the Orders Report page.\n2. Set the date range from January to December 2022 and filter by successful orders.\n3. Generate the report to display the data.\n4. Extract the monthly order counts in MM:COUNT format.\n\nSo the universal strategies used are US1, US3, US4, US6. But the output example for task 4 had three steps. However, the user's task here requires extraction, so it's necessary. Therefore, the JSON should include four strategies and the corresponding US IDs.\n\n\n```json\n{\n \"task_id\": 109,\n \"strategies\": [\n \"Navigate to the Orders Report section\",\n \"Configure the report parameters to include January 1, 2022 - December 31, 2022 date range and filter by 'Successful' status\",\n \"Generate the monthly orders report\",\n \"Extract monthly order counts in MM:COUNT format from the generated report\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategies\": [\n \"Navigate To Page/Section\",\n \"Configure Parameters/Settings\",\n \"Execute Action/Process\",\n \"Extract/Retrieve Information\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategy_ids\": [\"US1\", \"US3\", \"US4\", \"US6\"]\n}\n```",
"model_reasoning": null
},
{
"task_id": 115,
"task_intent": "Show me the name of the customers who have expressed dissatisfaction with Chloe tank",
"expected_ids": [
"US1",
"US2"
],
"actual_ids": [
"US1",
"US2",
"US7",
"US6"
],
"correct": false,
"model": "aiproxy/deepseek-reasoner",
"model_output": "\nOkay, let's tackle this task. The user wants to find the names of customers who were dissatisfied with the Chloe tank product. First, I need to figure out how to approach this on a shopping admin site. \n\nStarting with navigation. The admin site probably has a section for customer reviews or feedback. So step one would be to go to that section. That's US1, Navigate To Page/Section.\n\nNext, once in the reviews section, I need to filter the data. The product in question is the Chloe tank, so I should be set to only show reviews for that product. Also, filtering by negative sentiment or keywords like \"dissatisfied\" would help. That's US2, Search/Filter/Sort Data.\n\nAfter filtering, the agent would need to look through the reviews. They might have to read each review to check for dissatisfaction mentions. That's US7, Analyze/Evaluate/Verify Data. \n\nThen, from those filtered reviews, extract the customer names. That's US6, Extract/Retrieve Information.\n\nPutting it all together: navigate to the reviews, filter by product and sentiment, analyze the content, and extract the names. The strategies would be in that order, referencing the appropriate US IDs.\n\n\n```json\n{\n \"task_id\": 115,\n \"strategies\": [\n \"Navigate to Customer Reviews/Feedback Section\",\n \"Filter Reviews for 'Chloe Tank' Product and Negative Sentiment\",\n \"Analyze Reviews to Identify Dissatisfaction Mentions\",\n \"Extract Customer Names from Identified Reviews\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategies\": [\n \"Navigate To Page/Section\",\n \"Search/Filter/Sort Data\",\n \"Analyze/Evaluate/Verify Data\",\n \"Extract/Retrieve Information\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategy_ids\": [\"US1\", \"US2\", \"US7\", \"US6\"]\n}\n```",
"model_reasoning": null
},
{
"task_id": 117,
"task_intent": "What is the date when I made my first purchase on this site?",
"expected_ids": [
"US1",
"US5",
"US6"
],
"actual_ids": [
"US1",
"US2",
"US5",
"US6"
],
"correct": false,
"model": "aiproxy/deepseek-reasoner",
"model_output": "\nOkay, let's tackle this task. The user wants to know the date of their first purchase on the shopping site. First, I need to figure out how to get that information.\n\nHmm, the user probably needs to access their order history. So the first step would be navigating to the order history page. That's like US1, Navigate To Page/Section. Then, once they're there, the orders might be sorted by date by default, but maybe not. To find the first purchase, they might need to sort the orders from oldest to newest. That would be US2, Search/Filter/Sort Data. After sorting, the oldest order would be at the top. The user would then look at the details of that first order to get the purchase date. That's US5, View/Inspect Item Details. Finally, extracting the date from the details would be US6, Extract/Retrieve Information.\n\nWait, but do they need to execute any action like generating a report? Probably not. Just navigating, sorting, viewing, and extracting. Let me check the universal strategies again. US1 for navigation, US2 for sorting, US5 for viewing details, and US6 for extracting the date. That makes sense. So the strategies would be: go to order history, sort by date ascending, check the first order, and note the purchase date. The corresponding US IDs are 1, 2, 5, 6. Yeah, that should cover it.\n\n\n```json\n{\n \"task_id\": 117,\n \"strategies\": [\n \"Navigate to Order History page\",\n \"Sort orders by purchase date (oldest first)\",\n \"View details of the first order in the sorted list\",\n \"Retrieve the purchase date from the order details\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategies\": [\n \"Navigate To Page/Section\",\n \"Search/Filter/Sort Data\",\n \"View/Inspect Item Details\",\n \"Extract/Retrieve Information\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategy_ids\": [\"US1\", \"US2\", \"US5\", \"US6\"]\n}\n```",
"model_reasoning": null
},
{
"task_id": 123,
"task_intent": "Tell me the reasons why customers like Circe's products",
"expected_ids": [
"US1",
"US7",
"US5"
],
"actual_ids": [
"US1",
"US2",
"US7",
"US8",
"US6"
],
"correct": false,
"model": "aiproxy/deepseek-reasoner",
"model_output": "\nOkay, let's tackle this task. The user wants to know why customers like Circe's products. The site is shopping_admin, so I need to think about how an admin would find this information.\n\nFirst, I need to figure out where customer feedback is stored. Probably in product reviews or ratings. So the first step would be navigating to the product reviews section. That's US1: Navigate To Page/Section.\n\nNext, once on the reviews page, the admin would need to filter the reviews specifically for Circe's products. Maybe there's a search bar or a filter by product name. That's US2: Search/Filter/Sort Data.\n\nAfter filtering, the admin needs to look through the reviews to find common positive themes. They might read through the comments to identify recurring reasons like quality, price, etc. This analysis step is US7: Analyze/Evaluate/Verify Data.\n\nThen, the admin might need to check multiple pages of reviews if there are many. Using pagination controls would be US8: Navigate Within Data/Results.\n\nFinally, extracting the top reasons from the analysis would involve retrieving the identified reasons, which is US6: Extract/Retrieve Information.\n\nPutting it all together, the strategies would involve navigating, filtering, analyzing, navigating through pages, and extracting info. The corresponding universal strategies are US1, US2, US7, US8, US6.\n\n\n```json\n{\n \"task_id\": 123,\n \"strategies\": [\n \"Navigate to Product Reviews/Ratings Section\",\n \"Filter Reviews for Circe's Products\",\n \"Analyze Review Content for Positive Feedback Themes\",\n \"Navigate Through Review Pages of Results\",\n \"Extract Common Reasons from Customer Reviews\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategies\": [\n \"Navigate To Page/Section\",\n \"Search/Filter/Sort Data\",\n \"Analyze/Evaluate/Verify Data\",\n \"Navigate Within Data/Results\",\n \"Extract/Retrieve Information\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategy_ids\": [\"US1\", \"US2\", \"US7\", \"US8\", \"US6\"]\n}\n```",
"model_reasoning": null
},
{
"task_id": 125,
"task_intent": "What is the price range of teeth grinding mouth guard in the One Stop Market?",
"expected_ids": [
"US2",
"US2",
"US8"
],
"actual_ids": [
"US2",
"US2",
"US2",
"US6"
],
"correct": false,
"model": "aiproxy/deepseek-reasoner",
"model_output": "\nOkay, let's tackle this task. The user wants to know the price range of teeth grinding mouth guards in the One Stop Market on the shopping site.\n\nSo, first, I need to figure out how to approach this. The user is probably on a shopping platform, maybe an admin or a customer interface. Since the site is \"shopping,\" it's likely a customer-facing site. The user needs to find the price range, which means they need to see all the available options and their prices.\n\nFirst step: Navigate to the section where mouth guards are listed. Maybe there's a search bar. So, searching for \"teeth grinding mouth guard\" would make sense. That's using the Search/Filter/Sort Data strategy (US2). Then, once the results are displayed, the user might need to sort them by price to see the lowest and highest. That's also part of US2. After that, they need to look at the prices, extract the minimum and maximum to determine the range. That's Extract/Retrieve Information (US6). Finally, maybe they need to check if all results are from One Stop Market, so perhaps filtering by seller or store. Wait, the task specifies \"in the One Stop Market,\" so maybe there's a filter for the store. So first, search for the product, then apply a filter for the One Stop Market, then sort by price, and then extract the min and max prices. \n\nSo the steps would be: 1. Search for the product. 2. Filter by the specific store. 3. Sort the results by price. 4. Extract the price range. The corresponding universal strategies would be US2 (search and filter), US2 again (sort), and US6 (extract info). But the example shows that each step can be a separate strategy even if they use the same US. So the strategies array would list each action step, each mapped to the appropriate US.\n\n\n```json\n{\n \"task_id\": 125,\n \"strategies\": [\n \"Search for 'teeth grinding mouth guard' products\",\n \"Filter results to show items from One Stop Market\",\n \"Sort products by price (low to high)\",\n \"Extract minimum and maximum prices from the sorted list\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategies\": [\n \"Search/Filter/Sort Data\",\n \"Search/Filter/Sort Data\",\n \"Search/Filter/Sort Data\",\n \"Extract/Retrieve Information\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategy_ids\": [\"US2\", \"US2\", \"US2\", \"US6\"]\n}\n```",
"model_reasoning": null
},
{
"task_id": 127,
"task_intent": "What brands appear most frequently among the top search terms?",
"expected_ids": [
"US1",
"US7"
],
"actual_ids": [
"US1",
"US3",
"US4",
"US7"
],
"correct": false,
"model": "aiproxy/deepseek-reasoner",
"model_output": "\nOkay, let's tackle this task. The user wants to know which brands appear most frequently among the top search terms on the shopping admin site. \n\nFirst, I need to figure out where the top search terms are located. The admin site probably has a section for search analytics or search terms reports. So the first step would be navigating to that page. That's US1: Navigate To Page/Section.\n\nOnce there, the user might need to adjust the parameters to get the right data. Maybe set a specific time frame or filter to show top terms. That's US3: Configure Parameters/Settings.\n\nAfter configuring, generating the report would be next. Clicking a button to execute the action, which is US4: Execute Action/Process.\n\nNow, the report is generated. The user needs to look through the data to identify the brands. They might involve analyzing the terms to see which brands are mentioned most. That's US7: Analyze/Evaluate/Verify Data.\n\nSo the strategies would be: navigate to the search terms report, configure the settings, generate the report, and then check which brands are frequent. The corresponding universal strategies are US1, US3, US4, and US7.\n\n\n```json\n{\n \"task_id\": 127,\n \"strategies\": [\n \"Navigate to Search Terms Analytics Page\",\n \"Configure Search Terms Report Parameters (e.g., time range, top N terms)\",\n \"Generate Search Terms Report\",\n \"Analyze Top Search Terms to Identify Recurring Brand Names\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategies\": [\n \"Navigate To Page/Section\",\n \"Configure Parameters/Settings\",\n \"Execute Action/Process\",\n \"Analyze/Evaluate/Verify Data\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategy_ids\": [\"US1\", \"US3\", \"US4\", \"US7\"]\n}\n```",
"model_reasoning": null
},
{
"task_id": 131,
"task_intent": "What's the total number of items sold in the most recent 7 orders?",
"expected_ids": [
"US1",
"US2",
"US6",
"US4"
],
"actual_ids": [
"US1",
"US2",
"US5",
"US6",
"US7"
],
"correct": false,
"model": "aiproxy/deepseek-reasoner",
"model_output": "\nOkay, let's tackle this task. The user wants to know the total number of items sold in the most recent 7 orders on the shopping admin site.\n\nFirst, I need to figure out where to find order information. The shopping admin probably has an Orders section or page. So the first step is navigating there. That's US1: Navigate To Page/Section.\n\nOnce on the Orders page, the orders are likely listed in a table. The most recent orders would be at the top, but maybe they need to be sorted by date. So I should sort the orders by date in case they aren't already. That's part of US2: Search/Filter/Sort Data. Sorting ensures the most recent are first.\n\nNext, the user needs the 7 most recent orders. If the default view doesn't show enough, maybe adjust the number of orders per page or navigate through pages. But since it's the most recent, maybe the first page has them. Alternatively, using a filter to show the last 7. But the strategy would involve either filtering or sorting to get those 7. So configuring parameters or using sort, which falls under US2 or US3. Wait, US2 includes sorting, so maybe that's covered in the second step.\n\nAfter getting the list of the 7 orders, each order's details would show the number of items. So I have to view each of the 7 orders. That's US5: View/Inspect Item Details. For each order, open the details to see how many items were sold.\n\nThen, extract the number of items from each order. That's US6: Extract/Retrieve Information. Summing those numbers would be part of analyzing the data, which is US7: Analyze/Evaluate/Verify Data.\n\nPutting it all together: navigate to orders, sort to get recent ones, view each of the 7 orders, extract the item counts, sum them. But the steps need to be actionable. So the strategies would be:\n\n1. Navigate to the Orders page (US1).\n2. Sort orders by date to get the most recent (US2).\n3. View the details of the first 7 orders (US5 for each, but maybe a step to access all 7).\n4. Extract the number of items from each order (US6).\n5. Sum the numbers (US7).\n\nBut the strategies need to be concise steps. Maybe:\n\n- Navigate to Orders Section (US1)\n- Sort Orders by Most Recent Date (US2)\n- View Details of the First 7 Orders (US5)\n- Retrieve Item Counts from Each Order (US6)\n- Calculate Total Items Sold (US7)\n\nBut the problem is, the actual steps might involve checking each order one by one. So the agent would need to iterate through each of the 7 orders. But in strategy terms, it's more about the steps rather than the loop. So the strategies would be:\n\n1. Navigate to the Orders page (US1)\n2. Sort orders by date descending (US2)\n3. For the first 7 orders, open each to view details (US5)\n4. Extract the quantity of items from each order (US6)\n5. Sum all quantities to get the total (US7)\n\nBut how to present this as strategies? The strategies should be a list of steps. So maybe:\n\n1. Navigate to the Recent Orders section.\n2. Sort orders to display the most recent first.\n3. Access each of the latest seven orders to retrieve item counts.\n4. Sum the item counts from the seven orders.\n\nBut the universal strategies would map to US1, US2, US5, US6, US7. But the steps need to be in order. Let's check the example given. The example had three steps for a similar task. Maybe here, the steps would be:\n\n- Navigate to Orders Page (US1)\n- Sort Orders by Date to Identify Most Recent (US2)\n- Inspect Each of the 7 Most Recent Orders (US5)\n- Extract and Sum Item Quantities (US6 and US7 combined?)\n\nBut the output example combined steps. For instance, \"Generate and Review Bestsellers Report\" was one step but mapped to US4. So maybe here, the steps are:\n\n1. Navigate to the Orders Management page. (US1)\n2. Sort the list to show the most recent orders first. (US2)\n3. Open each of the latest seven orders to view item quantities. (US5)\n4. Calculate the total number of items from these orders. (US7)\n\nBut extracting the item counts is US6, and summing is US7. So maybe:\n\nStrategies:\n\n1. Navigate to the Orders section. (US1)\n2. Sort orders by date descending to list the most recent first. (US2)\n3. Access the details of the first seven orders. (US5)\n4. Retrieve the number of items from each order. (US6)\n5. Sum the item counts to find the total. (US7)\n\nBut the output example had three steps. Maybe combine some steps. For example, \"Access the details of the first seven orders and retrieve item counts\" could be two steps. But the user's example had three steps for a similar task. Let me check the example task was \"What are the top-3 best-selling product in Jan 2023\" and the strategies were:\n\n1. Navigate to Bestsellers Report\n2. Configure Report Parameters for January 2023\n3. Generate and Review Bestsellers Report\n\nSo three steps. So perhaps for this task, the steps would be:\n\n1. Navigate to the Orders page. (US1)\n2. Sort and filter to list the most recent seven orders. (US2)\n3. Extract item counts and calculate total. (US6 and US7)\n\nWait, how to get the seven orders? Maybe after sorting, the first seven are the most recent. So step 2 is sort by date descending. Then step 3 is view each of the first seven orders. Then extract and sum. But the strategies need to be concise. So perhaps:\n\nStrategies:\n\n1. Navigate to the Orders page. (US1)\n2. Sort orders by most recent to identify the latest seven. (US2)\n3. Review each of the seven orders to retrieve item quantities. (US5, US6)\n4. Sum the quantities to determine the total. (US7)\n\nBut the example had three steps. Maybe combine steps 3 and 4 into one. But the example had \"Generate and Review\" as one step. So perhaps:\n\nStrategies:\n\n1. Navigate to the Orders Management page. (US1)\n2. Sort orders by date to display the most recent first. (US2)\n3. Extract item counts from the latest seven orders and sum them. (US6, US7)\n\nBut how to map the universal strategies. The third step would involve US6 and US7. But the example had three steps with three US. So maybe:\n\nStrategies:\n\n1. Navigate to the Orders section. (US1)\n2. Sort orders to list the most recent first. (US2)\n3. Retrieve and sum item counts from the first seven orders. (US6, US7)\n\nBut the third step combines two US. However, the output example's third step was \"Generate and Review Bestsellers Report\" which mapped to US4 (Execute Action/Process). So perhaps the third step here is \"Retrieve and sum\" which would be US6 and US7. But the problem is that the universal strategies are per step. So each step must be mapped to one US. So perhaps:\n\nStep 3: Retrieve item counts from each of the seven orders (US6)\nStep 4: Calculate the total sum (US7)\n\nBut the example had three steps. Maybe the user's answer allows four steps. Let's see. The output example had three steps. But the user's answer can have more steps. Let's proceed.\n\nSo the strategies:\n\n1. Navigate to the Orders page. (US1)\n2. Sort the list by order date in descending order. (US2)\n3. Access the details of the first seven orders. (US5)\n4. Extract the number of items from each order. (US6)\n5. Sum the extracted numbers to get the total. (US7)\n\nBut that's five steps. The example had three. Maybe some steps can be combined. For example, accessing the details and extracting can be one step. But each step should correspond to a US. So perhaps:\n\n1. Navigate to Orders Page (US1)\n2. Sort orders to show most recent first (US2)\n3. Open each of the seven orders to view details (US5)\n4. Retrieve item counts from each order (US6)\n5. Calculate total items sold (US7)\n\nBut maybe the user's answer expects fewer steps. Alternatively, maybe the steps are:\n\n1. Navigate to the Orders section. (US1)\n2. Sort orders by date to display the most recent. (US2)\n3. For the first seven orders, retrieve the quantity of items sold. (US6)\n4. Sum the quantities to find the total. (US7)\n\nBut step 3 would involve viewing the details (US5) and then extracting (US6). So perhaps step 3 is \"Inspect the first seven orders and retrieve item counts\" which combines US5 and US6. But each step can only have one US. So maybe:\n\nStrategies:\n\n1. Navigate to the Orders page. (US1)\n2. Sort orders by most recent. (US2)\n3. View details of each of the seven orders. (US5)\n4. Extract item counts from each order. (US6)\n5. Sum the counts to get the total. (US7)\n\nBut that's five steps. However, the example had three steps. Maybe the answer can have more steps. The key is to map each step to a US. So the correct approach is to list each step with its corresponding US.\n\nSo the final answer would be:\n\nStrategies:\n1. Navigate to the Orders management page. (US1)\n2. Sort the orders by date in descending order to list the most recent first. (US2)\n3. Open each of the first seven orders to view their details. (US5)\n4. Retrieve the number of items sold from each order's details. (US6)\n5. Calculate the total number of items by summing the retrieved values. (US7)\n\nUniversal strategies: US1, US2, US5, US6, US7.\n\nBut the example had three steps. Maybe the user's answer allows more steps. Let's check the output example again. The example had three steps and three US. But the current task may require more steps. So the answer should include all necessary steps with their corresponding US.\n\nSo the JSON would be:\n\n{\n \"task_id\": 131,\n \"strategies\": [\n \"Navigate to the Orders management page\",\n \"Sort orders by most recent date\",\n \"Inspect the details of the first seven orders\",\n \"Retrieve the item count from each order\",\n \"Sum the item counts to find the total\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategies\": [\n \"Navigate To Page/Section\",\n \"Search/Filter/Sort Data\",\n \"View/Inspect Item Details\",\n \"Extract/Retrieve Information\",\n \"Analyze/Evaluate/Verify Data\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategy_ids\": [\"US1\", \"US2\", \"US5\", \"US6\", \"US7\"]\n}\n\n\n```json\n{\n \"task_id\": 131,\n \"strategies\": [\n \"Navigate to the Orders management page\",\n \"Sort orders by most recent date\",\n \"Inspect the details of the first seven orders\",\n \"Retrieve the item count from each order\",\n \"Sum the item counts to find the total\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategies\": [\n \"Navigate To Page/Section\",\n \"Search/Filter/Sort Data\",\n \"View/Inspect Item Details\",\n \"Extract/Retrieve Information\",\n \"Analyze/Evaluate/Verify Data\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategy_ids\": [\"US1\", \"US2\", \"US5\", \"US6\", \"US7\"]\n}\n```",
"model_reasoning": null
},
{
"task_id": 139,
"task_intent": "What is the estimated driving time between the hometown of Joe Biden and Bridgeport?",
"expected_ids": [
"US1",
"US3",
"US6"
],
"actual_ids": [
"US1",
"US3",
"US4",
"US6"
],
"correct": false,
"model": "aiproxy/deepseek-reasoner",
"model_output": "\nOkay, let's tackle this task. The user wants to know the estimated driving time between Joe Biden's hometown and Bridgeport. First, I need to figure out where Joe Biden's hometown is. I remember he's from Scranton, Pennsylvania. So the starting point is Scranton, PA, and the destination is Bridgeport, which one? There are several Bridgeports in the US. The most likely one might be Bridgeport, Connecticut, but I should confirm. However, as a GUI agent, maybe the user expects the system to handle that ambiguity.\n\nNext, the steps would involve using a map application. The first step is to navigate to the map site. Then, input the starting location as Scranton, PA, and the destination as Bridgeport. The system might need to select the correct Bridgeport, perhaps based on proximity or user selection. Once the route is plotted, the driving time estimate is usually displayed. So the strategies would be: navigate to the map, set the start and end points, maybe configure options like driving mode, and then retrieve the time. \n\nLooking at the universal strategies, navigating to the page is US1. Setting the start and end points could be part of configuring parameters (US3). Executing the route calculation would be US4. Then viewing the details (US5) and extracting the time (US6). Wait, but maybe configuring the start and end is part of US3. Then executing the action to get the route. Then the time is displayed, so extract that info. So the strategies would be: navigate to the map site, input the locations, generate the route, and then extract the time. So the universal strategies would be US1, US3, US4, US6. But maybe the inputting locations is part of US3 (configure parameters). Let me check the example. In the example, \"Configure Report Parameters\" is US3. So here, setting the start and end points is configuring parameters. Then executing the action (US4) to get the route. Then extract the time (US6). So the strategies would be:\n\n1. Navigate to the map application. (US1)\n2. Configure the start and end points (Scranton and Bridgeport). (US3)\n3. Generate the driving route. (US4)\n4. Retrieve the estimated driving time. (US6)\n\nBut maybe step 2 and 3 are part of the same action. Wait, maybe after inputting the locations, the map automatically shows the route, so executing the action might be implicit. Alternatively, after setting the parameters, the user clicks a \"Get directions\" button, which is US4. Then the time is displayed, so extract it. So the strategies would be:\n\n- Navigate to the map site (US1)\n- Set start and destination locations (US3)\n- Execute the route calculation (US4)\n- Extract the driving time (US6)\n\nYes, that makes sense. So the strategies are those four steps, using US1, US3, US4, US6. Let me check the universal strategies again. US3 is configuring parameters, which in this case are the start and end points. US4 is executing the action, like clicking \"Get Directions\". Then US6 is extracting the time from the displayed result. So the final answer should list these steps and the corresponding US IDs.\n\n\n```json\n{\n \"task_id\": 139,\n \"strategies\": [\n \"Navigate to the map application\",\n \"Configure start location (Joe Biden's hometown: Scranton, PA) and destination (Bridgeport)\",\n \"Generate driving route between the locations\",\n \"Retrieve the estimated driving time from the route details\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategies\": [\n \"Navigate To Page/Section\",\n \"Configure Parameters/Settings\",\n \"Execute Action/Process\",\n \"Extract/Retrieve Information\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategy_ids\": [\"US1\", \"US3\", \"US4\", \"US6\"]\n}\n```",
"model_reasoning": null
},
{
"task_id": 149,
"task_intent": "What is the color configuration of the artifical plants I bought Feb 2023",
"expected_ids": [
"US1",
"US2",
"US6"
],
"actual_ids": [
"US1",
"US2",
"US5",
"US6"
],
"correct": false,
"model": "aiproxy/deepseek-reasoner",
"model_output": "\nOkay, let's tackle this task. The user wants to know the color configuration of artificial plants they bought in February 2023. First, I need to figure out how they would find this information on a shopping site.\n\nStep 1: They probably need to go to their order history. On most shopping sites, there's a section like \"My Orders\" where past purchases are listed. So navigating to that page makes sense. That's US1 (Navigate To Page/Section).\n\nStep 2: Once in the order history, they need to find the specific order from February 2023. They might use the filter or search function to narrow down the orders by date. Applying a date filter for February 2023 would help locate the right order. That's US2 (Search/Filter/Sort Data).\n\nStep 3: After finding the order, they need to view the details of the artificial plants product. Clicking on the order to see more specifics would show the product details, including color configuration. That's US5 (View/Inspect Item Details).\n\nStep 4: Finally, within the product details, they would look for the color information. Extracting that specific data from the details page is necessary. That's US6 (Extract/Retrieve Information).\n\nSo the strategies involve navigating to the orders, filtering, viewing details, and extracting the color info. The corresponding universal strategies are US1, US2, US5, and US6.\n\n\n```json\n{\n \"task_id\": 149,\n \"strategies\": [\n \"Navigate to Order History page\",\n \"Filter orders by February 2023 date range\",\n \"View details of the artificial plants order\",\n \"Retrieve color configuration from product details\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategies\": [\n \"Navigate To Page/Section\",\n \"Search/Filter/Sort Data\",\n \"View/Inspect Item Details\",\n \"Extract/Retrieve Information\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategy_ids\": [\"US1\", \"US2\", \"US5\", \"US6\"]\n}\n```",
"model_reasoning": null
},
{
"task_id": 15,
"task_intent": "Tell me the the number of reviews that our store received by far that mention term \"best\"",
"expected_ids": [
"US1",
"US2",
"US6"
],
"actual_ids": [
"US1",
"US2",
"US6"
],
"correct": true,
"model": "aiproxy/deepseek-reasoner",
"model_output": "\nOkay, let's tackle this task. The user wants to know the number of reviews their store has received so far that mention the term \"best\". The site involved is the shopping_admin. \n\nFirst, I need to figure out how to get that information. In a typical admin interface, there's probably a section where reviews are managed. So the first step would be navigating to the reviews page or section. That aligns with US1 (Navigate To Page/Section).\n\nOnce on the reviews page, the next step is to filter the reviews to find those containing the word \"best\". This would involve using a search or filter feature, which is covered by US2 (Search/Filter/Sort Data). The user might enter \"best\" into a search bar or apply a keyword filter.\n\nAfter applying the filter, the system should display only the reviews with \"best\". Then, the agent needs to determine how many there are. This might involve looking at a count displayed on the page, which would be part of US6 (Extract/Retrieve Information). The count could be shown as a number next to the search results or in a summary section.\n\nWait, but maybe after filtering, the agent needs to check if the count is directly visible. If not, they might have to navigate through pages and sum the numbers, but the task says \"by far\", which implies all reviews up to now. So the filter should capture all instances, and the count should be available without pagination. So the main steps are navigate to reviews, filter by \"best\", then retrieve the count. \n\nSo the strategies would be: Navigate to the reviews section, filter reviews to include \"best\", then extract the number of reviews. The corresponding universal strategies are US1, US2, US6. Let me check the universal strategies again to confirm.\n\nUS1 is about navigating to a page/section. US2 is search/filter/sort. US6 is extract/retrieve info. That fits. So the strategy steps would be:\n\n1. Navigate to the store reviews section.\n2. Filter reviews to show those containing the term \"best\".\n3. Retrieve the total number of filtered reviews.\n\nThe universal strategy IDs would be US1, US2, US6.\n\n\n```json\n{\n \"task_id\": 15,\n \"strategies\": [\n \"Navigate to the store reviews section\",\n \"Filter reviews to include the term \\\"best\\\"\",\n \"Retrieve the total count of matching reviews\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategies\": [\n \"Navigate To Page/Section\",\n \"Search/Filter/Sort Data\",\n \"Extract/Retrieve Information\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategy_ids\": [\"US1\", \"US2\", \"US6\"]\n}\n```",
"model_reasoning": null
},
{
"task_id": 155,
"task_intent": "What is the minimum travel time by car from Animal Rescue League of Pittsburgh to Schenley park?",
"expected_ids": [
"US2",
"US4",
"US4"
],
"actual_ids": [
"US1",
"US3",
"US3",
"US4",
"US7",
"US6"
],
"correct": false,
"model": "aiproxy/deepseek-reasoner",
"model_output": "\nOkay, let's tackle this task. The user wants to find the minimum travel time by car from the Animal Rescue League of Pittsburgh to Schenley Park using a map site. \n\nFirst, I need to figure out the steps a user would take on a map service. The first thing would be to navigate to the directions feature. That's probably US1, Navigate To Page/Section. Then, they need to input the starting point and destination. That might fall under US9 or US10, but looking at the universal strategies, US9 is Create Item, which doesn't fit. Maybe US3, Configure Parameters/Settings, since they're setting the start and end points.\n\nAfter entering the locations, the user would select the travel mode as car. That's another configuration step, so US3 again. Then, they'd execute the search for directions, which is US4, Execute Action/Process. Once the results are displayed, the user needs to look at the travel times provided. The system might show multiple routes, so the user has to find the minimum time. That involves analyzing the data, so US7, Analyze/Evaluate/Verify Data. Finally, extracting the minimum time from the results would be US6, Extract/Retrieve Information.\n\nPutting it all together: Navigate to directions, set start and end points, choose car, execute, analyze times, extract the minimum. The corresponding US IDs would be US1, US3, US3, US4, US7, US6. But maybe some steps can be combined. For example, entering both locations and selecting car mode under a single Configure step. So the strategies would be:\n\n1. Navigate to the directions section (US1)\n2. Configure start and end points as the two places and set travel mode to car (US3)\n3. Execute the search (US4)\n4. Analyze the results to find the minimum time (US7)\n5. Extract the minimum travel time (US6)\n\nThat makes sense. Each step maps to a universal strategy correctly.\n\n\n```json\n{\n \"task_id\": 155,\n \"strategies\": [\n \"Navigate to Directions/Route Planning Section\",\n \"Configure Start Point (Animal Rescue League of Pittsburgh) and Destination (Schenley Park)\",\n \"Set Travel Mode to 'Car'\",\n \"Execute Route Calculation\",\n \"Analyze Route Options for Minimum Travel Time\",\n \"Retrieve Minimum Travel Time from Results\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategies\": [\n \"Navigate To Page/Section\",\n \"Configure Parameters/Settings\",\n \"Configure Parameters/Settings\",\n \"Execute Action/Process\",\n \"Analyze/Evaluate/Verify Data\",\n \"Extract/Retrieve Information\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategy_ids\": [\"US1\", \"US3\", \"US3\", \"US4\", \"US7\", \"US6\"]\n}\n```",
"model_reasoning": null
},
{
"task_id": 156,
"task_intent": "Checkout merge requests assigned to me",
"expected_ids": [
"US2"
],
"actual_ids": [
"US1",
"US2",
"US7"
],
"correct": false,
"model": "aiproxy/deepseek-reasoner",
"model_output": "\nOkay, let's tackle this task. The user wants to check out merge requests assigned to them on GitLab. First, I need to figure out the steps involved.\n\nStarting with navigation. The user probably needs to go to the merge requests section. GitLab typically has a menu on the left, so navigating to the \"Merge Requests\" page makes sense. That's US1, Navigate To Page/Section.\n\nNext, they need to find the ones assigned to them. The merge requests list might have filters. Applying a filter for \"Assigned to me\" would narrow it down. That's US2, Search/Filter/Sort Data.\n\nOnce filtered, the user would view the list. They might need to look through each MR, but since the task is just to check them out, maybe viewing the list is enough. But wait, maybe the user wants to inspect details. However, the intent is to \"checkout,\" which could mean reviewing the list. Alternatively, if they need to see details, US5 (View/Inspect Item Details) might come into play. But the example given in the output example for a similar task didn't include viewing details unless necessary. Since the intent is to check which MRs are assigned, filtering and viewing the list suffice. So maybe US2 is enough here.\n\nWait, the task is \"checkout,\" which might imply more than just listing. But in GitLab terms, checking out a merge request usually refers to viewing or working on it. However, the user's intent here is to see the ones are assigned. So the main steps are navigating to the MR section, filtering by assigned, and then viewing the list. But maybe the user needs to ensure they are assigned, so perhaps verifying the list. But the universal strategies don't have a specific \"verify\" unless it's part of analysis. US7 is Analyze/Evaluate/Verify Data. But in the example given earlier, when retrieving info, they used US6. However, in this case, the user is just checking out the list, so maybe after filtering, the list is presented, and that's it. So the strategies would be:\n\n1. Navigate to Merge Requests section (US1)\n2. Filter merge requests assigned to the user (US2)\n3. View the list of assigned merge requests (maybe US5 or US6? Or is viewing part of the filtering step?)\n\nWait, the output example for task 4 had \"Generate and Review Bestsellers Report\" which was US4 (Execute) and then maybe US6 or US7. But in the example, they used US4 (Execute Action) for generating, and then perhaps the review is part of the analysis. But in the example, the third strategy was \"Generate and Review Bestsellers Report\" mapped to US4 (Execute Action/Process). So maybe the third step here is just viewing the results after filtering, which is part of the filtering step. But maybe the user needs to ensure that the list is correct, so perhaps a verification step. Alternatively, maybe the steps are:\n\n- Navigate to Merge Requests (US1)\n- Apply filter for assigned to me (US2)\n- View the list (could be part of the result of filtering, but maybe as a separate step if needed to inspect)\n\nBut according to the universal strategies, US5 is View/Inspect Item Details, which is for individual items. If the user is just looking at the list, maybe that's part of the filtering result. However, if they need to check each item, then US5 would be involved. But the intent is to \"checkout\" the MRs, which might not require opening each one. So perhaps the strategies are:\n\n1. Navigate to the Merge Requests page (US1)\n2. Filter the list to show only those assigned to me (US2)\n3. Review the filtered list to identify the relevant merge requests (US7: Analyze/Evaluate/Verify Data)\n\nAlternatively, maybe after filtering, the list is already there, so no need. But the user might need to verify that the list is correct. So step 3 could be using US7 to verify. Let me check the universal strategies. US7 is for analysis, evaluation, verification. So checking that the MRs shown are indeed assigned would be US7.\n\nSo the strategies would be:\n\nStrategies:\n- Navigate to Merge Requests section (US1)\n- Filter merge requests by \"Assigned to me\" (US2)\n- Verify the list of assigned merge requests (US7)\n\nBut the example given in the problem's output example for task 4 had three steps\" navigate, configure, execute. Here, maybe navigate, filter, verify. So the universal strategies would be US1, US2, US7.\n\nAlternatively, maybe after filtering, the user just needs to view the list, which is part of the filtering step. But according to the universal strategies, US2 includes locating data. So maybe the third step isn't necessary. But the user's intent is to \"checkout\" which might imply they need to confirm the list. So including US7 makes sense.\n\nSo the final answer would be:\n\nstrategies: [\n \"Navigate to the Merge Requests section\",\n \"Filter merge requests by 'Assigned to me'\",\n \"Verify the list of assigned merge requests\"\n],\nuniversal_strategies: [\"Navigate To Page/Section\", \"Search/Filter/Sort Data\", \"Analyze/Evaluate/Verify Data\"],\nuniversal_strategy_ids: [\"US1\", \"US2\", \"US7\"]\n\n\n```json\n{\n \"task_id\": 156,\n \"strategies\": [\n \"Navigate to the Merge Requests section\",\n \"Filter merge requests by 'Assigned to me'\",\n \"Verify the list of assigned merge requests\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategies\": [\n \"Navigate To Page/Section\",\n \"Search/Filter/Sort Data\",\n \"Analyze/Evaluate/Verify Data\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategy_ids\": [\"US1\", \"US2\", \"US7\"]\n}\n```",
"model_reasoning": null
},
{
"task_id": 157,
"task_intent": "Show all customers",
"expected_ids": [
"US1"
],
"actual_ids": [
"US1",
"US2"
],
"correct": false,
"model": "aiproxy/deepseek-reasoner",
"model_output": "\nOkay, let's tackle this task. The user wants to \"Show all customers\" on the shopping_admin site. First, I need to figure out the steps a GUI agent would take. \n\nStarting with the first step, the agent needs to get to the right place. Since the goal is to show all customers, the agent probably needs to navigate to a section where customer data is listed. That sounds like US1 (Navigate To Page/Section). Maybe there's a \"Customers\" page or a \"Manage Customers\" section in the admin panel.\n\nNext, once on the customers page, there might be a list, but if there are many customers, the agent might need to ensure all are displayed. If the list is paginated, the agent might need to navigate through pages using pagination controls, which is US8 (Navigate Within Data/Results). Alternatively, if there's a filter applied by default, the agent might need to remove any filters to show all. But the task is to show all, not filter, so maybe just navigating through pages if needed. However, the main action here is just displaying all, so maybe US8 isn't necessary if the initial page already lists all without pagination. Hmm.\n\nWait, maybe the initial step is enough. If navigating to the customers page shows all customers in one list without needing to paginate, then US1 is sufficient. But if the list is long and split into pages, then the agent would need to navigate through all pages. But the task is to \"show all, so perhaps the user just wants to view the list, even if it's paginated. The main action is getting to the customers page. So maybe the strategies are just US1. But the example given in the output example for task 4 used US1, US3, US4. But in this case, maybe it's simpler.\n\nAlternatively, maybe the customers are in a table that requires sorting or filtering to see all, but the intent is to show all without any filters. So perhaps the agent needs to ensure no filters are applied, which could be part of US2 (Search/Filter/Sort Data) by resetting filters. But the task is to show all, not to filter. So maybe the steps are: navigate to the customers page (US1), and if there are any active filters, remove them (US2). But the user didn't mention any existing filters. So maybe the main step is just US1. \n\nWait, the universal strategy US2 includes using filters to narrow down or locate data. But showing all might require removing filters, which is part of US2. For example, if the default view has a filter, the agent would need to clear it. So the steps could be: navigate to customers page (US1), then remove any active filters (US2) to show all. Then, if the list is paginated, navigate through pages (US8). But the user's intent is just to display all customers, not necessarily to extract all pages. So maybe the main steps are US1 and US2 (clearing filters). \n\nAlternatively, maybe the customers are already listed without any filters by default. Then only US1 is needed. But without knowing the site's default setup, it's safer to assume that navigating to the correct page and ensuring no filters are applied. So strategies would be:\n\n1. Navigate to the Customers section (US1).\n2. Remove any applied filters to display all customers (US2).\n\nBut the example given in the problem statement for task 4 used US1, US3, US4. But in this case, there's no configuration or execution beyond navigating and adjusting filters. So the universal strategies would be US1 and US2. \n\nWait, the task is \"Show all customers\". If the default view already shows all, then only US1. If not, then US2 to clear filters. But since the user is asking to show all, it's possible that the agent needs to ensure that. So the strategies would be:\n\n- Navigate to the Customers page (US1)\n- Ensure all customers are displayed by removing any filters (US2)\n\nBut maybe the second step is part of US2. So the strategies would be:\n\n1. Navigate to the Customers Management page\", US1\n\n2. \"Remove any filters to display all customers\", US2\n\nBut the second step is using US2 (Search/Filter/Sort Data) to reset filters. So the universal strategies would be US1 and US2. \n\nAlternatively, the agent might need to sort or adjust the view, but the task is to show all, not sort. So the main steps are US1 and US2 (clearing filters). \n\nTherefore, the final answer would include US1 and US2. The strategies would be:\n\nStrategies: [\"Navigate to the Customers Management page\", \"Remove any applied filters to display all customers\"]\n\nUniversal strategies: [\"Navigate To Page/Section\", \"Search/Filter/Sort Data\"]\n\nUniversal strategy IDs: [\"US1\", \"US2\"]\n\n\n```json\n{\n \"task_id\": 157,\n \"strategies\": [\n \"Navigate to the Customers Management page\",\n \"Remove any applied filters to display all customers\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategies\": [\n \"Navigate To Page/Section\",\n \"Search/Filter/Sort Data\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategy_ids\": [\"US1\", \"US2\"]\n}\n```",
"model_reasoning": null
},
{
"task_id": 162,
"task_intent": "I have a lot of Nintendo Switch game cards now, help me find the best storage option to fit all 40 cards",
"expected_ids": [
"US2",
"US7"
],
"actual_ids": [
"US1",
"US2",
"US3",
"US5",
"US7",
"US7"
],
"correct": false,
"model": "aiproxy/deepseek-reasoner",
"model_output": "\nOkay, let's tackle this task. The user wants to find the best storage option for 40 Nintendo Switch game cards on a shopping site. First, I need to figure out the steps they'd take.\n\nStarting with navigation: they probably need to go to a section where storage solutions are sold. Maybe a search bar or a specific category like \"gaming accessories.\" So US1 (Navigate To Page/Section) makes sense here.\n\nNext, they need to search for storage options. Using keywords like \"Nintendo Switch game card storage\" would help. That's US2 (Search/Filter/Sort Data) because they're filtering products relevant to their need.\n\nThen, they might need to configure parameters. Since they have 40 cards, they need a product that can hold at least that many. Filtering by capacity or checking product specs would be US3 (Configure Parameters/Settings).\n\nAfter finding options, they need to view details to ensure compatibility and check reviews. That's US5 (View/Inspect Item Details).\n\nThey might compare different products based on capacity, reviews, and price. Analyzing which one fits best is US7 (Analyze/Evaluate/Verify Data).\n\nFinally, selecting the best option based on their analysis. This step is about making a decision, which falls under US7 again since it's evaluation.\n\nSo the strategies would involve navigating, searching, filtering, checking details, and evaluating. The universal strategies used are US1, US2, US3, US5, and US7.\n\n\n```json\n{\n \"task_id\": 162,\n \"strategies\": [\n \"Navigate to the gaming accessories or storage solutions section\",\n \"Search for 'Nintendo Switch game card storage'\",\n \"Filter products by capacity (e.g., 'Holds 40+ cards')\",\n \"Inspect product details for compatibility and capacity confirmation\",\n \"Analyze product options based on reviews, price, and capacity\",\n \"Select the best storage option that fits all 40 cards\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategies\": [\n \"Navigate To Page/Section\",\n \"Search/Filter/Sort Data\",\n \"Configure Parameters/Settings\",\n \"View/Inspect Item Details\",\n \"Analyze/Evaluate/Verify Data\",\n \"Analyze/Evaluate/Verify Data\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategy_ids\": [\"US1\", \"US2\", \"US3\", \"US5\", \"US7\", \"US7\"]\n}\n```",
"model_reasoning": null
},
{
"task_id": 167,
"task_intent": "What are the main criticisms of this product? Please extract the relevant sentences.",
"expected_ids": [
"US1",
"US7",
"US7"
],
"actual_ids": [
"US1",
"US2",
"US7",
"US6"
],
"correct": false,
"model": "aiproxy/deepseek-reasoner",
"model_output": "\nOkay, let's tackle this task. The user wants to know the main criticisms of a product by extracting relevant sentences. First, I need to figure out the steps a GUI agent would take.\n\nThe user is on a shopping site, probably looking at product reviews. So the first step would be to navigate to the product's review section. That aligns with US1 (Navigate To Page/Section). Once there, the agent might need to filter or sort the data to find negative reviews. Maybe there's a filter for low ratings or negative feedback, which is US2 (Search/Filter/Sort Data). \n\nAfter filtering, the agent needs to look through the reviews. Since the task is to extract specific sentences, the agent would have to view each review's details, which is US5 (View/Inspect Item Details). Then, the agent has to read through the text and identify critical sentences. That's analysis, so US7 (Analyze/Evaluate/Verify Data). Finally, extracting those sentences would be US6 (Extract/Retrieve Information).\n\nWait, but the steps need to be practical actions. Let me structure them properly. Navigate to the product's review page (US1). Then, filter reviews to show only negative ones (US2). Next, go through each negative review (maybe US8 if there are multiple pages). For each review, inspect the details (US5), analyze the content for criticisms (US7), and extract the relevant sentences (US6). But the steps should be concise. Maybe combine some steps. Let me check the universal strategies again.\n\nSo the strategies could be: 1. Navigate to product reviews. 2. Filter negative reviews. 3. Analyze each review to find criticisms. 4. Extract the critical sentences. The corresponding US would be US1, US2, US7, US6. But maybe the analysis and extraction are part of the same step. Alternatively, viewing the details (US5) might be necessary before analysis. Hmm.\n\nAlternatively, after filtering, the agent might need to view each review's details (US5), then analyze the text (US7), and extract the sentences (US6). So the strategies would be: Navigate to reviews, filter, view details, analyze, extract. But the user might not need to click into each review if the text is visible in the list. So maybe US5 isn't needed. Let me think. If the reviews are already displayed in a list, then the agent can read them without clicking into each. So steps would be: navigate to reviews, filter to negative, analyze the visible reviews for criticisms, extract the sentences. So US1, US2, US7, US6. That makes sense. So the strategies would be:\n\n1. Navigate to the product's review section (US1).\n2. Filter reviews to show negative feedback (US2).\n3. Analyze the reviews to identify critical sentences (US7).\n4. Extract the relevant criticism sentences (US6).\n\nYes, that covers the necessary steps without redundant actions. The agent doesn't need to click into each review if the text is visible. So the final answer would list these strategies with the corresponding US IDs.\n\n\n```json\n{\n \"task_id\": 167,\n \"strategies\": [\n \"Navigate to the product's review section\",\n \"Filter reviews to show negative feedback\",\n \"Analyze review content to identify critical sentences\",\n \"Extract the relevant criticism sentences\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategies\": [\n \"Navigate To Page/Section\",\n \"Search/Filter/Sort Data\",\n \"Analyze/Evaluate/Verify Data\",\n \"Extract/Retrieve Information\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategy_ids\": [\"US1\", \"US2\", \"US7\", \"US6\"]\n}\n```",
"model_reasoning": null
},
{
"task_id": 169,
"task_intent": "Tell me the full names of the repositories where I made contributions and they got the most stars?",
"expected_ids": [
"US1",
"US7"
],
"actual_ids": [
"US1",
"US2",
"US6"
],
"correct": false,
"model": "aiproxy/deepseek-reasoner",
"model_output": "\nOkay, let's tackle this task. The user wants to know the full names of repositories where they made contributions and those repositories have the most stars. The site is GitLab.\n\nFirst, I need to figure out how to approach this on GitLab. The user needs to find their contributed repositories and then sort them by stars. \n\nStep 1: Navigate to the user's profile or contributions section. GitLab has a section where users can view their activity or contributions. So, using US1 (Navigate To Page/Section) makes sense here. The user needs to go to their profile or activity page to see their contributions.\n\nStep 2: Once there, the user needs to filter or sort their contributions to repositories. But GitLab might not have a direct filter for \"my contributions,\" so maybe the user has to look at their activity and identify repositories they contributed to. Alternatively, there might be a way to list repositories the user has contributed to. Then, they need to sort those repositories by the number of stars. This would involve using US2 (Search/Filter/Sort Data) to sort the repositories by stars in descending order.\n\nStep 3: After sorting, the user needs to extract the repository names that are at the top of the list, which have the most stars. This is retrieving information, so US6 (Extract/Retrieve Information) applies here.\n\nWait, but the user might need to first get a list of their contributed repositories. Maybe there's a way to view all repositories the user has contributed to. Then, from that list, sort by stars. So the steps are: navigate to the contributed repositories page, sort by stars, then extract the top ones. \n\nSo the strategies would be:\n\n1. Navigate to the user's contributed repositories section (US1).\n2. Sort the repositories by the number of stars in descending order (US2).\n3. Retrieve the full names of the top repositories with the most stars (US6).\n\nI need to check if GitLab allows sorting repositories by stars. If yes, then this approach works. If not, maybe the user action would involve viewing each repository's details to check stars, but that's less efficient. Assuming GitLab has sorting options, the steps above should work.\n\n\n```json\n{\n \"task_id\": 169,\n \"strategies\": [\n \"Navigate to the user's contributed repositories list\",\n \"Sort repositories by star count in descending order\",\n \"Retrieve the full names of the top-starred repositories\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategies\": [\n \"Navigate To Page/Section\",\n \"Search/Filter/Sort Data\",\n \"Extract/Retrieve Information\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategy_ids\": [\"US1\", \"US2\", \"US6\"]\n}\n```",
"model_reasoning": null
},
{
"task_id": 173,
"task_intent": "Open my latest updated issue that has keyword \"better\" in its title to check if it is closed",
"expected_ids": [
"US1",
"US2",
"US2",
"US5"
],
"actual_ids": [
"US1",
"US2",
"US5",
"US6"
],
"correct": false,
"model": "aiproxy/deepseek-reasoner",
"model_output": "\nOkay, let's tackle this task. The user wants to open their latest updated issue on GitLab that contains the keyword \"better\" in the title and check if it's closed. \n\nFirst, I need to figure out the steps required. The user is on GitLab's main interface. To find the issue, they probably need to go to the issues section. That's navigation, so US1: Navigate To Page/Section.\n\nNext, they need to search for issues with \"better\" in the title. That's using a filter or search, which is US2: Search/Filter/Sort Data. They might sort the results by last updated to find the latest one, which is also part of US2.\n\nOnce the list is filtered and sorted, the user needs to open the most recent issue. That's viewing details, so US5: View/Inspect Item Details.\n\nAfter opening the issue, they need to check if the status is closed. That involves extracting information from the details page, which is US6: Extract/Retrieve Information.\n\nSo the strategies would be navigating to the issues page, applying search and sort, opening the issue, and checking the status. The corresponding universal strategies are US1, US2, US5, and US6.\n\n\n```json\n{\n \"task_id\": 173,\n \"strategies\": [\n \"Navigate to the Issues section of GitLab\",\n \"Search/filter issues with keyword \\\"better\\\" in titles and sort by last updated\",\n \"Open the most recently updated matching issue\",\n \"Check the issue's status (closed/open) in its details\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategies\": [\n \"Navigate To Page/Section\",\n \"Search/Filter/Sort Data\",\n \"View/Inspect Item Details\",\n \"Extract/Retrieve Information\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategy_ids\": [\"US1\", \"US2\", \"US5\", \"US6\"]\n}\n```",
"model_reasoning": null
},
{
"task_id": 182,
"task_intent": "Open my latest created issue that has homepage content in its title to check if it is closed",
"expected_ids": [
"US1",
"US2",
"US5"
],
"actual_ids": [
"US1",
"US2",
"US5",
"US7"
],
"correct": false,
"model": "aiproxy/deepseek-reasoner",
"model_output": "\nOkay, let's tackle this task. The user wants to open their latest created issue with \"homepage content\" in the title on GitLab and check if it's closed. \n\nFirst, I need to figure out the steps. The user probably starts by navigating to the issues section. GitLab has a section where all issues are listed. So the first step would be navigating to the issues page. That's US1: Navigate To Page/Section.\n\nNext, they need to find the specific issue. Since the title contains \"homepage content,\" they might use the search or filter feature. GitLab allows filtering issues by title, so applying a filter for \"homepage content\" in the title makes sense. That's US2: Search/Filter/Sort Data.\n\nOnce filtered, the list shows relevant issues. The user needs the latest one, so sorting by creation date in descending order would put the newest at the top. That's another US2 application since sorting is part of filtering data.\n\nAfter finding the latest issue, they need to open it to view details. Clicking on the issue to see its status (open or closed) is US5: View/Inspect Item Details.\n\nFinally, checking the status involves looking at the details, which is US6: Extract/Retrieve Information. But wait, the task is to check if it's closed, which might involve both viewing the details) and then verifying the status). However, the main action here is viewing the details, and the status is part of that. So maybe US5 covers that, and the verification is part of US7: Analyze/Evaluate/Verify Data. But the user's intent is to check if it's closed, which is a verification step. Hmm.\n\nWait, the user's main actions are navigating, filtering, sorting, opening the issue, and then checking the status. So the strategies would be:\n\n1. Navigate to the issues page (US1)\n2. Filter issues by title containing \"homepage content\" (US2)\n3. Sort the filtered issues by creation date to find the latest (US2 again)\n4. Open the latest issue to view details (US5)\n5. Check if the status is closed (US7)\n\nBut the output example for the previous task had three steps\" but here maybe more. Let me check the universal strategies. US7 is about analyzing or evaluating data, which would apply here when checking the status. So the strategies would be:\n\n- Navigate to My Issues section (US1)\n- Filter issues by title containing \"homepage content\" (US2)\n- Sort issues by creation date descending (US2)\n- Open the latest issue (US5)\n- Verify if the status is closed (US7)\n\nBut how to combine these into strategies. Maybe the filtering and sorting can be combined into one step. For example, \"Filter and sort issues to find the latest with 'homepage content' in title.\" But the universal strategies are separate. However, the user might need to first apply the filter, then sort. So two separate steps? Or can they be considered part of the same strategy step?\n\nLooking at the example given in the problem statement, the output example had three steps\" for a similar task. For instance, in the example, \"Configure Report Parameters for January 2023\" is one step under US3. So perhaps combining multiple actions under a single strategy step if they are part of the same logical step. \n\nIn this case, filtering by title and sorting by date could be part of the same strategy step: \"Filter and sort issues to find the latest with 'homepage content' in title.\" So US2 applies here. Then, opening the issue (US5), and then verifying the status (US7). \n\nSo the strategies would be:\n\n1. Navigate to the user's issues page (US1)\n2. Filter and sort issues to find the latest with \"homepage content\" in the title (US2)\n3. Open the latest issue to view details (US5)\n4. Check if the issue's status is closed (US7)\n\nBut the user's intent is to \"check if it is closed,\" which is the verification step. So the strategies would be:\n\nStrategies:\n- Navigate to the user's issues section (US1)\n- Search/filter issues by title containing \"homepage content\" and sort by creation date (US2)\n- Open the latest created issue (US5)\n- Verify the issue's status is closed (US7)\n\nUniversal strategies: US1, US2, US5, US7\n\nBut the output example had three steps. Maybe combining the search/filter and sort into one step. So the strategies array would have four steps, but the example had three. However, the user's task requires multiple steps. Let's proceed with the accurate breakdown.\n\nSo the JSON would be:\n\n{\n \"task_id\": 182,\n \"strategies\": [\n \"Navigate to the user's issues section\",\n \"Filter issues by title containing 'homepage content' and sort by creation date to find the latest\",\n \"Open the latest created issue to view details\",\n \"Check if the issue's status is closed'\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategies\": [\n \"Navigate To Page/Section\",\n \"Search/Filter/Sort Data\",\n \"View/Inspect Item Details\",\n \"Analyze/Evaluate/Verify Data\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategy_ids\": [\"US1\", \"US2\", \"US5\", \"US7\"]\n}\n\nBut wait, the step \"Check if the issue's status is closed\" is part of viewing the details. Maybe when you view the details, the status is visible, so the step \"Open the latest created issue to view details\" (US5) would allow the status to be seen. Then the verification (US7) is a separate step. So the four steps are correct.\n\n\n```json\n{\n \"task_id\": 182,\n \"strategies\": [\n \"Navigate to the user's issues section\",\n \"Filter and sort issues by title containing 'homepage content' to find the latest\",\n \"Open the latest issue to inspect its details\",\n \"Verify if the issue status is closed\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategies\": [\n \"Navigate To Page/Section\",\n \"Search/Filter/Sort Data\",\n \"View/Inspect Item Details\",\n \"Analyze/Evaluate/Verify Data\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategy_ids\": [\"US1\", \"US2\", \"US5\", \"US7\"]\n}\n```",
"model_reasoning": null
},
{
"task_id": 184,
"task_intent": "Give me the name of the products that have 0 units left",
"expected_ids": [
"US1",
"US2"
],
"actual_ids": [
"US1",
"US2",
"US6"
],
"correct": false,
"model": "aiproxy/deepseek-reasoner",
"model_output": "\nOkay, let's tackle this task. The user wants the names of products with 0 units left in the shopping admin site. First, I need to figure out the steps the GUI agent should take.\n\nStarting with navigation. The agent probably needs to go to a section where inventory is managed. Maybe a \"Products\" or \"Inventory\" page. That's US1, Navigate To Page/Section.\n\nNext, once on the products list, the agent should filter the inventory to show only items with 0 stock. Using a filter dropdown or a search option for stock quantity. That's US2, Search/Filter/Sort Data.\n\nAfter filtering, the agent needs to extract the product names from the displayed list. So they would look at each product in the filtered results and retrieve their names. That's US6, Extract/Retrieve Information.\n\nWait, maybe there's also a step to verify that the data is correct, but the main steps are navigating, filtering, and extracting. The example given in the strategies includes generating a report, but here it's more about filtering existing data. So the strategies would be: go to inventory, filter by 0 units, then get the product names. The universal strategies match US1, US2, US6.\n\n\n```json\n{\n \"task_id\": 184,\n \"strategies\": [\n \"Navigate to the Inventory Management/Products List page\",\n \"Filter products to show only items with 0 units in stock\",\n \"Extract product names from the filtered results\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategies\": [\n \"Navigate To Page/Section\",\n \"Search/Filter/Sort Data\",\n \"Extract/Retrieve Information\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategy_ids\": [\"US1\", \"US2\", \"US6\"]\n}\n```",
"model_reasoning": null
},
{
"task_id": 190,
"task_intent": "Tell me the total cost of my latest complete order?",
"expected_ids": [
"US1",
"US5"
],
"actual_ids": [
"US1",
"US5",
"US6"
],
"correct": false,
"model": "aiproxy/deepseek-reasoner",
"model_output": "\nOkay, let's tackle this task. The user wants to know the total cost of their latest complete order on the shopping site. First, I need to figure out the steps a GUI agent would take.\n\nStarting with navigation. The user probably needs to go to their order history or a similar page where all past orders are listed. That's US1, Navigate To Page/Section. Then, the orders might be sorted by date, so the latest one is at the top. But maybe the default isn't sorted, so the agent might need to sort them. That's part of US2, Search/Filter/Sort Data. Once sorted, the first order is the latest. The agent would click on that order to view details, which is US5, View/Inspect Item Details. Then, in the details, extract the total cost, which is US6, Extract/Retrieve Information. \n\nWait, but the orders might already be sorted by default. The latest order could be the first one. So maybe the steps are: navigate to orders, view the latest order, extract the total. But sometimes, if there are multiple pages, the agent might need to check if the latest is on the first page. But the user said \"latest complete order, so assuming it's the most recent and visible. So strategies would be navigate to order history, view the latest order details, then extract the total cost. So US1, US5, US6. The universal strategies would be Navigate, View Details, Extract Info. Let me check the example. In the example for retrieving purchase date, they used US5 and US6. So here, similar steps. So the strategies would be: Navigate to Order History, View Details of Latest Order, Retrieve Total Cost. The universal strategies are US1, US5, US6. That makes sense.\n\n\n```json\n{\n \"task_id\": 190,\n \"strategies\": [\n \"Navigate to Order History/Completed Orders section\",\n \"View Details of the Latest Completed Order\",\n \"Retrieve Total Cost from Order Details\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategies\": [\n \"Navigate To Page/Section\",\n \"View/Inspect Item Details\",\n \"Extract/Retrieve Information\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategy_ids\": [\"US1\", \"US5\", \"US6\"]\n}\n```",
"model_reasoning": null
},
{
"task_id": 196,
"task_intent": "Compare the payment difference of the last 4 cancelled orders and completed orders",
"expected_ids": [
"US1",
"US3",
"US7",
"US7",
"US7"
],
"actual_ids": [
"US1",
"US2",
"US6",
"US2",
"US6",
"US7"
],
"correct": false,
"model": "aiproxy/deepseek-reasoner",
"model_output": "\nOkay, let's tackle this task. The user wants to compare the payment differences between the last 4 cancelled orders and completed orders on the shopping admin site.\n\nFirst, I need to figure out how to find both cancelled and completed orders. Probably, the admin site has a section where orders are listed, maybe with filters. So the first step would be navigating to the orders page. That's US1: Navigate To Page/Section.\n\nNext, I need to filter the orders to show only the cancelled ones. Then sort them by date to get the last four. Similarly, do the same for completed orders. Filtering and sorting fall under US2: Search/Filter/Sort Data. So two steps here: one for cancelled, one for completed.\n\nAfter getting the lists, I need to view the details of each of those orders to get their payment information. That's US5: View/Inspect Item Details. For each order, open the details to see payment amounts.\n\nThen, extract the payment amounts from each order. That's US6: Extract/Retrieve Information. Record the payment values for both cancelled and completed orders.\n\nOnce I have all the payment data, the next step is to calculate the differences between the cancelled and completed orders. This analysis would be US7: Analyze/Evaluate/Verify Data. Compare each pair and note the differences.\n\nFinally, compile the results to present the comparison. Maybe generate a report or just list the differences. But since the task is to compare, executing the analysis and presenting it would be part of US7 again, or maybe US4 if generating a report. But since the main action here is the comparison, sticking with US7 makes sense.\n\nPutting it all together, the strategies would involve navigating, filtering, viewing details, extracting info, and analyzing. The universal strategies used are US1, US2, US5, US6, and US7. Let me check if I missed any steps. Oh, maybe after filtering, I need to sort to get the last four, which is part of US2. Also, after extracting, the analysis is crucial. So the steps are:\n\n1. Navigate to Orders section.\n2. Filter cancelled orders and sort to get last 4.\n3. Do the same for completed orders.\n4. View each order's details.\n5. Extract payment info.\n6. Analyze the payment differences.\n\nYes, that covers all necessary steps. The universal strategies are US1, US2 (twice), US5, US6, and US7. But in the output example, they list the strategies as a list of steps, not necessarily each US. So maybe group some steps. For example, filtering both order types under one strategy step. Hmm. Let me structure the strategies as:\n\n- Navigate to Orders Management Page\n- Filter and Sort Cancelled Orders to Retrieve Last 4\n- Filter and Sort Completed Orders to Retrieve Last 4\n- Extract Payment Information from Each Cancelled Order\n- Extract Payment Information from Each Completed Order\n- Compare Payment Differences Between Cancelled and Completed Orders\n\nBut the universal strategies would be US1, US2 (for both filter steps), US6 (for extracting), and US7 (for comparing). So the strategies array would have those steps, and the universal strategies would list US1, US2, US6, US7. But maybe the viewing details is part of US5. So perhaps:\n\nStrategies:\n\n1. Navigate to Orders Management Page (US1)\n2. Filter and sort to get last 4 cancelled orders (US2)\n3. View details of each cancelled order (US5)\n4. Extract payment info from cancelled orders (US6)\n5. Repeat steps 2-4 for completed orders (US2, US5, US6)\n6. Compare the payment amounts (US7)\n\nBut in the output, the strategies are written as concise steps. So maybe:\n\nStrategies:\n- Navigate to Orders Management Section\n- Filter and Retrieve Last 4 Cancelled Orders\n- Extract Payment Details from Cancelled Orders\n- Filter and Retrieve Last 4 Completed Orders\n- Extract Payment Details from Completed Orders\n- Analyze Payment Differences Between Groups\n\nUniversal strategies: US1, US2, US6, US2, US6, US7. But since US2 is used twice, but in the output example, they list the unique IDs. Wait, no, in the example, they list the IDs in order. For the output example given, the strategies array has three steps, and the universal_strategy_ids are [\"US1\", \"US3\", \"US4\"], each corresponding to the steps. So each strategy step corresponds to a US ID. So in this case, each step in the strategies array must map to a US ID. So for each strategy step, assign the US.\n\nSo breaking down:\n\n1. Navigate to Orders Management Section (US1)\n2. Apply Filters to Retrieve Last 4 Cancelled Orders (US2)\n3. Extract Payment Information from Cancelled Orders (US6)\n4. Apply Filters to Retrieve Last 4 Completed Orders (US2)\n5. Extract Payment Information from Completed Orders (US6)\n6. Compare Payment Differences Between Cancelled and Completed Orders (US7)\n\nBut the user might need to view the details of each order to extract payment info. So maybe:\n\n1. Navigate to Orders Management Section (US1)\n2. Filter and Sort Cancelled Orders by Date, Select Last 4 (US2)\n3. View Each Cancelled Order's Details (US5)\n4. Record Payment Amounts from Cancelled Orders (US6)\n5. Filter and Sort Completed Orders by Date, Select Last 4 (US2)\n6. View Each Completed Order's Details (US5)\n7. Record Payment Amounts from Completed Orders (US6)\n8. Analyze Payment Differences Between Groups (US7)\n\nBut this would make the strategies array have 8 steps, but perhaps some can be combined. For example, steps 2 and 3 can be combined into \"Retrieve and Inspect Last 4 Cancelled Orders\" which would involve US2 and US5. But according to the output example, each strategy step is mapped to a single US ID. So each step must correspond to one US.\n\nSo perhaps:\n\nStrategies array:\n\n1. Navigate to Orders Management Page (US1)\n2. Filter and Sort to Retrieve Last 4 Cancelled Orders (US2)\n3. Inspect Payment Details of Each Cancelled Order (US5)\n4. Extract Payment Information from Cancelled Orders (US6)\n5. Filter and Sort to Retrieve Last 4 Completed Orders (US2)\n6. Inspect Payment Details of Each Completed Order (US5)\n7. Extract Payment Information from Completed Orders (US6)\n8. Compare Payment Differences Between Groups (US7)\n\nBut this is a lot of steps. Maybe the extraction is part of the inspection. Alternatively, perhaps \"Inspect and Extract\" can be combined. But according to the universal strategies, US5 is View/Inspect, and US6 is Extract. So they are separate steps.\n\nBut in practice, when you view the details, you can extract the info in the same step. However, according to the definitions, US5 is about opening the details, and US6 is about reading and capturing the info. So they are separate.\n\nBut maybe in the strategy steps, it's acceptable to combine them. For example, \"View and extract payment details from each cancelled order\" would involve US5 and US6, but the output example shows each strategy step maps to one US. So perhaps each step must be assigned to one US.\n\nTherefore, the correct approach is to have separate steps for viewing and extracting. But that might be too granular. Alternatively, the extraction can be considered part of the analysis. Hmm.\n\nAlternatively, perhaps the steps can be:\n\n1. Navigate to Orders Management (US1)\n2. Filter/Sort Cancelled Orders to get last 4 (US2)\n3. For each order, view details and record payment (US5 and US6)\nBut since each strategy step must map to one US, this would need to be split into two steps: view details (US5) and extract (US6). But for four orders, this would be repetitive. However, the strategy steps are high-level, so perhaps per group.\n\nAlternatively, the strategy steps can be:\n\n1. Navigate to Orders Management (US1)\n2. Retrieve last 4 cancelled orders by filtering and sorting (US2)\n3. Inspect each order's payment details (US5)\n4. Extract payment amounts from cancelled orders (US6)\n5. Retrieve last 4 completed orders similarly (US2)\n6. Inspect their payment details (US5)\n7. Extract payment amounts (US6)\n8. Compare the differences (US7)\n\nSo the strategies array would have these 8 steps, and the universal strategies would be US1, US2, US5, US6, US2, US5, US6, US7. But the output example has fewer steps. Maybe the user can combine some steps. For example, \"Retrieve and inspect payment details for last 4 cancelled orders\" would involve US2, US5, US6. But since each step must be one US, perhaps the steps are:\n\n1. Navigate to Orders Management (US1)\n2. Apply filters to get last 4 cancelled orders (US2)\n3. View and extract payment info from each (US5 and US6) but this is two US. So perhaps split into two steps.\n\nAlternatively, maybe the extraction is part of the analysis. But according to the definitions, US6 is extraction, which is separate from analysis (US7). So the correct approach is to have separate steps.\n\nBut given the output example, where steps are more concise, perhaps the strategies can be:\n\n1. Navigate to Orders Management Section (US1)\n2. Filter and Retrieve Last 4 Cancelled Orders (US2)\n3. Extract Payment Details from Cancelled Orders (US6)\n4. Filter and Retrieve Last 4 Completed Orders (US2)\n5. Extract Payment Details from Completed Orders (US6)\n6. Compare Payment Differences (US7)\n\nBut this skips the step of viewing the order details. Because to extract payment details, you need to view them. So perhaps the steps should include viewing the details. So:\n\n1. Navigate to Orders (US1)\n2. Filter/Sort Cancelled Orders (US2)\n3. Open each order (US5)\n4. Extract payment (US6)\n5. Repeat 2-4 for completed (US2, US5, US6)\n6. Compare (US7)\n\nBut how to represent this in the strategies array. Maybe:\n\nStrategies:\n- Navigate to Orders Management Page (US1)\n- Filter and Sort to Retrieve Last 4 Cancelled Orders (US2)\n- View and Extract Payment Details from Each Cancelled Order (US5 and US6) → but can't have two US per step. So perhaps split into two steps.\n\nAlternatively, maybe the extraction is implied after viewing. But according to the universal strategies, they are separate. So perhaps:\n\nStrategies array:\n\n1. Navigate to Orders Management Page (US1)\n2. Apply Filters to Retrieve Last 4 Cancelled Orders (US2)\n3. Inspect Each Cancelled Order's Payment Details (US5)\n4. Record Payment Amounts from Cancelled Orders (US6)\n5. Apply Filters to Retrieve Last 4 Completed Orders (US2)\n6. Inspect Each Completed Order's Payment Details (US5)\n7. Record Payment Amounts from Completed Orders (US6)\n8. Analyze Payment Differences Between Groups (US7)\n\nBut this is quite detailed. However, the output example has three steps. So maybe the user can combine some. For example, \"Retrieve and extract payment info from cancelled orders\" would involve US2, US5, US6. But since each step must be one US, perhaps the strategies are:\n\n1. Navigate to Orders Section (US1)\n2. Configure Filters for Cancelled Orders and Retrieve Last 4 (US2)\n3. Extract Payment Details from Cancelled Orders (US6)\n4. Configure Filters for Completed Orders and Retrieve Last 4 (US2)\n5. Extract Payment Details from Completed Orders (US6)\n6. Compare Payment Differences (US7)\n\nBut this skips the viewing step. How can you extract payment details without viewing them? So perhaps the extraction requires viewing, which is part of US5. So maybe the steps are:\n\n1. Navigate to Orders (US1)\n2. Filter/Sort Cancelled Orders to get last 4 (US2)\n3. View each order's details to get payment info (US5)\n4. Extract payment info (US6)\n5. Repeat steps 2-4 for completed orders (US2, US5, US6)\n6. Compare (US7)\n\nBut again, each step must be a single US. So the strategies array would be:\n\n1. Navigate to Orders Management (US1)\n2. Filter and Sort Cancelled Orders (US2)\n3. View Cancelled Order Details (US5)\n4. Extract Payment Information from Cancelled Orders (US6)\n5. Filter and Sort Completed Orders (US2)\n6. View Completed Order Details (US5)\n7. Extract Payment Information from Completed Orders (US6)\n8. Analyze Payment Differences (US7)\n\nBut this is eight steps. The output example had three steps, but that's a simpler task. For this task, it's more complex. So the answer should reflect the necessary steps.\n\nAlternatively, maybe the extraction can be combined with viewing. For example, \"View and extract payment details from each order\" but according to the US definitions, these are separate. So the correct approach is to list them as separate steps.\n\nBut the user might not need to list each individual order's steps. The strategies are high-level. So perhaps:\n\nStrategies:\n\n1. Navigate to the Orders Management section. (US1)\n2. Apply filters to display the last 4 cancelled orders. (US2)\n3. Extract payment information from the cancelled orders. (US6)\n4. Apply filters to display the last 4 completed orders. (US2)\n5. Extract payment information from the completed orders. (US6)\n6. Compare the payment differences between the two groups. (US7)\n\nBut this assumes that after filtering, the payment info is visible without viewing each order. If the payment info is in a list view, then extraction is possible without viewing each detail. But if the payment details are only in the detailed view, then you need to view each order's details. So the answer depends on the interface. Since the site is shopping_admin, which is likely similar to an e-commerce backend, orders are probably listed in a table with some details, but payment amount might be in the list. If that's the case, then after filtering, the payment info is visible in the table, so extraction is done from the list, not needing to view each order. So in that case, the steps would be:\n\n1. Navigate to Orders (US1)\n2. Filter and sort to get last 4 cancelled (US2)\n3. Extract payment info from the list (US6)\n4. Do the same for completed (US2, US6)\n5. Compare (US7)\n\nBut if payment info is not in the list, then need to view each order's details. So the answer needs to assume that either the payment info is in the list or not. Since the problem doesn't specify, but in typical admin interfaces, payment info might be in the list. So perhaps the steps are:\n\nStrategies:\n\n1. Navigate to Orders Management Page (US1)\n2. Filter and Sort to Retrieve Last 4 Cancelled Orders (US2)\n3. Extract Payment Amounts from Cancelled Orders List (US6)\n4. Filter and Sort to Retrieve Last 4 Completed Orders (US2)\n5. Extract Payment Amounts from Completed Orders List (US6)\n6. Compare Payment Differences Between Groups (US7)\n\nIn this case, the universal strategies are US1, US2, US6, US2, US6, US7. So the strategy_ids would be [\"US1\", \"US2\", \"US6\", \"US2\", \"US6\", \"US7\"], but in the output example, they list the unique strategies in order. So the output should list the strategies in order, even if US2 is repeated.\n\nSo the final answer would be:\n\nStrategies array:\n- Navigate to Orders Management Section\n- Filter and Retrieve Last 4 Cancelled Orders\n- Extract Payment Information from Cancelled Orders\n- Filter and Retrieve Last 4 Completed Orders\n- Extract Payment Information from Completed Orders\n- Compare Payment Differences Between Cancelled and Completed Orders\n\nUniversal strategies: [\"Navigate To Page/Section\", \"Search/Filter/Sort Data\", \"Extract/Retrieve Information\", \"Search/Filter/Sort Data\", \"Extract/Retrieve Information\", \"Analyze/Evaluate/Verify Data\"]\n\nStrategy IDs: [\"US1\", \"US2\", \"US6\", \"US2\", \"US6\", \"US7\"]\n\nBut the user might need to view the orders' details if the payment info isn't in the list. But since the problem doesn't specify, I'll proceed with the assumption that payment info is in the list view.\n\n\n```json\n{\n \"task_id\": 196,\n \"strategies\": [\n \"Navigate to Orders Management Section\",\n \"Filter and Retrieve Last 4 Cancelled Orders\",\n \"Extract Payment Information from Cancelled Orders\",\n \"Filter and Retrieve Last 4 Completed Orders\",\n \"Extract Payment Information from Completed Orders\",\n \"Compare Payment Differences Between Cancelled and Completed Orders\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategies\": [\n \"Navigate To Page/Section\",\n \"Search/Filter/Sort Data\",\n \"Extract/Retrieve Information\",\n \"Search/Filter/Sort Data\",\n \"Extract/Retrieve Information\",\n \"Analyze/Evaluate/Verify Data\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategy_ids\": [\"US1\", \"US2\", \"US6\", \"US2\", \"US6\", \"US7\"]\n}\n```",
"model_reasoning": null
},
{
"task_id": 202,
"task_intent": "Get the date of the most recent canlled order",
"expected_ids": [
"US1",
"US2",
"US3",
"US4"
],
"actual_ids": [
"US1",
"US2",
"US6"
],
"correct": false,
"model": "aiproxy/deepseek-reasoner",
"model_output": "\nOkay, let's tackle this task. The user wants the date of the most recent canceled order in the shopping admin site. First, I need to figure out the steps a GUI agent would take.\n\nStarting with navigation. The agent probably needs to go to the orders section, maybe a specific page where canceled orders are listed. That's US1, Navigate To Page/Section. Then, since they need canceled orders, they might have to filter the orders by their status, which is \"Canceled\". That's US2, Search/Filter/Sort Data. Once filtered, the orders might be sorted by date, so the most recent would be at the top. The agent would need to sort them in descending order of date, which is also part of US2. Then, the agent would look at the top entry and extract the date from it, which is US6, Extract/Retrieve Information. \n\nWait, but maybe after filtering, the list is already ordered by date. If not, sorting is necessary. So the steps would be: navigate to orders, filter by canceled status, sort by date descending, then check the first order's date. Alternatively, maybe the system has a dedicated \"recent canceled orders\" section. But assuming standard steps, filtering and sorting are needed. So strategies would be navigate to orders, apply filter, sort, then retrieve the date. The universal strategies would be US1, US2, US6. Let me check the example. The example for a similar task used US1, US3, US4. But here, filtering and sorting are under US2. So the strategies would be:\n\n1. Navigate to the Orders section (US1)\n2. Filter orders by \"Canceled\" status (US2)\n3. Sort orders by date in descending order (US2)\n4. Retrieve the date from the most recent order (US6)\n\nBut maybe steps 2 and 3 can be combined under one strategy. The user might need to both filter and sort. So the strategies array would list those steps, and the universal strategies would list US1, US2, US2, US6. But the output example grouped similar steps. Wait, in the example given, \"Configure Parameters/Settings\" was one step. But here, filtering and sorting are both part of US2. So maybe the strategies can be written as \"Filter and sort orders by cancellation status and date\" combining both actions under US2. Alternatively, separate them. Let me see the output example again. The example had \"Configure Report Parameters for US3\". So in this case, filtering and sorting are both under US2. So the strategies are:\n\n1. Navigate to the Canceled Orders section (US1)\nWait, maybe there's a direct page for canceled orders. If not, then navigate to Orders and then filter. So the first step is navigate to Orders page (US1). Then apply filter for canceled (US2). Then sort by date (US2). Then retrieve the date (US6). So the strategies would be:\n\nStrategies:\n- Navigate to the Orders Management page\n- Apply filter to show only canceled orders\n- Sort orders by order date in descending order\n- Extract the date from the most recent canceled order\n\nUniversal strategies: US1, US2, US2, US6. But since US2 can be used for both filter and sort, the strategy_ids would be US1, US2, US2, US6. But in the output example, they didn't repeat the same US. Wait, in the example, they had US1, US3, US4. So maybe each step is a separate strategy. So even if two steps use the same US, they are listed. So the answer would have four strategies with US1, US2, US2, US6. But maybe combining the filter and sort into one step. For example, \"Filter and sort orders to show most recent canceled ones\" which would be US2. Then the strategies would be:\n\nStrategies:\n- Navigate to Orders page (US1)\n- Filter and sort orders to show most recent canceled (US2)\n- Retrieve the date from the top entry (US6)\n\nBut is that possible? Maybe. Alternatively, the agent might need to filter first, then sort. So two separate US2 steps. Let's check the universal strategies. US2 includes search, filter, or sort. So both filtering and sorting are under US2. So the strategies could be:\n\n1. Navigate to Orders page (US1)\n2. Filter orders by status 'Canceled' and sort by date descending (US2)\n3. Extract the date from the first order in the list (US6)\n\nBut maybe the filter and sort are two actions, but under the same strategy. So the strategy step would be \"Filter and sort the orders to display the most recent canceled ones\" and that's one step using US2. Then the strategies array would have three steps. So the final answer would be:\n\nStrategies: [\n \"Navigate to the Orders Management section\",\n \"Filter orders by 'Canceled' status and sort by most recent date\",\n \"Retrieve the order date from the top entry\"\n]\n\nUniversal_strategies: [\"Navigate To Page/Section\", \"Search/Filter/Sort Data\", \"Extract/Retrieve Information\"]\nUniversal_strategy_ids: [\"US1\", \"US2\", \"US6\"]\n\nThat makes sense. So the steps are: go to the right place, adjust the view to show the needed data, then get the info. So the answer would follow that structure.\n\n\n```json\n{\n \"task_id\": 202,\n \"strategies\": [\n \"Navigate to the Orders Management section\",\n \"Filter orders by 'Canceled' status and sort by most recent date\",\n \"Retrieve the order date from the top entry\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategies\": [\n \"Navigate To Page/Section\",\n \"Search/Filter/Sort Data\",\n \"Extract/Retrieve Information\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategy_ids\": [\"US1\", \"US2\", \"US6\"]\n}\n```",
"model_reasoning": null
},
{
"task_id": 205,
"task_intent": "How many commits did kilian make on 3/5/2023?",
"expected_ids": [
"US1",
"US2",
"US2"
],
"actual_ids": [
"US1",
"US2",
"US6"
],
"correct": false,
"model": "aiproxy/deepseek-reasoner",
"model_output": "\nOkay, let's tackle this task. The user wants to know how many commits Kilian made on March 5, 2023, on GitLab. First, I need to figure out the steps a GUI agent would take.\n\nStarting with navigation. GitLab's interface probably has a section where commits are listed. So the first step would be to go to the repository's commits page. That aligns with US1 (Navigate To Page/Section).\n\nNext, the commits are likely listed by date, but the specific date needs filtering. GitLab might have a search or date filter. So setting the date filter to March 5, 2023, which is US3 (Configure Parameters/Settings).\n\nAfter applying the filter, the agent would need to check the number of commits displayed. That's retrieving information, so US6 (Extract/Retrieve Information). But wait, the example for US6 is retrieving a purchase date, which is similar. Here, it's the count of commits. So yes, US6 fits.\n\nWait, but after filtering, maybe the agent needs to execute the filter. Oh, right, applying the filter might be part of configuring parameters, or does it require an action? Hmm. In some interfaces, after setting the date, you might need to click a \"Apply\" button, which would be US4. But in others, the filter applies automatically. Let me check the universal strategies. US3 is about configuring parameters before executing an action. So maybe the configuration includes setting the date, and then generating the filtered list would be US4. But in the example given for US3, configuring the date range for a report is US3, and generating is US4. So perhaps here, after setting the date, the agent would execute the filter (like clicking apply), which is US4. Then, extract the count with US6.\n\nWait, but the original example for the user's task didn't include an execute step. Let me think. The user's task is to find the number of commits on a specific date. The steps would be: navigate to the commits page (US1), set the date filter to 3/5/2023 (US3), maybe execute the filter (US4?), then extract the count (US6). But maybe in GitLab, once you set the date, it automatically updates, so no need for an explicit execute step. So perhaps the strategies are US1, US3, US6. But the example given in the problem's output example had US1, US3, US4. Let me check that. The example task was generating a report, so configure parameters (US3) and then execute (US4). In this case, maybe after setting the date, the agent needs to trigger the filter, which would be US4. But I'm not entirely sure. Alternatively, maybe the filter is applied automatically upon setting, so no US4. Hmm. Let me think again. The universal strategies: US3 is configuring parameters before executing an action. So if the action is generating the filtered list, then US3 would be setting the date, and US4 would be executing the filter. But in some cases, the parameters are part of the same form, and submitting the form is the execute action. Alternatively, if the filter is applied immediately when the date is set, then maybe US3 covers both. But according to the universal strategies, US3 is about configuring parameters before executing an action. So perhaps in this case, after setting the date, the agent would need to apply the filter, which is US4. Then, the count is retrieved. So the strategies would be: Navigate to the Commits section (US1), Configure the date filter (US3), Apply the filter (US4), then extract the count (US6). But that's four steps. However, the example output for the previous task had three steps. Let me check the example again. The example had \"Navigate to Bestsellers Report\", \"Configure Report Parameters...\", \"Generate and Review...\". So US1, US3, US4. So in that case, generating the report is the execute action. So in this case, after configuring the date, the agent would execute the filter (like clicking apply or generating the filtered list), which is US4. Then, extract the count. So the strategies would be:\n\n1. Navigate to the Commits section (US1)\n2. Configure the date filter to March 5, 2023 (US3)\n3. Apply the filter (US4)\n4. Retrieve the number of commits (US6)\n\nBut the example output only had three steps. Maybe the apply is part of the configuration step. Alternatively, maybe the agent can combine steps. Let me see. The user's task is to find the count. So perhaps:\n\nStrategies:\n\n- Navigate to the Commits page (US1)\n- Filter commits by author (Kilian) and date (3/5/2023) (US2 or US3?)\nWait, the user's intent is about Kilian's commits. So the agent needs to filter by author and date. So maybe first, set the author filter to Kilian, then set the date. But the original task says \"how many commits did Kilian make on 3/5/2023\". So the agent needs both author and date. So steps would be:\n\n1. Navigate to the Commits section (US1)\n2. Search/filter by author Kilian and date 3/5/2023 (US2 or US3)\n3. US2 is Search/Filter/Sort Data. US3 is Configure Parameters/Settings. So filtering would be US2. But if the filtering is done through a form with parameters, maybe US3. Hmm. Let me check the definitions.\n\nUS2: Use search boxes, filters (like dropdowns or checkboxes), or sorting controls to locate, narrow down, or reorder data. So filtering by author and date would be US2. US3 is for configuring parameters before executing an action, like setting up a report's parameters. So in this case, applying the filters (author and date) would be US2. Then, the agent would need to execute the filter (if needed), but maybe in GitLab, the filter is applied as you type. So perhaps:\n\nStrategies:\n\n1. Navigate to the Commits page (US1)\n2. Filter commits by author 'kilian' and date '2023-03-05' (US2)\n3. Retrieve the number of commits displayed (US6)\n\nBut the original example for the sales report used US3 (configure parameters) and US4 (execute). So maybe in this case, if the filtering requires setting parameters and then executing, then US3 and US4. But if the filtering is done via a search box that immediately applies, then US2. So perhaps the answer depends on how GitLab's interface works. Since the user is on GitLab, let's assume that the commits page has a search/filter bar where you can input the author and date. So using that would be US2. Then, the count is retrieved. So the strategies would be:\n\nStrategies:\n\n- Navigate to the Commits section (US1)\n- Filter the commits by author 'kilian' and date '3/5/2023' (US2)\n- Retrieve the count of commits from the filtered results (US6)\n\nBut the problem is asking for the number of commits. So after filtering, the agent would need to check how many commits are listed. That's US6. So the universal strategies would be US1, US2, US6. But wait, the example given in the problem's output example used US1, US3, US4. So perhaps the difference is between configuring parameters (like a date range in a form) versus using a search/filter box. So in this case, if the date and author are entered into a search/filter box, that's US2. If it's a form with parameters are set (like a date picker and author dropdown), then US3. But the line between US2 and US3 can be blurry. Let me check the definitions again.\n\nUS2: Use search boxes, filters (like dropdowns or checkboxes), or sorting controls to locate, narrow down, or reorder data. So if the agent uses a search box to type the author's name and date, that's US2. If it's a form where you set parameters (like a start and end date, author selection from a dropdown), then US3. So in this case, if the agent uses a search/filter input to type \"author:kilian date:2023-03-05\", that's US2. If there are separate fields for author and date, each configured, that's US3. But perhaps in GitLab's commit page, there's a search bar where you can input the author and date using keywords. For example, in GitLab, you can filter commits by author and date using the search bar with terms like \"author:kilian after:2023-03-05 before:2023-03-06\". So that would be using a search box, hence US2. So the steps would be:\n\n1. Navigate to the Commits page (US1)\n2. Search/filter commits by author 'kilian' and date '3/5/2023' (US2)\n3. Retrieve the number of commits from the results (US6)\n\nSo the universal strategies would be US1, US2, US6. But let me check the example again. The example for \"how many commits...\" would need to extract the count, which is US6. So the answer would be:\n\nstrategies: [\n \"Navigate to the Commits section\",\n \"Filter commits by author 'kilian' and date '2023-03-05'\",\n \"Retrieve the number of commits from the filtered results\"\n],\nuniversal_strategies: [\"Navigate To Page/Section\", \"Search/Filter/Sort Data\", \"Extract/Retrieve Information\"],\nuniversal_strategy_ids: [\"US1\", \"US2\", \"US6\"]\n\nBut wait, the date in the task is 3/5/2023, which is March 5th. So the filter would need to set the date to that day. Depending on how GitLab's date filter works, maybe the agent needs to set a date range (from 3/5 to 3/5), which could be part of configuring parameters (US3). But if it's a search term like \"after:2023-03-05 before:2023-03-06\", that's part of the search/filter (US2). So the answer depends on the interface. Since the user is on GitLab, and assuming that the commits can be filtered via a search bar with such terms, then US2 is correct. Otherwise, if it's a date picker, then US3. But without specific knowledge of GitLab's UI, perhaps the safest approach is to use US2 for filtering. So the answer would be as above.\n\n\n```json\n{\n \"task_id\": 205,\n \"strategies\": [\n \"Navigate to the Commits section\",\n \"Filter commits by author 'kilian' and date '2023-03-05'\",\n \"Retrieve the number of commits from the filtered results\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategies\": [\n \"Navigate To Page/Section\",\n \"Search/Filter/Sort Data\",\n \"Extract/Retrieve Information\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategy_ids\": [\"US1\", \"US2\", \"US6\"]\n}\n```",
"model_reasoning": null
},
{
"task_id": 215,
"task_intent": "What are the key aspects that the customers don't like about Circe ice fleece",
"expected_ids": [
"US2",
"US7",
"US7"
],
"actual_ids": [
"US1",
"US2",
"US7",
"US6"
],
"correct": false,
"model": "aiproxy/deepseek-reasoner",
"model_output": "\nOkay, let's tackle this task. The user wants to know the key aspects customers don't like about the Circe Ice Fleece. Since the site is shopping_admin, I need to think about how an admin would find negative feedback.\n\nFirst, they probably need to go to where product reviews are. So navigating to the product page or a review section makes sense. That's US1: Navigate To Page/Section.\n\nNext, they might need to filter reviews for the Circe Ice Fleece specifically. Maybe there's a search or filter option. That's US2: Search/Filter/Sort Data.\n\nThen, looking at the reviews, they need to check for negative ones. Maybe filter by low ratings. Another use of US2 here.\n\nAfter that, they have to read through the negative reviews to find common complaints. That's US7: Analyze/Evaluate/Verify Data.\n\nSo the steps together would be: navigate to the product reviews, filter to the specific product, filter to negative reviews, analyze the content for common issues. The universal strategies involved are US1, US2, US2 again, and US7.\n\n\n```json\n{\n \"task_id\": 215,\n \"strategies\": [\n \"Navigate to the product reviews section for Circe Ice Fleece\",\n \"Filter reviews to show only negative feedback (e.g., low-star ratings)\",\n \"Analyze negative reviews to identify recurring complaints or patterns\",\n \"Extract key aspects mentioned in negative feedback (e.g., material quality, sizing, durability)\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategies\": [\n \"Navigate To Page/Section\",\n \"Search/Filter/Sort Data\",\n \"Analyze/Evaluate/Verify Data\",\n \"Extract/Retrieve Information\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategy_ids\": [\"US1\", \"US2\", \"US7\", \"US6\"]\n}\n```",
"model_reasoning": null
},
{
"task_id": 220,
"task_intent": "Show me the walking distance from nearby hotels to Gardner Steel Conference Center, that take at most 5 minutes?",
"expected_ids": [
"US1",
"US2",
"US4"
],
"actual_ids": [
"US1",
"US2",
"US3",
"US4",
"US5"
],
"correct": false,
"model": "aiproxy/deepseek-reasoner",
"model_output": "\nOkay, let's tackle this task. The user wants to see the walking distance from nearby hotels to the Gardner Steel Conference Center, and they want it to take at most 5 minutes. \n\nFirst, I need to figure out how to approach this using a map site. The main steps would involve finding the conference center, then locating nearby hotels, checking their walking distances, and filtering those that are within 5 minutes.\n\nStarting with the first step, the user needs to navigate to the conference center's location on the map. That's probably using the \"Navigate To Page/Section\" strategy (US1) because they have to go to a specific place on the map.\n\nNext, they need to search for nearby hotels. That's a search/filter action, so US2 makes sense here. The map might have a search bar or a filter for hotels.\n\nThen, the user has to check the walking distance for each hotel. This involves viewing details, which aligns with US5 (View/Inspect Item Details). Clicking on each hotel might show the walking time.\n\nAfter that, they need to analyze which hotels are within 5 minutes. That's evaluating data, so US7 (Analyze/Evaluate/Verify Data) applies here. The system might need to compare the walking times against the 5-minute threshold.\n\nFinally, maybe they need to adjust the search parameters if not all results fit, but since the user specified \"at most 5 minutes,\" perhaps the filter can be set upfront. Wait, but how do you set a walking time filter? Maybe in the search parameters, configure the maximum walking time. So configuring parameters (US3) could be part of this. Let me think again.\n\nWait, the initial steps might be: navigate to the conference center, search nearby hotels with a walking time filter set to 5 minutes. So configuring the parameters (US3) when searching. Then execute the search (US4). Then view the results (US5) and verify (US7). Hmm, maybe the steps are:\n\n1. Navigate to Gardner Steel Conference Center on the map (US1).\n2. Configure the search for nearby hotels with a walking time filter of ≤5 minutes (US3).\n3. Execute the search (US4).\n4. View the list of hotels and their walking distances (US5).\n5. Verify each hotel's walking time meets the criteria (US7).\n\nBut maybe the map interface allows setting the filter before searching, so combining steps 2 and 3. Alternatively, the search might automatically show walking times, and then the user has to analyze them. It depends on the site's features. Since the example uses a map site, perhaps the steps are:\n\n- Go to the conference center location.\n- Search for nearby hotels.\n- For each hotel, check walking time.\n- Filter out those over 5 minutes.\n\nBut if the site allows filtering by walking time, then configuring that filter (US3) would be part of the process. If not, the user has to manually check each hotel's details (US5) and analyze (US7). \n\nIn the absence of a direct filter, the strategies would be US1, US2, US5, US7. But if the site allows setting a maximum walking time, then US3 and US4 would be involved. Since the user is asking for a specific time constraint, the ideal approach is to use the site's filtering capabilities. So the steps would be:\n\n1. Navigate to the conference center's location (US1).\n2. Search for nearby hotels (US2).\n3. Configure the filter to show only hotels within a 5-minute walk (US3).\n4. Execute the filter (US4).\n5. View the filtered results (US5).\n\nBut maybe the search and filter are combined. Alternatively, the process might be:\n\n1. Navigate to the conference center (US1).\n2. Use the \"Nearby\" search for hotels (US2).\n3. Set the walking time parameter to 5 minutes (US3).\n4. Generate the results (US4).\n5. Review the list (US5) and verify they meet the time (US7).\n\nHmm, but US7 is about analyzing, which might be necessary if the filter isn't perfect. Alternatively, if the filter accurately applies the 5-minute limit, then US7 might not be needed. But the user's intent is to \"show me\" those that take at most 5 minutes, so the filter would handle that. So the strategies would be US1, US2, US3, US4, and US5 to view the details. But maybe the steps are:\n\n- Navigate to the conference center (US1).\n- Search for nearby hotels (US2).\n- Adjust the walking time filter to 5 minutes (US3).\n- Apply the filter (US4).\n- View the filtered hotels (US5).\n\nBut US4 is Execute Action, which would be clicking the apply button after setting the filter. So the strategies would be US1, US2, US3, US4, US5. However, maybe the search and filter are part of the same step. For example, when you search for hotels nearby, you can set the walking time parameter as part of the search configuration, then execute. So:\n\n1. Navigate to the conference center (US1).\n2. Configure the parameters for nearby hotels with max 5-minute walk (US3).\n3. Execute the search (US4).\n4. View the results (US5).\n\nBut the initial search might require navigating to the right section. Alternatively, the steps could be:\n\n1. Navigate to the conference center's page (US1).\n2. Use the \"Nearby Hotels\" feature (US2).\n3. Set the walking time filter to 5 minutes (US3).\n4. Apply the filter (US4).\n5. View the list of hotels (US5).\n\nIn this case, US2 is the search/filter step. Then US3 and US4 for configuring and executing. Then US5 to view. So the universal strategies would be US1, US2, US3, US4, US5. But maybe the analysis (US7) is needed if the filter isn't available. But the user's question implies that the filter exists. So the answer would be:\n\nStrategies:\n- Navigate to Gardner Steel Conference Center on the map.\n- Search for nearby hotels.\n- Configure walking time filter to 5 minutes.\n- Apply the filter to view results.\n- Review the filtered hotel list.\n\nUniversal strategies: US1, US2, US3, US4, US5.\n\nWait, the original task is to \"show me the walking distance from nearby hotels... that take at most 5 minutes.\" So the key steps are: find the location, find nearby hotels, filter by walking time, display results. So the strategies would be:\n\n1. Navigate to Gardner Steel Conference Center (US1).\n2. Search for nearby hotels (US2).\n3. Configure the walking time filter to 5 minutes (US3).\n4. Execute the filter (US4).\n5. View the filtered hotels and their walking distances (US5).\n\nBut maybe step 2 and 3 are combined. For example, when searching, you can set the parameters. So maybe:\n\n1. Navigate to the conference center (US1).\n2. Configure search parameters for hotels with max 5 minutes (US3).\n3. Execute the search (US4).\n4. View results (US5).\n\nBut the initial search for hotels is part of the configuration. Hmm. Alternatively, the steps could be:\n\n1. Navigate to the conference center's location (US1).\n2. Use the search/filter to find nearby hotels with walking time ≤5 minutes (US2 and US3).\n3. Generate the results (US4).\n4. Inspect the list (US5).\n\nBut the exact breakdown depends on how the map site's UI works. Assuming that the user has to first navigate to the location, then use a search with parameters, then execute, then view. So the universal strategies would be US1, US3, US4, US5. Wait, but the search/filter is part of US2. So maybe:\n\n- US1: Navigate to the conference center.\n- US2: Search/filter for nearby hotels.\n- US3: Configure the walking time parameter.\n- US4: Execute the search.\n- US5: View the results.\n\nBut US2 and US3 might be combined. For example, when you search, you can set parameters. So perhaps:\n\nStrategies:\n1. Navigate to Gardner Steel Conference Center on the map (US1).\n2. Configure search parameters to find nearby hotels with a maximum walking time of 5 minutes (US3).\n3. Execute the search to retrieve results (US4).\n4. View the list of qualifying hotels and their walking distances (US5).\n\nIn this case, the search is part of configuring parameters. So US3 and US4. Then US5. So the universal strategies would be US1, US3, US4, US5. But maybe the initial step of searching for hotels is US2. So:\n\n1. US1: Navigate to the location.\n2. US2: Initiate a search for nearby hotels.\n3. US3: Set the walking time filter to 5 minutes.\n4. US4: Execute the filtered search.\n5. US5: View the results.\n\nSo the strategies would be US1, US2, US3, US4, US5. But the user's intent is to show the walking distance that takes at most 5 minutes. So the key is setting the walking time parameter. Therefore, the steps would involve configuring that parameter (US3), executing the search (US4), and viewing (US5). The initial steps are navigating to the location (US1) and possibly initiating the search (US2). \n\nAlternatively, maybe the process is:\n\n- Go to the conference center's page (US1).\n- Use the nearby hotels feature (US2).\n- Adjust the walking time filter (US3).\n- Apply the filter (US4).\n- Check the results (US5).\n\nSo the universal strategies would be US1, US2, US3, US4, US5. \n\nBut I need to check the universal strategies definitions. US2 is Search/Filter/Sort Data. So initiating a search or applying a filter. US3 is configuring parameters. So if the user sets the walking time as a parameter before executing the search, that's US3. Then US4 to execute. \n\nTherefore, the final answer would be:\n\nStrategies:\n1. Navigate to Gardner Steel Conference Center on the map.\n2. Configure search parameters to show nearby hotels with a maximum walking time of 5 minutes.\n3. Execute the search to retrieve results.\n4. View the list of hotels and their walking distances.\n\nUniversal strategies: US1, US3, US4, US5.\n\nWait, but where is the search initiated? Maybe the initial step is to search for nearby hotels, which is US2. Then configure parameters (US3), then execute (US4). Hmm. Maybe the correct sequence is:\n\n1. US1: Navigate to the conference center.\n2. US2: Search for nearby hotels (this brings up a list without filters).\n3. US3: Set the walking time filter to 5 minutes.\n4. US4: Apply the filter.\n5. US5: View the filtered results.\n\nBut in some interfaces, the search and filter are part of the same process. For example, when you search for hotels, you can input parameters like walking time. So in that case, US3 would be configuring the parameters as part of the search, then US4 to execute. So:\n\n1. US1: Navigate to the location.\n2. US3: Configure the search with max 5-minute walk.\n3. US4: Execute the search.\n4. US5: View results.\n\nBut then where is the search for hotels? Maybe the initial step after navigating is to open the hotel search, which is US2. Then configure parameters (US3), execute (US4), view (US5). \n\nAlternatively, the process is:\n\n- Navigate to the conference center (US1).\n- Open the 'Nearby Hotels' search (US2).\n- In the search options, set walking time to 5 minutes (US3).\n- Click 'Search' or 'Apply' (US4).\n- View the results (US5).\n\nSo the strategies would be US1, US2, US3, US4, US5. \n\nBut according to the universal strategies, US2 is Search/Filter/Sort Data. So initiating the search for nearby hotels is US2. Then configuring the walking time is US3. Then executing the search with those parameters is US4. Then viewing is US5. \n\nTherefore, the correct universal strategies are US1, US2, US3, US4, US5. \n\nBut the example given in the user's output example for task 4 uses US1, US3, US4. So maybe in some cases, the configuration and execution are sufficient. However, in this case, the search for hotels is a separate step. \n\nAlternatively, maybe the 'search for nearby hotels' is part of the configuration. For example, when you navigate to the conference center, you click on 'search nearby' and then set parameters. So:\n\n1. US1: Navigate to the conference center.\n2. US3: Configure parameters (nearby hotels, walking time 5 mins).\n3. US4: Execute the search.\n4. US5: View results.\n\nBut then where is the search action? Maybe the configuration includes the search parameters. So the steps would be US1, US3, US4, US5. \n\nHmm, this is a bit ambiguous. The key is whether the initial action of searching for hotels is considered a separate step (US2) or part of the configuration (US3). \n\nThe user's intent is to show hotels within 5 minutes walk. So the main steps are:\n\n- Go to the conference center location.\n- Set up the search with the walking time filter.\n- Run the search.\n- Check the results.\n\nIf the map site has a feature where you can input the walking time as part of the search parameters, then configuring that (US3) and executing (US4) would be the steps. But if the user has to perform a search first and then apply a filter, then US2 and US3 would be separate. \n\nGiven that the user is on a map site, it's likely that after navigating to the location, they would use a search or nearby feature (US2), then apply a walking time filter (US3), execute (US4), and view (US5). \n\nTherefore, the strategies would be:\n\n1. Navigate to Gardner Steel Conference Center on the map (US1).\n2. Search for nearby hotels (US2).\n3. Configure the walking time filter to 5 minutes (US3).\n4. Apply the filter to update results (US4).\n5. View the filtered list of hotels and their walking distances (US5).\n\nThus, the universal strategies involved are US1, US2, US3, US4, US5. \n\nWait, but in the example given in the problem statement, the output example for task 4 uses US1, US3, US4. So maybe in some cases, the search is part of the configuration. But in this case, the search for hotels is a separate step. \n\nAlternatively, maybe the 'search for nearby hotels' is part of the configuration. For example, when you set the location to the conference center and choose to search for hotels with a walking time filter. So:\n\n1. US1: Navigate to the conference center.\n2. US3: Configure parameters (hotels, walking time 5 mins).\n3. US4: Execute the search.\n4. US5: View results.\n\nIn this case, the search is part of the configuration. But I think the correct approach is to include US2 for the initial search. \n\nBut perhaps the correct answer is:\n\nStrategies:\n- Navigate to the conference center (US1).\n- Configure the search parameters for nearby with 5-minute walk (US3).\n- Execute the search (US4).\n- View the results (US5).\n\nBecause the 'nearby hotels' is part of the parameters. So US3 includes specifying the location (already navigated to) and the walking time. Then US4 to execute. \n\nBut how does the search know to look for hotels? Maybe the user has to select 'hotels' as the category. So that's part of the configuration (US3). \n\nIn that case, the steps would be:\n\n1. US1: Navigate to the conference center.\n2. US3: Configure parameters (category: hotels, walking time: 5 mins).\n3. US4: Execute the search.\n4. US5: View results.\n\nThus, the universal strategies are US1, US3, US4, US5. \n\nBut the problem is that the user is on a map site. Typically, to find nearby places, you might first search for the category (e.g., hotels) which is US2. Then apply a filter for walking time (US3), then execute (US4). \n\nBut perhaps the process is:\n\n- Go to the conference center's location (US1).\n- Search for hotels nearby (US2).\n- Apply a walking time filter of 5 minutes (US3 and US4).\n- View the results (US5).\n\nBut applying the filter might be part of US2 (filtering). \n\nAlternatively, the steps could be:\n\n1. US1: Navigate to the conference center.\n2. US2: Search/filter for hotels in the nearby area.\n3. US3: Set the maximum walking time to 5 minutes.\n4. US4: Apply the filter.\n5. US5: View the filtered hotels.\n\nThus, the strategies would be US1, US2, US3, US4, US5. \n\nBut I'm not entirely sure. However, given the possible steps, I think the correct answer includes US1, US2, US3, US4, US5. \n\nBut looking back at the universal strategies, US2 is Search/Filter/Sort Data. So when the user searches for hotels, that's US2. Then configuring the walking time is US3. Then executing the filter is US4. Then viewing is US5. \n\nTherefore, the final answer should include these steps and the corresponding US IDs.\n\n\n```json\n{\n \"task_id\": 220,\n \"strategies\": [\n \"Navigate to Gardner Steel Conference Center on the map\",\n \"Search for nearby hotels\",\n \"Configure walking time filter to 5 minutes\",\n \"Apply the filter to update results\",\n \"View filtered hotels and verify walking distances\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategies\": [\n \"Navigate To Page/Section\",\n \"Search/Filter/Sort Data\",\n \"Configure Parameters/Settings\",\n \"Execute Action/Process\",\n \"View/Inspect Item Details\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategy_ids\": [\"US1\", \"US2\", \"US3\", \"US4\", \"US5\"]\n}\n```",
"model_reasoning": null
},
{
"task_id": 221,
"task_intent": "I am at CMU Pittsburgh, how long it takes to the nearest USPS postal office with different transportation methods?",
"expected_ids": [
"US1",
"US2",
"US4"
],
"actual_ids": [
"US1",
"US3",
"US2",
"US4",
"US5",
"US6",
"US7"
],
"correct": false,
"model": "aiproxy/deepseek-reasoner",
"model_output": "\nOkay, let's tackle this task. The user is at CMU Pittsburgh and wants to know the time to the nearest USPS office using different transport methods. First, I need to figure out the steps a GUI agent would take on a map site.\n\nStarting with navigation. The agent would probably need to go to the map's search or directions section. That's US1: Navigate To Page/Section. Then, set the starting point as CMU Pittsburgh. That's configuring parameters, so US3. Next, search for the nearest USPS office. That's another search action, maybe US2. Then, the system might automatically show different transportation options. The agent would need to check each method, which involves viewing details (US5) and extracting the time info (US6). Finally, comparing those times would be analysis, so US7. \n\nWait, do I need to execute an action after configuring parameters? Like after setting the start and end points, maybe clicking a button to get directions. That's US4. So the steps would be: navigate to directions, set start and end, execute the search, then view and extract the times for each method. Then analyze to compare. Let me structure that.\n\nSo strategies: 1. Navigate to directions. 2. Set start as CMU. 3. Search for USPS. 4. Generate directions. 5. View transport options. 6. Extract times. 7. Analyze. The universal strategies would be US1, US3, US2, US4, US5, US6, US7. But maybe some steps can be combined. For example, setting start and end might be part of configuring parameters. Also, the search for USPS could be part of US2. Let me check the example. In the input example, configuring date range is US3. So setting start and end locations would be US3. Searching for the destination is US2. Then executing the search (like clicking get directions) is US4. Then viewing the results is US5, extracting the times is US6, and comparing is US7. So the strategies would be:\n\n1. Navigate to directions section (US1)\n2. Configure start as CMU and search for USPS (US3 and US2)\n3. Execute the search (US4)\n4. View transportation options (US5)\n5. Extract travel times (US6)\n6. Analyze to compare times (US7)\n\nBut how to structure the strategies? Maybe each step into a strategy. Let me list them:\n\nStrategies:\n- Navigate to the directions or search section of the map. (US1)\n- Set the starting location to \"CMU Pittsburgh\" and search for the nearest USPS office. (US3 for setting start, US2 for searching)\n- Generate directions to the selected USPS location. (US4)\n- View the available transportation methods and their respective travel times. (US5 and US6)\n- Compare the travel times across different transportation methods. (US7)\n\nSo the universal strategies would be US1, US3, US2, US4, US5, US6, US7. But maybe some steps. For example, setting the start and searching could be combined under US3 and US2. The answer example had three steps for a report: navigate, configure, execute. Here, maybe:\n\n1. Navigate to directions (US1)\n2. Configure start and search destination (US3 and US2)\n3. Execute to get directions (US4)\n4. View and extract times (US5 and US6)\n5. Analyze (US7)\n\nBut the output example had three steps. Maybe group some. Let me see. The key steps are: navigate, set parameters (start and destination), execute, view, extract, analyze. So the strategies could be:\n\n1. Navigate to the directions section (US1)\n2. Configure start location as CMU Pittsburgh and search for nearest USPS (US3 and US2)\n3. Generate directions with different transportation methods (US4)\n4. View and extract travel times for each method (US5 and US6)\n5. Compare the travel times across methods (US7)\n\nBut the output example had strategies as phrases, not full sentences. So maybe:\n\nStrategies:\n- \"Navigate to Directions Section\",\n- \"Set Start Location and Search for USPS\",\n- \"Generate Directions with Transport Options\",\n- \"Extract Travel Times for Each Method\",\n- \"Compare Transportation Times\"\n\nBut the US IDs would be US1, US3, US2?), US4, US6, US7. Wait, the second step involves setting the start (US3) and searching (US2). But in the example, \"Configure Report Parameters\" is US3. So setting the start location is US3. Searching for the destination (USPS) is US2. So maybe two separate steps? But in practice, on a map, you might enter start and end in the same form. So perhaps \"Configure start and destination parameters\" as US3. But the search for the destination could be part of US2. Hmm. Alternatively, the step \"Set start as CMU and search for USPS\" combines US3 (configure parameters) and US2 (search). But how to represent that in the strategy. Maybe the strategy is \"Configure start location and search for nearest USPS office\", which would be US3 and US2. But the output example combines steps. For example, in the input example, the strategies were \"Navigate to Bestsellers Report\", \"Configure Report Parameters...\", \"Generate...\". So each strategy step can involve multiple US steps. But the output example lists each strategy step and maps to the US IDs. So in the example, the three strategies correspond to US1, US3, US4. So each strategy step can be mapped to one or more US steps. Wait, no. The output example's strategies each map to a single US. For example, \"Navigate to Bestsellers Report\" is US1. \"Configure Parameters...\" is US3. \"Generate...\" is US4. So each strategy step is mapped to one US. Therefore, in the current task, the steps should be broken down into individual US steps. So:\n\n1. Navigate to the directions section (US1)\n2. Configure the start location as CMU Pittsburgh (US3)\n3. Search for the nearest USPS office (US2)\n4. Execute the directions search (US4)\n5. View the transportation method options (US5)\n6. Extract the travel times for each method (US6)\n7. Analyze and compare the times (US7)\n\nBut that's seven steps, which might be too detailed. However, the output example had three steps. So perhaps some steps can be combined. For example, steps 2 and 3 could be combined into \"Configure start location and search for USPS office\" (US3 and US2). Then step 4 is execute (US4). Then steps 5 and 6: view and extract (US5 and US6). Then step 7: analyze (US7). So the strategies would be:\n\n1. Navigate to Directions Section (US1)\n2. Configure start location and search for nearest USPS (US3, US2)\n3. Generate directions (US4)\n4. View and extract travel times (US5, US6)\n5. Compare transportation times (US7)\n\nBut the output example lists each strategy step with a single US. So perhaps the steps need to be split into individual US steps. However, the example shows that sometimes a strategy step can involve multiple US steps, but the output example didn't. For example, the example's strategies are each mapped to a single US. So perhaps the correct approach is to split into individual steps each mapped to a single US. Let's try:\n\nStrategies:\n1. Navigate to the directions or search section of the map application. (US1)\n2. Configure the starting location as \"CMU Pittsburgh\". (US3)\n3. Search for the nearest USPS postal office. (US2)\n4. Execute the search to generate directions. (US4)\n5. View the available transportation methods and their details. (US5)\n6. Extract the travel times for each transportation method. (US6)\n7. Analyze and compare the travel times across different methods. (US7)\n\nBut this might be too granular. However, the output example had three steps. Maybe some steps can be merged. For example, steps 2 and 3 could be merged into \"Configure start location and search for USPS\" but that would involve US3 and US2. But the output example's strategies each correspond to one US. So perhaps the answer should list each step with a single US. Alternatively, maybe the search for USPS is part of configuring parameters. For example, in a map app, when you set the start and end points, you first set the start (US3), then search for the destination (US2). Then execute (US4). Then view (US5), extract (US6), analyze (US7). So the strategies would be:\n\n1. Navigate to directions (US1)\n2. Set start location to CMU Pittsburgh (US3)\n3. Search for nearest USPS office (US2)\n4. Generate directions (US4)\n5. View transportation options (US5)\n6. Extract travel times (US6)\n7. Compare times (US7)\n\nBut the output example had three steps. Maybe the answer can have more steps. Let's check the output example again. The example had three strategies, each mapped to a US. So perhaps the answer should have more steps. Let's proceed with the detailed steps.\n\nThe final answer would be:\n\nStrategies:\n1. Navigate to the directions section of the map. (US1)\n2. Configure the starting point as CMU Pittsburgh. (US3)\n3. Search for the nearest USPS postal office. (US2)\n4. Generate directions to the selected USPS location. (US4)\n5. View the details of each transportation method. (US5)\n6. Extract the travel time for each method. (US6)\n7. Analyze and compare the travel times. (US7)\n\nBut the user might not need all these steps. Alternatively, maybe some steps can be grouped. For example, steps 2 and 3 could be \"Set start and search destination\" (US3 and US2). But according to the output example, each strategy step is mapped to a single US. So perhaps the answer should list each step with a single US. Therefore, the strategies array would have seven items, each with their own US. But the example had three steps. Maybe the answer can have more steps. Let's proceed.\n\nThe JSON output would then have strategies as the seven steps, each mapped to their US. But perhaps in practice, some steps are combined. For example, generating directions (US4) might automatically show the transportation options. So maybe after generating, the agent can view (US5) and extract (US6) the times. Then analyze (US7). So the strategies could be:\n\n1. Navigate to directions (US1)\n2. Set start location (US3)\n3. Search for USPS (US2)\n4. Generate directions (US4)\n5. View and extract times (US5 and US6)\n6. Compare times (US7)\n\nBut how to represent US5 and US6 in one step. The output example had each strategy step mapped to a single US. So perhaps the steps would be:\n\n1. Navigate to directions (US1)\n2. Configure start location (US3)\n3. Search for USPS (US2)\n4. Generate directions (US4)\n5. View transportation options (US5)\n6. Extract travel times (US6)\n7. Compare times (US7)\n\nBut maybe the answer can have these steps. The user's intent is to get the nearest USPS and compare times. So the agent needs to navigate to directions, set start, search destination, generate, then check each method's time. So the answer would include these steps. The universal strategies would be US1, US3, US2, US4, US5, US6, US7. But maybe the answer can be more concise. For example, after generating directions, the transportation methods are shown, so viewing and extracting times can be part of the same step. But according to the universal strategies, viewing is US5 and extracting is US6. So they are separate. Therefore, the answer should list them as separate steps. \n\nSo the final answer would be:\n\n{\n \"task_id\": 221,\n \"strategies\": [\n \"Navigate to the directions section of the map\",\n \"Set the starting location to CMU Pittsburgh\",\n \"Search for the nearest USPS postal office\",\n \"Generate directions to the selected USPS location\",\n \"View the available transportation methods\",\n \"Extract travel times for each transportation method\",\n \"Compare the travel times across different methods\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategies\": [\n \"Navigate To Page/Section\",\n \"Configure Parameters/Settings\",\n \"Search/Filter/Sort Data\",\n \"Execute Action/Process\",\n \"View/Inspect Item Details\",\n \"Extract/Retrieve Information\",\n \"Analyze/Evaluate/Verify Data\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategy_ids\": [\"US1\", \"US3\", \"US2\", \"US4\", \"US5\", \"US6\", \"US7\"]\n}\n\n\n```json\n{\n \"task_id\": 221,\n \"strategies\": [\n \"Navigate to the directions section of the map\",\n \"Set the starting location to CMU Pittsburgh\",\n \"Search for the nearest USPS postal office\",\n \"Generate directions to the selected USPS location\",\n \"View the available transportation methods\",\n \"Extract travel times for each transportation method\",\n \"Compare the travel times across different methods\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategies\": [\n \"Navigate To Page/Section\",\n \"Configure Parameters/Settings\",\n \"Search/Filter/Sort Data\",\n \"Execute Action/Process\",\n \"View/Inspect Item Details\",\n \"Extract/Retrieve Information\",\n \"Analyze/Evaluate/Verify Data\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategy_ids\": [\"US1\", \"US3\", \"US2\", \"US4\", \"US5\", \"US6\", \"US7\"]\n}\n```",
"model_reasoning": null
},
{
"task_id": 225,
"task_intent": "What do customers say about brush from sephora",
"expected_ids": [
"US2",
"US5"
],
"actual_ids": [
"US1",
"US5",
"US7",
"US8",
"US6"
],
"correct": false,
"model": "aiproxy/deepseek-reasoner",
"model_output": "\nOkay, let's tackle this task. The user wants to know what customers are saying about a brush from Sephora on a shopping site. First, I need to figure out the steps a GUI agent would take.\n\nStarting with navigation. The agent would probably go to the product page for that specific brush. So that's US1: Navigate To Page/Section. Then, once on the product page, there should be a reviews section. The agent needs to view those details, which is US5: View/Inspect Item Details. \n\nNext, the agent might need to analyze the reviews to extract common themes or comments. That's US7: Analyze/Evaluate/Verify Data. Maybe there are multiple pages of reviews, so navigating through them using pagination (US8: Navigate Within Data/Results) would be necessary. Finally, retrieving specific information from the reviews, like quotes or ratings, which is US6: Extract/Retrieve Information.\n\nWait, let me check the universal strategies again. US5 is about viewing details, which would include accessing the reviews section. Then analyzing the content (US7) makes sense. If there are many reviews, navigating through pages (US8) is needed. Extracting the actual comments would be US6. So the strategies would be: navigate to product page, view reviews, analyze content, navigate through pages, extract info. The corresponding US IDs would be US1, US5, US7, US8, US6. Let me structure that into the JSON format.\n\n\n```json\n{\n \"task_id\": 225,\n \"strategies\": [\n \"Navigate to Sephora brush product page\",\n \"View customer reviews section\",\n \"Analyze review content for feedback themes\",\n \"Navigate through review pages if needed\",\n \"Extract key customer opinions from reviews\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategies\": [\n \"Navigate To Page/Section\",\n \"View/Inspect Item Details\",\n \"Analyze/Evaluate/Verify Data\",\n \"Navigate Within Data/Results\",\n \"Extract/Retrieve Information\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategy_ids\": [\"US1\", \"US5\", \"US7\", \"US8\", \"US6\"]\n}\n```",
"model_reasoning": null
},
{
"task_id": 227,
"task_intent": "What is the price range for products from EYZUTAK?",
"expected_ids": [
"US2",
"US1",
"US5"
],
"actual_ids": [
"US1",
"US2",
"US6",
"US7"
],
"correct": false,
"model": "aiproxy/deepseek-reasoner",
"model_output": "\nOkay, let's tackle this task. The user wants to know the price range for products from the brand EYZUTAK on a shopping site. First, I need to figure out how to approach this.\n\nHmm, the user is on a shopping site, so probably there's a search or filter feature. The first step would be to navigate to the section where products are listed. Maybe a search bar or a brand section. Then, they need to filter products by the brand EYZUTAK. That makes sense. Once the products are filtered, the next need to see the prices. But how do you get the price range? Maybe after filtering, the products are listed with their prices, so the user would have to look through them to find the minimum and maximum. Alternatively, some sites might show a price range automatically when filtering. But since the task is to determine the range, the user might have to check each product's price and note the highest and lowest. So the steps would involve navigating to the products, filtering by brand, and then extracting the prices to determine the range. Let me map this to the universal strategies.\n\nFirst, navigate to the products page or section (US1). Then, apply a filter for the brand EYZUTAK (US2). After that, view the details of each product to get their prices (US5). Then extract the prices (US6) and finally analyze them to find the range (US7). Wait, maybe after filtering, the prices are already listed, so extracting the prices from the list without viewing each detail. So maybe US6 is extracting the prices from the list, then US7 to determine the min and max. Let me check the strategies again. US2 is search/filter/sort, so applying the brand filter. Then US6 is extract info, which would be getting all the prices from the filtered list. Then US7 to analyze and find the range. That makes sense. So the strategies would be: 1. Navigate to the product listings. 2. Filter by EYZUTAK. 3. Extract prices. 4. Analyze for range. But the output example had three steps. Maybe combine some steps. Let me structure it as:\n\n1. Navigate to the product catalog or search page (US1).\n2. Apply a filter to show only EYZUTAK products (US2).\n3. Extract the prices of the filtered products (US6).\n4. Determine the minimum and maximum prices to establish the range (US7).\n\nBut the output example for the previous task had three steps. Maybe the extraction and analysis can be considered as a single step? Or maybe the user has to view each product's details. Wait, if the prices are visible in the list after filtering, then US6 would be extracting from the list. If not, then they have to view each product (US5) and extract each price (US6), then analyze. But that's more steps. The problem is the initial task is to get the price range. So the most efficient way would be to filter, then extract all prices from the list, then compute the range. So the strategies would be:\n\n- Navigate to the product section (US1)\n- Filter products by brand EYZUTAK (US2)\n- Extract all product prices (US6)\n- Analyze to find the price range (US7)\n\nBut the output example for task 4 had three steps. Maybe in this case, the extraction and analysis are part of the same step? Or maybe the user has to generate a report or something. Wait, the sites here are \"shopping\", not \"shopping_admin\". So it's the regular shopping site, not the admin side. So the user is a regular user, not an admin. So they might not have access to a report. They would have to manually search and check. So the steps would be:\n\n1. Go to the product search or catalog page (US1).\n2. Use the brand filter to select EYZUTAK (US2).\n3. From the filtered list, extract the prices (US6).\n4. Determine the min and max (US7).\n\nBut the output needs to be in strategies, which are more action-oriented. So maybe:\n\nStrategies:\n1. Navigate to the product listings page.\n2. Apply brand filter for EYZUTAK.\n3. Extract prices of displayed products.\n4. Analyze prices to determine the range.\n\nBut the universal strategies would be US1, US2, US6, US7. However, the output example had three steps. Maybe combine steps 3 and 4 into one. For example, \"Extract and analyze product prices to determine the range.\" But according to the universal strategies, extraction and analysis are separate. So perhaps the strategies are:\n\n1. Navigate to the product listings or search page (US1)\n2. Filter the products by the brand EYZUTAK (US2)\n3. Extract the price information from the filtered products (US6)\n4. Evaluate the prices to identify the minimum and maximum values (US7)\n\nBut the user might need to view each product's details if the list doesn't show prices. But assuming the list shows prices, then steps 3 and 4 are separate. However, the answer needs to fit into the strategies as per the example. Let me check the example again. The example for task 4 had three steps: navigate, configure, execute. So maybe here, the steps would be:\n\n1. Navigate to the product search/catalog (US1)\n2. Filter by EYZUTAK (US2)\n3. Extract and analyze prices (US6 and US7)\n\nBut the output example combined generate and review into one step. So perhaps here, the third step is \"Extract and determine price range\". So the strategies. So the universal strategies would be US1, US2, US6, US7. But the output example for task 4 had three steps with three strategies. So maybe here, the steps are:\n\nStrategies:\n1. Navigate to the product search page (US1)\n2. Apply brand filter for EYZUTAK (US2)\n3. Extract and analyze product prices to determine the range (US6 and US7)\n\nBut the universal strategies would list US6 and US7. But the output example lists the strategies as separate. Wait, in the example, the third step was \"Generate and Review Bestsellers Report\" which maps to US4 (execute action) and US5 (view details). But in the output example, the universal strategies were US1, US3, US4. So the strategies can combine multiple steps but the universal strategies are listed as separate. Wait, no. The example's strategies were:\n\n\"strategies\": [\n \"Navigate to Bestsellers Report\",\n \"Configure Report Parameters for January 2023\",\n \"Generate and Review Bestsellers Report\"\n ],\n\"universal_strategies\": [\n \"Navigate To Page/Section\",\n \"Configure Parameters/Settings\",\n \"Execute Action/Process\"\n ],\n\"universal_strategy_ids\": [\"US1\", \"US3\", \"US4\"]\n\nSo each strategy step corresponds to one universal strategy. So in this case, the third step \"Generate and Review\" combines two actions (execute and view), but in the universal strategies, it's only US4 (execute). The \"review\" part is part of the execute action? Or maybe the example is not perfectly aligned. Hmm. So perhaps each strategy step should map to one universal strategy. So in the current task, the steps would be:\n\n1. Navigate to the product listings (US1)\n2. Filter by EYZUTAK (US2)\n3. Extract price information (US6)\n4. Analyze to determine range (US7)\n\nBut the user's task is to get the price range, so maybe the steps are part of the process, but the answer needs to list the steps as strategies. However, the output example had three steps. Maybe in this case, the extraction and analysis can be considered as one step. But according to the universal strategies, they are separate. So perhaps the answer should have four steps. But the example had three. Maybe the user can combine steps. For example, after filtering, the prices are visible, so extracting and analyzing can be done in one step. But according to the universal strategies, extraction and analysis are separate. So perhaps the answer should have four steps. But the output example had three. Let me check the output requirements. The output example had three strategies and three universal strategies. So each strategy step corresponds to one universal strategy. So in this case, the steps would be:\n\n1. Navigate to the product search or catalog page (US1)\n2. Apply a filter to show products from EYZUTAK (US2)\n3. Extract the prices of the filtered products (US6)\n4. Analyze the prices to determine the range (US7)\n\nBut that's four steps, but the example had three. Maybe the user can combine steps 3 and 4 into one strategy step. For example, \"Extract and analyze product prices to determine the range.\" Then the universal strategies would be US6 and US7. But the output example lists each strategy step as corresponding to one universal strategy. So perhaps the answer, the strategies are:\n\n1. Navigate to the product listings page. (US1)\n2. Filter products by brand EYZUTAK. (US2)\n3. Extract and evaluate the price range from the displayed products. (US6 and US7)\n\nBut the universal strategies would be US1, US2, and then both US6 and US7. But the output example lists each strategy step as one universal strategy. So perhaps the answer should have three steps, combining extraction and analysis into one step. But according to map that to the universal strategies, it's two strategies. However, the output example's third step was \"Generate and Review Bestsellers Report\" which maps to US4 (execute action) and possibly US5 (view details), but in the example, the universal strategies were US1, US3, US4. So maybe the answer can have a strategy step that combines two actions, but the universal strategies are selected based on the primary action. Alternatively, maybe the analysis is part of the extraction. Hmm. Alternatively, maybe after filtering, the price range is visible in the filtered results, so extracting the range directly. For example, some sites show a price range when you select a brand. In that case, the steps would be:\n\n1. Navigate to the product section (US1)\n2. Filter by EYZUTAK (US2)\n3. Extract the displayed price range (US6)\n\nBut that's three steps. But if the site doesn't show the range, then the user has to extract each price and compute. So the answer depends on the site's features. Since the site is \"shopping\", which is a general site, maybe the user has to look at individual product prices. So the steps would be:\n\n1. Navigate to the product search page. (US1)\n2. Apply a filter for brand EYZUTAK. (US2)\n3. Extract prices of all products. (US6)\n4. Determine the minimum and maximum prices. (US7)\n\nBut the output example had three steps. Maybe the user can combine steps 3 and 4 into one strategy step. So the strategies would be:\n\n1. Navigate to the product listings page. (US1)\n2. Filter products by the brand EYZUTAK. (US2)\n3. Extract and analyze product prices to determine the range. (US6 and US7)\n\nThen the universal strategies would be US1, US2, US6, US7. But the output example lists three universal strategies. So perhaps the answer should have three steps, each mapped to one universal strategy. But how? Maybe the analysis is part of the extraction. Or maybe the extraction includes analysis. But according to the universal strategies, US6 is extract/retrieve information, and US7 is analyze/evaluate/verify data. So they are separate. Therefore, the answer should have four steps. But the example had three. Maybe the answer can have three steps by combining steps 3 and 4 into one, but then the universal strategies would include both US6 and US7. However, the output example's third step was mapped to US4 (execute action). So perhaps the answer can have three steps, with the third step being US6 and US7. But the output requires listing the universal strategies and their IDs. So in this case, the answer would have:\n\nstrategies: [\n \"Navigate to the product listings page\",\n \"Filter products by brand EYZUTAK\",\n \"Extract and analyze product prices to determine the range\"\n],\nuniversal_strategies: [\"Navigate To Page/Section\", \"Search/Filter/Sort Data\", \"Extract/Retrieve Information\", \"Analyze/Evaluate/Verify Data\"],\nuniversal_strategy_ids: [\"US1\", \"US2\", \"US6\", \"US7\"]\n\nBut the example had three strategies and three universal strategies. So perhaps the answer should have three steps, but the third step combines US6 and US7. But the output example didn't do that. Hmm. Alternatively, maybe the analysis is considered part of the extraction. But according to the definitions, US6 is extracting the information, and US7 is analyzing it. So they are separate. Therefore, the correct approach is to have four steps. But the example had three. Maybe the answer can have three steps by combining steps 3 and 4. Let's see. The user's intent is to find the price range. So after filtering, the user needs to extract the prices (US6) and then analyze (US7). But maybe the extraction and analysis are part of the same step. For example, \"Extract the price range from the filtered products.\" But if the site doesn't show the range, the user has to extract each price and then compute. So the steps would be:\n\n1. Navigate to the product search page. (US1)\n2. Apply brand filter for EYZUTAK. (US2)\n3. Extract all product prices. (US6)\n4. Determine the price range. (US7)\n\nBut the output example had three steps. Maybe the answer can have four steps. But the example had three. However, the user's task is to provide the correct strategies regardless of the number. So perhaps the answer should have four steps. But the output example had three. Let me check the output requirements again. The output example had three strategies and three universal strategies. So perhaps in this case, the answer should have three steps. Let me think again. Maybe after filtering, the user can be considered to view the list of products and their prices, which is part of US5 (view details). But no, US5 is about viewing details of a specific item. If the list already shows the prices, then US6 is extracting from the list. So the steps would be:\n\n1. Navigate to the product listings (US1)\n2. Filter by EYZUTAK (US2)\n3. Extract prices from the filtered list (US6)\n4. Analyze to find range (US7)\n\nBut that's four steps. However, the output example had three. Maybe the answer can combine steps 3 and 4 into one strategy step. For example, \"Extract and analyze product prices to determine the range.\" Then the universal strategies would be US6 and US7. But the output example's third step was mapped to US4. So perhaps the answer, the strategies are:\n\n1. Navigate to the product search page. (US1)\n2. Apply filter to show EYZUTAK products. (US2)\n3. Extract and evaluate the price range. (US6 and US7)\n\nBut the universal strategies would be US1, US2, US6, US7. But the output example had three strategies and three universal strategies. So perhaps the answer should list three strategies, but include all four universal strategies. But the output example's universal_strategies and universal_strategy_ids lists each step's strategy. Wait, in the example, the three steps corresponded to one strategy each. So the answer should have each strategy step mapped to one universal strategy. Therefore, in this case, the steps would be:\n\n1. Navigate to the product listings page. (US1)\n2. Filter products by brand EYZUTAK. (US2)\n3. Extract the prices of the displayed products. (US6)\n4. Analyze the prices to determine the range. (US7)\n\nBut that's four steps. However, the example had three steps. Maybe the answer can combine steps 3 and 4 into one, but that would require two universal strategies for one step. But the output example didn't do that. So perhaps the answer should have four steps. But the user's example had three. Maybe the answer can have three steps by combining steps 3 and 4. But according to the universal strategies, they are separate. So perhaps the answer should have four steps. But the output example had three. Maybe the answer can have three steps, with the third step being US6 and US7. But the output example's third step was mapped to US4. So perhaps the answer can have three steps, with the third step being US6 and US7. But the output requires listing the universal strategies and their IDs. So in this case, the answer would have:\n\nstrategies: [\n \"Navigate to the product search page\",\n \"Filter products by brand EYZUTAK\",\n \"Extract and analyze product prices to determine the range\"\n],\nuniversal_strategies: [\"Navigate To Page/Section\", \"Search/Filter/Sort Data\", \"Extract/Retrieve Information\", \"Analyze/Evaluate/Verify Data\"],\nuniversal_strategy_ids: [\"US1\", \"US2\", \"US6\", \"US7\"]\n\nBut the example had three strategies and three universal strategies. So this might not fit. Alternatively, maybe the analysis is part of the extraction. But according to the definitions, they are separate. Therefore, the correct answer should include four steps. However, the user's example had three steps. Maybe the answer can have three steps by combining steps 3 and 4. But according to the universal strategies, they are separate. So perhaps the answer should have four steps. But the output example had three. I'm a bit confused here. Let me look back at the universal strategies. US6 is analyze/evaluate/verify data. So after extracting the prices (US6), the user needs to analyze them (US7). So they are two separate steps. Therefore, the answer should have four steps. But the output example had three. Maybe the answer can have three steps by combining steps 3 and 4. For example:\n\nStrategies:\n1. Navigate to the product listings page. (US1)\n2. Apply brand filter for EYZUTAK. (US2)\n3. Extract and analyze product prices to determine the range. (US6 and US7)\n\nBut the universal strategies would be US1, US2, US6, US7. But the output example's third step was mapped to US4. So perhaps the answer can list three strategies, but include four universal strategies. But the output example's universal_strategies and universal_strategy_ids lists three entries. So perhaps the answer should have three strategies, but the third step combines two universal strategies. But according to the instructions, the output must include the referenced universal strategies and their IDs. So if a strategy step combines two universal strategies, both should be listed. For example, in the output example, the third step \"Generate and Review Bestsellers Report\" involves executing the report (US4) and viewing it (US5). But in the example, the universal strategies listed were US1, US3, US4. So the \"review\" part was not considered as a separate US5. So perhaps in this case, the third step's \"analyze\" is part of the extraction. Or maybe the analysis is considered part of the extraction. But according to the definitions, US6 is extracting information, and US7 is analyzing. So they are separate. Therefore, the answer should have four steps, but the example had three. This is conflicting. Maybe the answer should follow the example's structure, even if it means combining steps. So perhaps the answer would be:\n\nStrategies:\n1. Navigate to the product listings page. (US1)\n2. Filter products by brand EYZUTAK. (US2)\n3. Extract and determine the price range. (US6 and US7)\n\nUniversal strategies: US1, US2, US6, US7\n\nBut the output example's universal_strategies list had three entries. So perhaps the answer should list all four. But the example had three. Maybe the answer should proceed with four steps. But the example had three. I think the correct approach is to list all necessary steps, even if it's four. But the example had three. Maybe the answer can have three steps by combining steps 3 and 4. So:\n\nStrategies:\n1. Navigate to the product search page. (US1)\n2. Apply filter to display EYZUTAK products. (US2)\n3. Extract and analyze prices to determine the range. (US6 and US7)\n\nUniversal strategies: US1, US2, US6, US7\n\nBut the output example's universal_strategies list had three entries. So perhaps the answer is acceptable. The user's example had three steps and three universal strategies. But in this case, the third step combines two. So the answer would list four universal strategies. But the output example's third step was mapped to one. So perhaps the answer should have three steps, each mapped to one universal strategy. But how? Maybe the analysis is part of the extraction. For example, extracting the price range directly. But if the site doesn't show the range, the user has to compute it. So perhaps the answer should have four steps. But the example had three. I'm stuck. Let me proceed with the four steps, but perhaps the answer expects three. Alternatively, maybe the user can view the product details (US5) and extract the price (US6) for each product, then analyze. So the steps would be:\n\n1. Navigate to the product search page. (US1)\n2. Filter by EYZUTAK. (US2)\n3. View each product's details to extract prices. (US5 and US6)\n4. Analyze to determine the range. (US7)\n\nBut that's four steps. But the answer example had three. Alternatively, maybe the steps are:\n\n1. Navigate to the product search page. (US1)\n2. Filter by EYZUTAK. (US2)\n3. View product prices and determine the range. (US6 and US7)\n\nBut then the universal strategies would be US1, US2, US6, US7. But the answer example had three steps. So perhaps the answer should have three steps, with the third step combining US6 and US7. So the answer would be:\n\n{\n \"task_id\": 227,\n \"strategies\": [\n \"Navigate to the product search page\",\n \"Filter products by brand EYZUTAK\",\n \"Extract and analyze product prices to determine the price range\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategies\": [\n \"Navigate To Page/Section\",\n \"Search/Filter/Sort Data\",\n \"Extract/Retrieve Information\",\n \"Analyze/Evaluate/Verify Data\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategy_ids\": [\"US1\", \"US2\", \"US6\", \"US7\"]\n}\n\nBut the output example had three strategies and three universal strategies. However, in this case, the third strategy combines two universal strategies. So the answer lists all four. I think this is acceptable, even though the example had three. The instructions say to select the appropriate templates and generate the specific strategy content. So if the task requires four steps, then it's correct. But perhaps the answer can be three steps. Let me think again. Maybe after filtering, the prices are displayed in a list, so the prices are already visible. So extracting the prices (US6) and then analyzing (US7) are two steps, but maybe the user can do them in one action. So the strategies would be:\n\n1. Navigate to the product search page. (US1)\n2. Apply brand filter for EYZUTAK. (US2)\n3. Review the product prices to determine the range. (US6 and US7)\n\nBut \"review\" might imply both extraction and analysis. So the universal strategies would be US6 and US7. But the answer example's third step was mapped to US4. So perhaps the answer is acceptable. So the final answer would be as above.\n\n\n```json\n{\n \"task_id\": 227,\n \"strategies\": [\n \"Navigate to the product search/catalog page\",\n \"Filter products by brand EYZUTAK\",\n \"Extract prices of the filtered products\",\n \"Analyze prices to determine the minimum and maximum values\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategies\": [\n \"Navigate To Page/Section\",\n \"Search/Filter/Sort Data\",\n \"Extract/Retrieve Information\",\n \"Analyze/Evaluate/Verify Data\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategy_ids\": [\"US1\", \"US2\", \"US6\", \"US7\"]\n}\n```",
"model_reasoning": null
},
{
"task_id": 23,
"task_intent": "List out reviewers, if exist, who mention about good fingerprint resistant",
"expected_ids": [
"US1",
"US7"
],
"actual_ids": [
"US1",
"US2",
"US7",
"US6"
],
"correct": false,
"model": "aiproxy/deepseek-reasoner",
"model_output": "\nOkay, let's tackle this task. The user wants to list reviewers who mention \"good fingerprint resistant\" on a shopping site. First, I need to figure out the steps a GUI agent would take.\n\nStarting with navigation. The agent probably needs to go to the product page where reviews are located. That's US1: Navigate To Page/Section. Then, they might need to search through the reviews. Since the reviews could be many, using a search or filter function makes sense. That's US2: Search/Filter/Sort Data. The agent would input the keyword \"fingerprint resistant\" to find relevant reviews.\n\nAfter filtering, the agent needs to check if there are any results. If there are, they need to extract the reviewers' names. That's US6: Extract/Retrieve Information. But wait, maybe they also need to verify that the reviews actually mention \"good\" in relation to fingerprint resistance. So analyzing the content is part of it, which is US7: Analyze/Evaluate/Verify Data. They have to ensure the context is positive.\n\nIf there are multiple pages of results, navigating through them with pagination (US8) might be necessary. But the example given in the input doesn't mention pagination, so maybe it's not needed here. The main steps are navigating, searching, extracting, and verifying. So the strategies would be: navigate to product reviews, search for the keyword, check for existence, extract reviewer names, and verify the mentions are positive. \n\nBut the universal strategies should map to the given IDs. So US1 for navigation, US2 for search, US7 for extraction and verification. Wait, extraction is US6. So maybe the steps are US1, US2, US6, and US7. But the output example combines steps. Let me check the example again. The output example for a similar task used US1, US3, US4. So each strategy step corresponds to a universal strategy. \n\nIn this case, the strategies would be: 1. Navigate to product reviews section (US1). 2. Search reviews for \"fingerprint resistant\" (US2). 3. Extract reviewer names from matching reviews (US6). 4. Verify reviews mention \"good\" in context (US7). But the user's intent is to list reviewers who mention \"good fingerprint resistant\". So maybe the search term should include \"good\", but the user might not have that. Alternatively, the agent searches for \"fingerprint resistant\" and then checks if \"good\" is present. \n\nSo the steps would be: navigate to reviews, filter/search for \"fingerprint resistant\", then analyze each review to see if \"good\" is mentioned in that context. Then extract the names. So the universal strategies would be US1, US2, US7, US6. But the order might be important. So the strategies array would list the steps in order, and the US IDs accordingly. \n\nBut the output example for a similar task had three steps. Maybe here, the search includes the keyword \"good fingerprint resistant\", but sometimes the exact phrase might not be present, so the agent needs to search for \"fingerprint resistant\" and then check for \"good\". So the strategies would be:\n\n1. Navigate to the product reviews section (US1)\n2. Search reviews for the keyword \"fingerprint resistant\" (US2)\n3. Analyze the filtered reviews to identify mentions of \"good\" (US7)\n4. Extract the names of reviewers who meet the criteria (US6)\n\nBut the user's intent is to list reviewers who mention \"good fingerprint resistant\", which is a specific phrase. Maybe the search can be for \"good fingerprint resistant\", combining both terms. Then steps would be:\n\n1. Navigate to reviews (US1)\n2. Search for \"good fingerprint resistant\" (US2)\n3. Extract reviewer names (US6)\n4. Verify existence (if any) (US7?)\n\nWait, the task says \"if exist\", so the agent needs to check if there are any results. So maybe after searching, they need to verify if there are results. But the extraction is part of retrieving the information. So the strategies could be:\n\n- Navigate to the reviews section (US1)\n- Use the search/filter to input \"good fingerprint resistant\" (US2)\n- Check if any reviews are found (US7)\n- If yes, extract the reviewer names (US6)\n\nBut the output example might combine some steps. The answer needs to list the strategies as steps, each mapped to a US. So perhaps:\n\nStrategies:\n1. Navigate to the product reviews section. (US1)\n2. Search reviews for the term \"good fingerprint resistant\". (US2)\n3. Extract the list of reviewers from the search results. (US6)\n4. Verify if any reviewers exist. (US7)\n\nBut US7 is about analyzing/evaluating. So verifying existence would be part of US7. So the steps are:\n\n1. Navigate (US1)\n2. Search (US2)\n3. Analyze the results to check existence (US7)\n4. Extract names if they exist (US6)\n\nBut the order might be Navigate, Search, Extract, then Analyze. Wait, no. Because you can't extract before checking. So maybe:\n\nStrategies array:\n- \"Navigate to product reviews section\"\n- \"Search reviews for 'good fingerprint resistant'\"\n- \"Check if any matching reviews exist\"\n- \"Extract reviewer names from matching reviews\"\n\nUniversal strategies would be US1, US2, US7, US6.\n\nBut the output example had three steps. Maybe combine some steps. For example, \"Search reviews for the keyword and check existence\" could be US2 and US7. But each strategy should correspond to one US. So each step is one US.\n\nSo the correct mapping would be:\n\n1. Navigate (US1)\n2. Search (US2)\n3. Analyze/verify existence (US7)\n4. Extract (US6)\n\nBut the user's task is to list reviewers if they exist. So the steps are: navigate, search, extract, and verify. But maybe the extraction is part of the process. Alternatively, the steps could be:\n\n1. Navigate to the reviews section (US1)\n2. Filter reviews by the keyword \"good fingerprint resistant\" (US2)\n3. Extract the reviewers' names from the filtered results (US6)\n4. Verify if any reviewers exist (US7)\n\nBut the verification (US7) would be part of checking if the extraction yields any results. So perhaps the strategies are:\n\n[\"Navigate to product reviews section\", \"Filter reviews for 'good fingerprint resistant'\", \"Extract reviewers' names\", \"Check if any reviewers exist\"]\n\nBut the order might be: after filtering, you extract, then check. But the check (US7) is part of the analysis. So the strategies would be:\n\n- US1: Navigate\n- US2: Filter\n- US6: Extract\n- US7: Verify existence\n\nBut the problem is that the extraction (US6) is retrieving the information, and the verification (US7) is checking if there are any. So maybe the steps are:\n\n1. Navigate (US1)\n2. Search/Filter (US2)\n3. Analyze/Verify if any results (US7)\n4. If yes, extract names (US6)\n\nBut the output example includes all steps, regardless of conditions. So the strategies should list all steps taken, including the verification. So the final answer would have strategies:\n\n[\n \"Navigate to the product reviews section\",\n \"Search reviews for 'good fingerprint resistant'\",\n \"Check if any matching reviews exist\",\n \"Extract the reviewers' names from the results\"\n]\n\nAnd the universal_strategies would be US1, US2, US7, US6.\n\nBut looking at the output example, they sometimes combine steps. For example, in the example given, \"Generate and Review Bestsellers Report\" maps to US4 (Execute Action) and maybe US7, but in the example, it's only US4. So perhaps each strategy step is mapped to one US.\n\nIn this case, the third step \"Check if any matching reviews exist\" is US7 (Analyze/Evaluate/Verify Data). The fourth step is US6 (Extract). So the universal_strategy_ids would be [\"US1\", \"US2\", \"US7\", \"US6\"].\n\nBut the user's intent is to list reviewers if they exist. So the agent needs to first navigate, then search, then check if there are any, and if so, extract the names. So the four steps. But maybe the extraction is part of the same step as checking. Alternatively, the steps could be:\n\n1. Navigate to reviews (US1)\n2. Search for the keyword (US2)\n3. Analyze results to identify reviewers mentioning the term (US7)\n4. Extract their names (US6)\n\nYes, that makes sense. So the strategies array would have four steps, each mapped to the corresponding US.\n\nBut looking at the output example, sometimes they have three steps. Maybe in this case, the extraction and analysis can be combined. But according to the universal strategies, extraction is US6 and analysis is US7. So they are separate.\n\nTherefore, the correct answer would include all four steps with their respective US.\n\n\n```json\n{\n \"task_id\": 23,\n \"strategies\": [\n \"Navigate to the product reviews section\",\n \"Search reviews for 'good fingerprint resistant'\",\n \"Analyze filtered reviews to verify mentions of 'good' in context\",\n \"Extract reviewer names from confirmed matches\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategies\": [\n \"Navigate To Page/Section\",\n \"Search/Filter/Sort Data\",\n \"Analyze/Evaluate/Verify Data\",\n \"Extract/Retrieve Information\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategy_ids\": [\"US1\", \"US2\", \"US7\", \"US6\"]\n}\n```",
"model_reasoning": null
},
{
"task_id": 235,
"task_intent": "Get the order number of my most recent under delivery order ",
"expected_ids": [
"US1",
"US2"
],
"actual_ids": [
"US1",
"US2",
"US6"
],
"correct": false,
"model": "aiproxy/deepseek-reasoner",
"model_output": "\nOkay, let's tackle this task. The user wants the order number of their most recent under delivery\" order on a shopping site. First, I need to figure out the steps a GUI agent would take.\n\nStarting with navigation. The user probably needs to go to their order history or orders section. That's US1, Navigate To Page/Section. Then, they might need to filter the orders to show only those that are \"under delivery.\" That's US2, Search/Filter/Sort Data. Once filtered, the orders should be sorted by date to find the most recent. That's also part of US2. Then, the agent would look at the top entry in the list to get the order number, which is US6, Extract/Retrieve Information. \n\nWait, but maybe after filtering and sorting, the agent needs to view the details of the first order? No, the order number is likely visible in the list without needing to click into details. So steps would be: navigate to orders, filter by status \"under delivery,\" sort by date descending, then extract the order number from the first entry. So the strategies would be US1, US2, US2, US6. But since US2 can cover both filtering and sorting, maybe combine those into one step. So the strategies would be Navigate to Orders, Apply filter for \"under delivery\" and sort by recent, then retrieve the order number. The universal strategies would be US1, US2, US6.\n\n\n```json\n{\n \"task_id\": 235,\n \"strategies\": [\n \"Navigate to the Orders/My Orders section\",\n \"Filter orders by 'Under Delivery' status and sort by most recent date\",\n \"Retrieve the order number from the top entry in the filtered/sorted list\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategies\": [\n \"Navigate To Page/Section\",\n \"Search/Filter/Sort Data\",\n \"Extract/Retrieve Information\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategy_ids\": [\"US1\", \"US2\", \"US6\"]\n}\n```",
"model_reasoning": null
},
{
"task_id": 236,
"task_intent": "Where is the nearest pharmacy from Carnegie Mellon I can walk within 20mins",
"expected_ids": [
"US1",
"US2",
"US4"
],
"actual_ids": [
"US1",
"US2",
"US3",
"US4",
"US7"
],
"correct": false,
"model": "aiproxy/deepseek-reasoner",
"model_output": "\nOkay, let's tackle this task. The user wants to find the nearest pharmacy from Carnegie Mellon that's within a 20-minute walk. The site involved is a map service, like Google Maps or similar.\n\nFirst, I need to figure out the steps a user would take. Starting the map app, they probably need to input the starting location, which is Carnegie Mellon University. So that's the first step: navigate to the map and set the starting point. That aligns with US1 (Navigate To Page/Section) because they're moving to a specific location on the map.\n\nNext, they need to search for pharmacies. That's a search action, so US2 (Search/Filter/Sort Data) makes sense here. They might type \"pharmacy\" in the search bar.\n\nThen, applying a filter for walking time. The user wants places within a 20-minute walk. On maps, you can filter by travel mode (walking) and sometimes set time limits. So configuring parameters like travel mode and time would be US3 (Configure Parameters/Settings).\n\nAfter setting the filters, the user would execute the search or apply the filters, which is US4 (Execute Action/Process). This would generate the results based on the criteria.\n\nOnce the results are displayed, the user needs to view the list and identify the top options. They might look at the nearest ones first. This step is about inspecting the results, so US5 (View/Inspect Item Details) could apply if they click on a specific result. Alternatively, if they're looking at the list and determining the nearest based on the map, it might involve US7 (Analyze/Evaluate/Verify) to check which ones are within the 20-minute window.\n\nWait, maybe after applying the filters, the map shows the pharmacies sorted by distance or time. So the user might not need to execute an additional step beyond applying the filters. Hmm. Let me think again.\n\nThe steps down: \n\n1. Open the map and set Carnegie Mellon as the starting point (US1).\n2. Search for pharmacies (US2).\n3. Set the travel mode to walking and filter by 20 minutes (US3).\n4. Execute the search with these parameters (US4).\n5. Review the results to find the nearest ones (US7 for analyzing which are within the time frame).\n\nAlternatively, maybe after setting the parameters, the results automatically update, so the execute action might be part of the filter configuration. But sometimes you have to click a \"Go\" or \"Apply\" button, which would be US4.\n\nThen, the user checks the results. Since the map might display the time, they need to verify which ones are within 20 minutes. That's analysis (US7). But if the filter correctly applies, then the results are already filtered, so maybe just viewing the list (US5 or US6). But the task is to find the top 3, so maybe after the filtered results, they extract the top 3 (US6). But extraction is more about retrieving specific info, while analysis is evaluating. Since the user needs to determine which are the top 3, maybe US7 is involved here.\n\nSo putting it all together:\n\nStrategies:\n1. Navigate to the map and set Carnegie Mellon as the starting location. (US1)\n2. Search for nearby pharmacies. (US2)\n3. Configure filters for walking mode and maximum 20-minute travel time. (US3)\n4. Apply the filters to update the search results. (US4)\n5. Analyze the displayed results to identify the top 3 nearest pharmacies. (US7)\n\nWait, but the original task is to find the nearest within 20 mins walk. So maybe after applying the filters, the results are already sorted by distance or time. So the user just needs to view the list and pick the top 3. So step 5 could be \"View the filtered results to identify the top 3 pharmacies\" which would be US5 or US6. But since it's about evaluating which ones are top, maybe US7 is better here.\n\nAlternatively, maybe the extraction (US6) is just retrieving the names, but the analysis (US7) is determining they are the top 3. Hmm. The line between US6 and US7 can be blurry. Since the user is asking for the top 3, which requires evaluating the results to see which are the closest, that's analysis (US7). So the steps would be:\n\nStrategies:\n1. Navigate to the map interface and input Carnegie Mellon as the starting point. (US1)\n2. Search for pharmacies in the vicinity. (US2)\n3. Set the travel mode to walking and filter by a 20-minute maximum duration. (US3)\n4. Execute the search with the applied filters. (US4)\n5. Analyze the results to determine the top 3 nearest pharmacies. (US7)\n\nBut maybe step 4 is part of step 3 if the filters apply automatically. However, in some interfaces, changing the filter automatically, but in others, you might need to click a \"Go\" button. So including US4 is safer.\n\nSo the universal strategies would be US1, US2, US3, US4, US7.\n\n\n```json\n{\n \"task_id\": 236,\n \"strategies\": [\n \"Navigate to the map interface and set Carnegie Mellon as the starting location\",\n \"Search for nearby pharmacies using the search function\",\n \"Configure filters for walking mode and maximum 20-minute travel time\",\n \"Apply the configured filters to update search results\",\n \"Analyze the filtered results to identify the top 3 nearest pharmacies\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategies\": [\n \"Navigate To Page/Section\",\n \"Search/Filter/Sort Data\",\n \"Configure Parameters/Settings\",\n \"Execute Action/Process\",\n \"Analyze/Evaluate/Verify Data\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategy_ids\": [\"US1\", \"US2\", \"US3\", \"US4\", \"US7\"]\n}\n```",
"model_reasoning": null
},
{
"task_id": 240,
"task_intent": "I am doing a market survey for one stop market, show me the most expensive product from competitive swimwear category",
"expected_ids": [
"US2",
"US2",
"US10",
"US7"
],
"actual_ids": [
"US1",
"US2",
"US5",
"US6"
],
"correct": false,
"model": "aiproxy/deepseek-reasoner",
"model_output": "\nOkay, let's tackle this task. The user wants the most expensive product in the competitive swimwear category on a shopping site. First, I need to figure out the steps a GUI agent would take.\n\nStarting with navigation: the agent needs to get to the competitive swimwear section. That's probably under a category menu or search. So US1, Navigate To Page/Section.\n\nNext, once on the category page, the products are there. To find the most expensive, sorting by price descending makes sense. That's using a filter or sort option, so US2, Search/Filter/Sort Data.\n\nAfter sorting, the top item would be the most expensive. The agent needs to view that product's details to confirm. That's US5, View/Inspect Item Details.\n\nThen, extract the product's name and price. That's US6, Extract/Retrieve Information.\n\nWait, but after sorting, maybe the first item is already visible. Do they need to click into details? Maybe, to get full info. So steps would be navigate to category, sort by price high to low, view the top product, extract its details. So strategies would be Navigate to Competitive Swimwear, Sort by Price descending, View top product, Extract info. The universal strategies would be US1, US2, US5, US6. Let me check the example. The output example had three steps, but here maybe four. But maybe the extraction is part of viewing. Hmm. Let me structure the strategies concisely. Maybe \"Navigate to Competitive Swimwear Category\", \"Sort products by price in descending order\", \"Identify and view the top product\", \"Retrieve product name and price\". But the example might combine some steps. Alternatively, maybe after sorting, the most expensive is already listed first, so the agent just needs to extract it. But the user might need to view details to confirm. So the steps make sense. The universal strategies would be US1, US2, US5, US6. Let me check the output example again. The example had three steps with US1, US3, US4. So here, four steps but maybe possible. Let me proceed.\n\n\n```json\n{\n \"task_id\": 240,\n \"strategies\": [\n \"Navigate to Competitive Swimwear Category\",\n \"Sort products by price in descending order\",\n \"Identify and view the top-listed product\",\n \"Retrieve product name and price details\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategies\": [\n \"Navigate To Page/Section\",\n \"Search/Filter/Sort Data\",\n \"View/Inspect Item Details\",\n \"Extract/Retrieve Information\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategy_ids\": [\"US1\", \"US2\", \"US5\", \"US6\"]\n}\n```",
"model_reasoning": null
},
{
"task_id": 247,
"task_intent": "Show me the email address of the customer who is the most unhappy with the style of Zoe products",
"expected_ids": [
"US2",
"US6"
],
"actual_ids": [
"US1",
"US2",
"US7",
"US5",
"US6"
],
"correct": false,
"model": "aiproxy/deepseek-reasoner",
"model_output": "\nOkay, let's tackle this task. The user wants the email address of the most unhappy customer regarding the style of Zoe products. First, I need to figure out how to approach this on a shopping admin site.\n\nHmm, the first step would probably be to navigate to where customer feedback or reviews are stored. Maybe there's a section like \"Customer Reviews\" or \"Feedback\" in the admin panel. That fits under US1 (Navigate To Page/Section).\n\nNext, once I'm on the reviews page, I need to filter them. Since the focus is on Zoe products and unhappy customers, I should filter by product brand (Zoe) and sort by the lowest ratings. That's using search/filter/sort, which is US2. Maybe also filter by negative keywords like \"style\" or \"unhappy\" in the comments.\n\nAfter filtering, I need to look through the reviews to find the one with the most negative sentiment. That's analyzing the data, so US7 (Analyze/Evaluate/Verify Data). The agent would read through the reviews to identify the most unhappy customer.\n\nOnce the worst review is found, the agent needs to view the details of that customer's account to get their email. That's US5 (View/Inspect Item Details).\n\nFinally, extract the email address from the customer details, which is US6 (Extract/Retrieve Information).\n\nPutting it all together: navigate to the right section, filter and sort, analyze the reviews, view the customer's details, and retrieve the email. The strategies would be in that order, referencing the corresponding US steps.\n\n\n```json\n{\n \"task_id\": 247,\n \"strategies\": [\n \"Navigate to Customer Reviews/Feedback section\",\n \"Filter reviews for Zoe products and sort by lowest ratings\",\n \"Analyze review content for style-related complaints\",\n \"View details of the most negative review\",\n \"Retrieve email address from customer profile\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategies\": [\n \"Navigate To Page/Section\",\n \"Search/Filter/Sort Data\",\n \"Analyze/Evaluate/Verify Data\",\n \"View/Inspect Item Details\",\n \"Extract/Retrieve Information\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategy_ids\": [\"US1\", \"US2\", \"US7\", \"US5\", \"US6\"]\n}\n```",
"model_reasoning": null
},
{
"task_id": 250,
"task_intent": "Tell me the coordinates of Apple Store near Pitt in DD format",
"expected_ids": [
"US2",
"US6"
],
"actual_ids": [
"US2",
"US5",
"US6"
],
"correct": false,
"model": "aiproxy/deepseek-reasoner",
"model_output": "\nOkay, let's tackle this task. The user wants the coordinates of the Apple Store near Pitt in decimal degrees (DD) format. First, I need to figure out the steps a GUI agent would take on a map site.\n\nStarting with navigation. The agent would probably go to the map website or app. Then, they need to search for \"Apple Store near Pitt.\" Pitt likely refers to the University of Pittsburgh, so the search bar would be used here. That's US2, Search/Filter/Sort Data.\n\nOnce the search results come up, the agent might need to look through the results to find the correct Apple Store. If there are multiple, maybe check the address or details. That's viewing details, which is US5.\n\nAfter selecting the correct store, the agent would extract the coordinates shown, which are probably in DD format. If not, maybe convert them, but the task specifies DD, so assuming the map displays that. Extracting info is US6.\n\nSo the strategies would be: search for the store, view its details, then get the coordinates. The universal strategies involved are US2, US5, US6.\n\n\n```json\n{\n \"task_id\": 250,\n \"strategies\": [\n \"Search for 'Apple Store near Pitt' in the map interface\",\n \"View details of the identified Apple Store location\",\n \"Extract the coordinates in Decimal Degrees (DD) format from the location details\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategies\": [\n \"Search/Filter/Sort Data\",\n \"View/Inspect Item Details\",\n \"Extract/Retrieve Information\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategy_ids\": [\"US2\", \"US5\", \"US6\"]\n}\n```",
"model_reasoning": null
},
{
"task_id": 254,
"task_intent": "What is the phone number of Western Pennsylvania Hospital",
"expected_ids": [
"US2",
"US5",
"US6"
],
"actual_ids": [
"US2",
"US5",
"US6"
],
"correct": true,
"model": "aiproxy/deepseek-reasoner",
"model_output": "\nOkay, let's tackle this task. The user wants the phone number of Western Pennsylvania Hospital from a map site. First, I need to figure out the steps a GUI agent would take.\n\nStarting with navigation. The agent would probably go to the map's search function. That's US1: Navigate To Page/Section. Then, they need to search for the hospital. That's US2: Search/Filter/Sort Data. Once the hospital is found, the agent would view its details, which is US5: View/Inspect Item Details. Finally, extract the phone number from the details page, which is US6: Extract/Retrieve Information.\n\nSo the strategies would be: search for the hospital, view its details, and retrieve the phone number. The corresponding universal strategies are US2, US5, and US6. Let me check if that covers all steps. Yes, that makes sense. No need for other steps like configuration or execution beyond the initial search and viewing details. Alright, that should do it.\n\n\n```json\n{\n \"task_id\": 254,\n \"strategies\": [\n \"Search for Western Pennsylvania Hospital on the map interface\",\n \"View the detailed information card for the hospital\",\n \"Extract the phone number from the hospital's contact details\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategies\": [\n \"Search/Filter/Sort Data\",\n \"View/Inspect Item Details\",\n \"Extract/Retrieve Information\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategy_ids\": [\"US2\", \"US5\", \"US6\"]\n}\n```",
"model_reasoning": null
},
{
"task_id": 258,
"task_intent": "See all public projects",
"expected_ids": [
"US1"
],
"actual_ids": [
"US1",
"US2",
"US5"
],
"correct": false,
"model": "aiproxy/deepseek-reasoner",
"model_output": "\nOkay, let's tackle this task. The user wants to \"See all public projects\" on GitLab. First, I need to figure out the steps a GUI agent would take. \n\nStarting with navigation. GitLab's interface has different sections, so the agent would need to go to the Projects area. That's under a menu or a link. So the first step is probably navigating to the Projects page. That aligns with US1 (Navigate To Page/Section).\n\nNext, once on the Projects page, there might be a mix of public and private projects. The default view might not show all public ones, so the agent needs to apply a filter. GitLab likely has a filter option for project visibility. So setting the filter to \"Public\" would be US2 (Search/Filter/Sort Data).\n\nAfter applying the filter, the agent might need to ensure all results are displayed. If there are many projects, maybe pagination is involved. But the task is to \"see all,\" so maybe just applying the filter is enough. However, if the list is long, the agent might need to navigate through pages using pagination controls, which would be US8 (Navigate Within Data/Results). But the user's intent is to see all, not necessarily to scroll through each page. So maybe US8 isn't needed here. Alternatively, maybe the initial filter displays all public projects, and the agent just needs to view them. \n\nWait, the main actions are: go to Projects, filter by public. Maybe the third step is viewing the list, but that's part of the filtering result. The strategies might be: Navigate to Projects section, filter to show public projects, and then maybe execute the filter action. Wait, but filtering is part of US2. So the steps are:\n\n1. Navigate to the Projects page (US1).\n2. Apply a filter for public visibility (US2).\n3. Maybe execute the filter action, but in some interfaces, the filter applies automatically when you select it. If not, there might be a \"Apply\" button, which would be US4. But in many cases, selecting the filter option automatically applies it. So maybe only two steps are needed. \n\nBut the example given in the problem had three steps. Let me check the example again. The example for \"top-3 best-selling products\" had three steps: navigate, configure, execute. So in this case, configuring the date range (US3) and then executing (US4). \n\nIn this GitLab task, navigating to Projects (US1), then configuring the filter (US3?), but wait, US2 is about search/filter/sort. So applying the filter would be US2. So the steps would be:\n\n1. Navigate to Projects page (US1).\n2. Filter projects by public visibility (US2).\n3. Maybe execute the filter if needed (US4), but if the filter applies upon selection, then maybe not. Alternatively, maybe the filter is part of the configuration. Hmm. \n\nWait, the universal strategies: US2 is Search/Filter/Sort Data. So using a filter control to narrow down the data. So selecting the public filter would be US2. No need for US4 unless there's a separate action to apply the filter. If the interface applies the filter immediately when you select the option, then US2 covers it. So the strategies would be:\n\n- Navigate To Page/Section (US1) to the Projects page.\n- Search/Filter/Sort Data (US2) by setting the visibility filter to Public.\n\nBut maybe the user needs to click a \"Apply\" button after setting the filter, which would be US4. But I'm not sure how GitLab's UI works. If the filter is applied automatically upon selection, then US2 suffices. If it requires a separate action, then US4 is needed. \n\nAlternatively, maybe the initial page already lists projects, but to see all public ones, you have to go to the \"Explore\" section where public projects are listed. But the user's intent is \"see all public projects,\" which might be a specific section. So maybe:\n\n1. Navigate to the Explore section (US1), which lists public projects.\nBut I'm not certain. Let me think. On GitLab, there's an Explore menu that includes Projects, Groups, Snippets. So maybe navigating to Explore > Projects would show public projects. In that case, the steps would be:\n\n- Navigate to Explore Projects (US1), which already lists public projects. Then no need for filtering. But maybe the default is to show all public projects there. So the strategy would be just US1. But the user might need to ensure that all are shown, perhaps by adjusting the view. \n\nAlternatively, if the user is on their own dashboard, they might need to go to the Projects page and then filter. \n\nThis depends on the site's structure. Since the site is GitLab, the correct approach would be to go to the Explore section to find public projects. So the steps would be:\n\n1. Navigate to the Explore section (US1).\n2. Within Explore, navigate to Public Projects (US1 again?), or maybe use a filter there. \n\nAlternatively, the Explore > Projects page might list all public projects by default. So navigating there would suffice. But maybe there's a lot, so the agent needs to ensure all are loaded, which might involve US8 (Navigate Within Data/Results) to paginate through all pages. But the task is to \"see all,\" which might just require accessing the list, not necessarily every page. \n\nSo the possible strategies:\n\n- Navigate to Explore > Projects (US1), which lists public projects. \n\nBut if the user is already in their own projects, they might need to adjust the filter. So the steps could be:\n\n1. Navigate to Projects page (US1).\n2. Set filter to Public (US2).\n3. Apply the filter (US4 if needed).\n\nBut I'm not sure. Let me check. On GitLab, when you go to the Projects page (from the top menu), you can see your projects and others. There's a dropdown to filter by visibility. So selecting \"Public\" there would filter the list. If the filter is applied immediately upon selection, then steps are US1 and US2. If it requires a \"Apply\" button, then US4. \n\nAssuming it's applied immediately, the strategies would be:\n\n1. Navigate to the Projects page (US1).\n2. Filter by Public visibility (US2).\n\nBut maybe the Projects page is under the user's namespace, so to see all public projects, they need to go to the Explore section. So the correct first step is navigating to Explore > Projects. \n\nIn that case, the steps are:\n\n1. Navigate to Explore section (US1).\n2. Select Public Projects (US1 again? Or US2?).\n\nAlternatively, the Explore Projects page might already list public projects, so just US1. \n\nThis is a bit ambiguous without knowing the exact UI of GitLab. But given the user's intent is to \"see all public projects,\" the most straightforward way is to go to the Explore section where public projects are listed. So the strategy would be:\n\n- Navigate to the Explore Public Projects page (US1).\n\nBut if that's not a direct link, then maybe:\n\n1. Navigate to Explore (US1).\n2. Within Explore, navigate to Projects (US1).\n3. Ensure the visibility is set to Public (US2).\n\nBut perhaps the Explore Projects page automatically shows public projects. So the steps are:\n\n1. Navigate to Explore Projects (US1).\n\nThat's a single step. But the example given in the problem had three steps. Maybe the answer expects more detailed steps. \n\nAlternatively, if the user is on their dashboard, they need to go to the Projects section, then adjust the filter. So:\n\n1. Navigate to Projects page (US1).\n2. Apply Public filter (US2).\n\nBut again, depends on the site's structure. \n\nGiven that the output example used three steps, perhaps the answer here would involve navigating to the Projects section, configuring the filter, and executing. But in this case, maybe:\n\nStrategies:\n1. Navigate to Projects section (US1)\n2. Filter projects by public visibility (US2)\n3. View the list of public projects (US5 or US6?)\n\nWait, US5 is View/Inspect Item Details, which is about looking at a specific item. US6 is extracting info, but here the task is to see all, not extract. \n\nAlternatively, maybe after filtering, the list is displayed, so no further action. So the strategies are:\n\n1. Navigate to Projects (US1)\n2. Filter to show public projects (US2)\n\nBut the example in the problem had three steps. Maybe the answer here is two steps. \n\nAlternatively, if the Projects page requires setting parameters (like a search query) and then executing a search, then:\n\n1. Navigate to Projects (US1)\n2. Configure filter to public (US3)\n3. Execute search (US4)\n\nBut US3 is Configure Parameters/Settings, which is more about forms. If the filter is part of a form, then US3. But if it's a simple dropdown or checkbox, then US2. \n\nIn the universal strategies, US2 is Search/Filter/Sort Data, which includes using filters. So selecting a filter would be US2. \n\nSo the correct answer would be:\n\nStrategies:\n- Navigate to Projects page (US1)\n- Apply Public filter (US2)\n\nBut maybe the Projects page isn't the right place. Maybe the Explore section is. So:\n\n- Navigate to Explore > Projects (US1)\n- If needed, apply Public filter (US2)\n\nBut if Explore Projects already shows public projects, then only US1. \n\nGiven that the user's intent is to \"see all public projects,\" and assuming that GitLab's Explore section is where public projects are listed, the steps would be:\n\n1. Navigate to the Explore section (US1)\n2. Select the Projects option within Explore (US1 again)\nBut maybe that's considered a single navigation step. \n\nAlternatively, the Explore Projects page is a single navigation step. \n\nThis is a bit tricky. To resolve, perhaps the answer is:\n\nStrategies: Navigate to the public projects section (US1), which might be under Explore > Projects. \n\nBut to cover all possibilities, maybe the steps are:\n\n1. Navigate to the Projects section (US1)\n2. Filter to show only public projects (US2)\n\nThus, the universal strategies would be US1 and US2.\n\n\n```json\n{\n \"task_id\": 258,\n \"strategies\": [\n \"Navigate to the Projects section\",\n \"Filter projects to show only public visibility\",\n \"View the list of all public projects\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategies\": [\n \"Navigate To Page/Section\",\n \"Search/Filter/Sort Data\",\n \"View/Inspect Item Details\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategy_ids\": [\"US1\", \"US2\", \"US5\"]\n}\n```",
"model_reasoning": null
},
{
"task_id": 259,
"task_intent": "Get me my RSS feed token",
"expected_ids": [
"US1",
"US6"
],
"actual_ids": [
"US1",
"US3",
"US4",
"US6"
],
"correct": false,
"model": "aiproxy/deepseek-reasoner",
"model_output": "\nOkay, let's tackle this task where the user wants to get their RSS feed token on GitLab. First, I need to figure out the steps involved. The user is asking for their personal RSS token, so I should recall where GitLab stores such settings.\n\nI remember that on GitLab, user-specific settings like tokens are usually found in the user's profile or account settings. So the first step would be navigating to the user's profile. That aligns with US1 (Navigate To Page/Section).\n\nOnce in the profile, there might be a section for access tokens or RSS feeds. The user needs to access the correct subsection where the RSS token is generated or displayed. That's another navigation step, maybe under the profile settings. That could also be US1 again, but perhaps there's a configuration involved. Wait, maybe generating the token requires some setup, but the user just wants to retrieve it. If the token already exists, they might need to view it. If not, they might have to create it.\n\nWait, GitLab's RSS feed might require a token for private projects. The user might need to generate an RSS token if they haven't already. So the steps could be: go to profile settings, find the access tokens section, generate an RSS token if necessary, and then retrieve it. But the user's intent is to \"get\" the token, which might imply they already have it and just need to access it, or they need to create it first.\n\nAssuming the token needs to be generated, the steps would involve navigating to the access tokens section (US1), configuring the token parameters like name and scopes (US3), then executing the action to create it (US4), and finally extracting the token value (US6). But if the token is present, maybe just navigating to the right section and extracting it.\n\nBut the exact process on GitLab: To get the RSS feed token, you go to your user settings, then \"Access Tokens\", create a new token with the \"read_api\" scope, and then the token is displayed once. So the user might need to generate it if they haven't already. So the strategies would be:\n\n1. Navigate to the Access Tokens section in user settings (US1).\n2. Configure the new token with the necessary scopes (US3).\n3. Generate the token (US4).\n4. Retrieve the token value (US6).\n\nBut the user's intent is to \"get\" the token. If they already have one, maybe they need to view it. However, GitLab doesn't show the token value after creation; you can only see it once when it's generated. So if the user hasn't created it yet, they need to generate it. So the steps would involve creating a new token, which would display the token value once. So the strategies would be as above.\n\nSo the universal strategies involved are US1 (navigate to access tokens), US3 (configure the token), US4 (execute generate), and US6 (retrieve the token value). But maybe the configuration is part of the creation form, so US3 applies. Then the strategies would be:\n\nStrategies:\n- Navigate to User Settings\n- Navigate to Access Tokens Section\n- Configure RSS Feed Token Parameters\n- Generate RSS Feed Token\n- Retrieve the Token Value\n\nBut the exact wording might vary. The key is to navigate to the correct section, set up the token (name and scopes), generate it, and then get the token value. So the token parameters would be part of US3, generating is US4, and retrieving is US6. The universal strategies would be US1, US3, US4, US6.\n\nBut the output example had three strategies. Let me check the example again. The example for getting the RSS token might need to be concise. Let me structure it step by step.\n\nFirst, navigate to the user's profile (US1). Then, within the profile, go to the access tokens section (another US1). Then, create a new access token with the appropriate scope (US3 and US4). Then, extract the token value (US6). So the strategies could be:\n\n1. Navigate to User Settings (US1)\n2. Create a New Access Token with RSS Scope (combines US3 and US4)\n3. Retrieve the Generated Token Value (US6)\n\nBut the problem is that creating the token involves both configuring (US3) and executing (US4). So maybe split into:\n\n1. Navigate to Access Tokens in User Settings (US1)\n2. Configure the RSS Feed Token parameters (name and scopes) (US3)\n3. Generate the Access Token (US4)\n4. Extract the Token Value (US6)\n\nBut the user's task is to get the token. If the token is already there, maybe they just need to view it, but GitLab doesn't allow viewing existing tokens again. So the user must generate a new one, which gives them the token once. So the steps are necessary.\n\nSo the strategies would be:\n\nStrategies:\n- Navigate to the Access Tokens page in user settings.\n- Configure the new token with the required scopes (e.g., read_api for RSS).\n- Generate the token to obtain its value.\n- Retrieve the token value from the success message.\n\nBut the exact wording in the strategies should be concise. The universal strategies would be US1, US3, US4, US6. However, the example output had three strategies. Let me see if I can combine some steps. For example, \"Configure and generate the access token\" would combine US3 and US4. But according to the universal strategies, each step should correspond to a single strategy. So perhaps:\n\nStrategies:\n1. Navigate to the Access Tokens section in User Settings. (US1)\n2. Configure the token parameters (name and scopes). (US3)\n3. Generate the access token. (US4)\n4. Retrieve the RSS feed token value. (US6)\n\nBut the output example had three strategies. Maybe the user needs to navigate to the user settings, then to access tokens (two US1 steps?), but perhaps in the strategy, it's considered a single step. Alternatively, maybe the access tokens section is a subsection under user settings, so navigating to it is part of the same US1.\n\nAlternatively, the steps could be:\n\n1. Navigate to User Settings (US1)\n2. Navigate to Access Tokens (US1)\n3. Configure and Generate Token (US3 and US4)\n4. Retrieve Token (US6)\n\nBut the example output might combine steps. Let me check the example again. In the example, \"Navigate to Bestsellers Report\" is one step (US1), \"Configure parameters\" (US3), \"Generate and Review\" (US4). So each step is separate. So for this task, the strategies would be:\n\n1. Navigate to the Access Tokens page in User Settings. (US1)\n2. Configure the token with name and required scopes (e.g., read_api). (US3)\n3. Generate the access token. (US4)\n4. Retrieve the RSS feed token value from the generated token. (US6)\n\nBut maybe the user needs to first navigate to their profile settings. So perhaps:\n\n1. Navigate to User Profile Settings. (US1)\n2. Access the Access Tokens section. (US1)\n3. Configure a new token with RSS feed permissions. (US3)\n4. Generate the token to obtain the value. (US4)\n5. Extract the token value from the generated token. (US6)\n\nBut the output example had three strategies, but here it's five. Maybe some steps can be merged. For example, \"Navigate to Access Tokens in User Settings\" combines two navigations into one step. Alternatively, the user might have to click through menus, but the agent can consider it as a single navigation step.\n\nAlternatively, the steps could be:\n\n1. Navigate to the Access Tokens page in User Settings. (US1)\n2. Create a new access token with the necessary scopes. (US3 and US4)\n3. Retrieve the generated token value. (US6)\n\nBut creating the token involves configuring (US3) and executing (US4). So perhaps the second step is split into two. However, the example output combines \"Configure Parameters\" and \"Execute Action\" into separate steps. So the correct approach is to list each as separate strategies.\n\nSo the final answer would have four steps, but the example output had three. However, the user's task might require all necessary steps. Let's proceed with the accurate breakdown.\n\nThe answer would be:\n\nStrategies:\n- Navigate to the Access Tokens section in User Settings. (US1)\n- Configure the new token's parameters (name and scopes). (US3)\n- Generate the access token. (US4)\n- Retrieve the RSS feed token value. (US6)\n\nUniversal strategies: US1, US3, US4, US6.\n\nBut the output example had three strategies. Maybe the configuration and execution can be combined into a single step? No, according to the universal strategies, they are separate. So the correct approach is to list each step. However, the user's task might not require creating a new token if they already have one, but GitLab doesn't display existing tokens, so the user must generate a new one. Hence, the steps are necessary.\n\nSo the JSON output would be:\n\n{\n \"task_id\": 259,\n \"strategies\": [\n \"Navigate to the Access Tokens section in User Settings\",\n \"Configure a new access token with RSS feed permissions\",\n \"Generate the access token\",\n \"Retrieve the RSS feed token value\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategies\": [\n \"Navigate To Page/Section\",\n \"Configure Parameters/Settings\",\n \"Execute Action/Process\",\n \"Extract/Retrieve Information\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategy_ids\": [\"US1\", \"US3\", \"US4\", \"US6\"]\n}\n\nBut the example output had three strategies. However, the correct approach is to include all necessary steps. So this is the accurate breakdown.\n\n\n```json\n{\n \"task_id\": 259,\n \"strategies\": [\n \"Navigate to the Access Tokens section in User Settings\",\n \"Configure a new access token with RSS feed permissions (e.g., read_api scope)\",\n \"Generate the access token\",\n \"Retrieve the RSS feed token value from the success message\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategies\": [\n \"Navigate To Page/Section\",\n \"Configure Parameters/Settings\",\n \"Execute Action/Process\",\n \"Extract/Retrieve Information\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategy_ids\": [\"US1\", \"US3\", \"US4\", \"US6\"]\n}\n```",
"model_reasoning": null
},
{
"task_id": 268,
"task_intent": "What's the closest national park to Vinalhaven, ME? How long does it take to bike there?",
"expected_ids": [
"US1",
"US5",
"US4"
],
"actual_ids": [
"US1",
"US6",
"US1",
"US3",
"US4",
"US6"
],
"correct": false,
"model": "aiproxy/deepseek-reasoner",
"model_output": "\nOkay, let's tackle this task. The user wants to know the closest national park to Vinalhaven, ME, and how long it takes to bike there. First, I need to figure out the steps. \n\nStarting with Wikipedia. The user would probably need to search Vinalhaven on Wikipedia to confirm its location. Maybe check the \"Nearby\" section or the page's geography part for nearby national parks. That's US1 (Navigate) and US6 (Extract info).\n\nThen, once they have the park's name, they need to switch to a map site. Search for directions from Vinalhaven to that park. But since it's biking route, they have to set the transportation mode to biking. That's US3 (Configure settings) on the map. Then execute the search (US4). The map will show the distance and time, so they need to extract that info (US6 again).\n\nWait, the steps might be: 1. Use Wikipedia to find the closest park. 2. Use maps to get biking time. So strategies would involve navigating to the pages, searching, configuring the bike option, and extracting the time. Let me check the universal strategies. \n\nFor Wikipedia: Navigate to Vinalhaven's page (US1), then extract the closest park (US6). For Maps: Navigate to directions, set start and end points (US3), configure bike mode (US3), execute to get route (US4), then extract the duration (US6). \n\nSo the strategies would be: \n1. Navigate to Vinalhaven's Wikipedia page.\n2. Extract the closest national park.\n3. Navigate to map directions.\n4. Configure start as Vinalhaven and destination as the park.\n5. Set transportation mode to biking.\n6. Execute to get route details.\n7. Extract biking duration.\n\nThe corresponding universal strategies are US1, US6, US1, US3, US3, US4, US6. But need to list them in order. The strategy IDs would be US1, US6, US1, US3, US3, US4, US6. But maybe some steps can be combined. For example, steps 4 and 5 are both configuring parameters (US3). So the strategies list might be shorter. Let me structure it as:\n\nStrategies:\n- Access Vinalhaven, ME Wikipedia page to identify nearby national parks.\n- Retrieve the name of the closest national park from the page content.\n- Use map service to search directions from Vinalhaven to the identified park.\n- Configure map settings for biking mode.\n- Generate biking route and view estimated travel time.\n- Extract the duration from the route details.\n\nUniversal strategies would be US1, US6, US1, US3, US4, US6. The IDs: US1, US6, US1, US3, US4, US6. But need to check the exact steps. Let me map each strategy step to the US:\n\n1. Access Wikipedia page: US1.\n2. Retrieve closest park: US6.\n3. Use map directions: US1 (navigate to directions section).\n4. Configure biking mode: US3.\n5. Generate route: US4.\n6. Extract time: US6.\n\nSo the universal strategies are US1, US6, US1, US3, US4, US6. The strategy IDs would be in order: [\"US1\", \"US6\", \"US1\", \"US3\", \"US4\", \"US6\"].\n\n\n```json\n{\n \"task_id\": 268,\n \"strategies\": [\n \"Access Vinalhaven, ME Wikipedia page to identify nearby national parks\",\n \"Retrieve the name of the closest national park from the page content\",\n \"Use map service to search directions from Vinalhaven to the identified park\",\n \"Configure map settings for biking mode\",\n \"Generate biking route and view estimated travel time\",\n \"Extract the duration from the route details\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategies\": [\n \"Navigate To Page/Section\",\n \"Extract/Retrieve Information\",\n \"Navigate To Page/Section\",\n \"Configure Parameters/Settings\",\n \"Execute Action/Process\",\n \"Extract/Retrieve Information\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategy_ids\": [\"US1\", \"US6\", \"US1\", \"US3\", \"US4\", \"US6\"]\n}\n```",
"model_reasoning": null
},
{
"task_id": 27,
"task_intent": "Tell me the count of comments that have received more downvotes than upvotes for the user who made the latest post on the Showerthoughts forum.",
"expected_ids": [
"US1",
"US1",
"US7"
],
"actual_ids": [
"US1",
"US5",
"US1",
"US6",
"US7"
],
"correct": false,
"model": "aiproxy/deepseek-reasoner",
"model_output": "\nOkay, let's tackle this task. The user wants the count of comments from the user who made the latest post on the Showerthoughts forum where the comments have more downvotes than upvotes. \n\nFirst, I need to figure out the steps. Starting with Reddit's interface, the first thing is to navigate to the Showerthoughts forum. That's probably a navigation step (US1). Once there, find the latest post. Maybe the posts are listed, so the latest one would be at the top. Then, view the details of that post to see the author (US5). \n\nNext, go to the user's profile to see their comments. That's another navigation (US1). Then, I need to look through their comments. But how do I check each comment has more downvotes than upvotes? Reddit doesn't show exact numbers, but maybe the score (upvotes minus downvotes) is visible. If a comment has a negative score, that means more downvotes. So, analyze each comment's score (US7). \n\nBut wait, the user wants the count. So I need to go through all comments, check if their score is negative, and count them. That would involve extracting the score (US6) and evaluating each one (US7). Maybe also navigating through multiple pages if there are many comments (US8). \n\nSo the steps would be: navigate to Showerthoughts, find latest post, view author's profile, navigate to their comments, iterate through each comment, check if score is negative, and count. \n\nThe universal strategies involved here are US1 (navigate to sections), US5 (view details), US6 (extract info), US7 (analyze data), and US8 if pagination is needed. But the example output might not include US8 if it's assumed all comments are on one page. Let me check the output example again. The example used US1, US3, US4. So maybe in this case, the steps are:\n\n1. Navigate to Showerthoughts forum (US1)\n2. Identify the latest post (US5)\n3. Access the author's profile (US1)\n4. Extract their comments (US6)\n5. Analyze each comment's votes (US7)\n6. Count those with more downvotes (US7 again?)\n\nBut how to structure the strategies. Maybe:\n\n- Navigate to Showerthoughts forum to locate the latest post.\n- View the latest post details to identify the author.\n- Navigate to the author's profile page.\n- Analyze all comments to find those with negative scores.\n- Count the qualifying comments.\n\nSo the strategies would be US1, US5, US1, US7, US7. But US7 is used twice. Alternatively, extracting the comments (US6) and then analyzing (US7). So strategies:\n\n1. Navigate to Showerthoughts forum (US1)\n2. View latest post details (US5)\n3. Navigate to author's profile (US1)\n4. Extract all comments (US6)\n5. Analyze comments for downvotes > upvotes (US7)\n6. Count the results (maybe part of US7 or another US7?)\n\nBut the output example for task 4 had three steps. Maybe here, the strategies are:\n\n1. Navigate to Showerthoughts forum and locate the latest post. (US1)\n2. Access the author's profile and view their comments. (US1, US5)\n3. Analyze each comment's votes to count those with more downvotes. (US7, US6)\n\nBut need to map each strategy step to the universal strategies. Let me list the steps with their US:\n\n1. Navigate to the Showerthoughts forum. (US1)\n2. Identify the latest post and its author. (US5)\n3. Navigate to the author's profile page. (US1)\n4. Extract all comments from the profile. (US6)\n5. Evaluate each comment's upvotes and downvotes. (US7)\n6. Count comments where downvotes exceed upvotes. (US7)\n\nBut the output example combines steps. So maybe:\n\nStrategies:\n- \"Navigate to Showerthoughts forum and locate the latest post\" (US1)\n- \"View the latest post to identify the author\" (US5)\n- \"Navigate to the author's profile page\" (US1)\n- \"Extract all comments from the profile\" (US6)\n- \"Analyze comments to count those with more downvotes than upvotes\" (US7)\n\nBut the output example had three steps. Maybe combine some steps. For example:\n\n1. Navigate to Showerthoughts and find latest post (US1)\n2. View post details to get author (US5)\n3. Go to author's profile and extract comments (US1, US6)\n4. Analyze comments for downvote count (US7)\n\nBut the output needs to be concise. Let's see the example again. The example had three steps. So perhaps:\n\nStrategies:\n1. Navigate to Showerthoughts forum and locate the latest post. (US1)\n2. Access the author's profile and retrieve their comments. (US1, US5, US6)\n3. Analyze comments to count those with more downvotes than upvotes. (US7)\n\nBut need to map each strategy step to one universal strategy. Each step can only use one US. So:\n\n1. Navigate to Showerthoughts forum (US1)\n2. View latest post details to identify author (US5)\n3. Navigate to author's profile (US1)\n4. Extract all user comments (US6)\n5. Analyze comments to count those with negative scores (US7)\n\nBut the output example had three steps, but maybe it's okay to have more. The user's intent requires several steps. So the strategies would be:\n\n[\n \"Navigate to the Showerthoughts forum\",\n \"Identify the latest post and its author\",\n \"Navigate to the author's profile\",\n \"Retrieve all comments from the profile\",\n \"Count comments with more downvotes than upvotes\"\n]\n\nBut each of these steps must be mapped to a US. Let's check:\n\n1. Navigate to Showerthoughts forum: US1\n2. Identify latest post and author: US5 (view details)\n3. Navigate to author's profile: US1\n4. Retrieve comments: US6 (extract info)\n5. Count comments: US7 (analyze)\n\nSo the strategies array would have these five steps, and the US IDs would be US1, US5, US1, US6, US7.\n\nBut maybe some steps can be combined. For example, \"Navigate to the author's profile and retrieve all comments\" as one step, which would be US1 and US6. But according to the output example, each strategy step is a single action. So each step is a single strategy. So the answer would have five steps. But the example output had three steps. Maybe the user expects fewer steps. Let me think again.\n\nAlternative approach:\n\n1. Navigate to Showerthoughts forum and find the latest post (US1)\n2. View the post to get the author's username (US5)\n3. Navigate to the author's profile (US1)\n4. Extract all comments and analyze for downvotes (US6 and US7)\n5. Count the qualifying comments (US7)\n\nBut perhaps steps 4 and 5 can be combined as \"Analyze comments to count those with more downvotes than upvotes\" (US7). So the strategies would be:\n\n1. Navigate to Showerthoughts forum (US1)\n2. View latest post details to identify author (US5)\n3. Navigate to author's profile (US1)\n4. Extract and analyze comments for downvote count (US6, US7)\nBut how to split. Since each strategy can only use one US, perhaps:\n\nStrategies:\n1. Navigate to Showerthoughts forum (US1)\n2. View latest post to identify author (US5)\n3. Navigate to author's profile (US1)\n4. Retrieve all comments (US6)\n5. Analyze comments to count those with more downvotes (US7)\n\nSo the answer would have five strategies. But maybe the user expects a more concise plan. Let's see the example again. The example had three steps. Maybe in this case, the steps can be grouped. For example:\n\n- Navigate to the Showerthoughts forum and locate the latest post (US1)\n- Access the author's profile and retrieve their comments (US1, US6)\n- Analyze comments to count those with more downvotes (US7)\n\nBut each step can only use one US. So the first step is US1, the second step would be US1 (navigate to profile) and US6 (retrieve comments). But since each strategy step can only use one US, perhaps split into two steps. \n\nAlternatively, maybe the steps are:\n\n1. Navigate to Showerthoughts forum (US1)\n2. Identify the latest post's author (US5)\n3. Navigate to the author's profile (US1)\n4. Extract all comments (US6)\n5. Analyze and count comments with more downvotes (US7)\n\nBut the output would have five steps. However, the example had three steps. Maybe the answer is allowed to have more steps. Let's proceed with that.\n\nSo the final answer would be:\n\nStrategies: [\n \"Navigate to the Showerthoughts forum\",\n \"View the latest post to identify the author\",\n \"Navigate to the author's profile page\",\n \"Retrieve all comments from the user's profile\",\n \"Analyze comments to count those with more downvotes than upvotes\"\n]\n\nUniversal strategies: US1, US5, US1, US6, US7\n\nBut the output example grouped some steps. For example, \"Generate and Review Bestsellers Report\" combines US4 (execute) and US7 (analyze). But in the example, the strategies are three steps, each mapped to one US. So perhaps in this case, the steps can be:\n\n1. Navigate to Showerthoughts forum (US1)\n2. View latest post details (US5)\n3. Navigate to author's profile (US1)\n4. Extract and analyze comments (US6 and US7)\n\nBut how to split. Since each step must be mapped to one US, perhaps:\n\nThe fourth step is \"Extract comments\" (US6), and the fifth step is \"Analyze comments...\" (US7). So five steps. But the user's output example had three steps, but maybe that's just an example and longer sequences are allowed. The key is to correctly map each step to a US.\n\nSo the final answer would have five steps. But let's check if any steps can be merged. For example, \"Navigate to the author's profile and retrieve comments\" could be two steps. But each step must be a single US. So \"Navigate to author's profile\" is US1, \"Retrieve comments\" is US6. So yes, five steps.\n\nThus, the JSON output would be:\n\n{\n \"task_id\": 27,\n \"strategies\": [\n \"Navigate to the Showerthoughts forum\",\n \"View the latest post to identify the author\",\n \"Navigate to the author's profile page\",\n \"Retrieve all comments from the user's profile\",\n \"Analyze comments to count those with more downvotes than upvotes\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategies\": [\n \"Navigate To Page/Section\",\n \"View/Inspect Item Details\",\n \"Navigate To Page/Section\",\n \"Extract/Retrieve Information\",\n \"Analyze/Evaluate/Verify Data\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategy_ids\": [\"US1\", \"US5\", \"US1\", \"US6\", \"US7\"]\n}\n\n\n```json\n{\n \"task_id\": 27,\n \"strategies\": [\n \"Navigate to the Showerthoughts forum\",\n \"View the latest post to identify the author\",\n \"Navigate to the author's profile page\",\n \"Retrieve all comments from the user's profile\",\n \"Analyze comments to count those with more downvotes than upvotes\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategies\": [\n \"Navigate To Page/Section\",\n \"View/Inspect Item Details\",\n \"Navigate To Page/Section\",\n \"Extract/Retrieve Information\",\n \"Analyze/Evaluate/Verify Data\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategy_ids\": [\"US1\", \"US5\", \"US1\", \"US6\", \"US7\"]\n}\n```",
"model_reasoning": null
},
{
"task_id": 270,
"task_intent": "Show me products under $30 in \"men shoes\" category",
"expected_ids": [
"US1",
"US2",
"US10"
],
"actual_ids": [
"US1",
"US2",
"US5"
],
"correct": false,
"model": "aiproxy/deepseek-reasoner",
"model_output": "\nOkay, let's tackle this task. The user wants to see products under $30 in the \"men shoes\" category on a shopping site. First, I need to figure out the steps a GUI agent would take.\n\nStarting with navigation. The user is on the shopping site, so they probably need to go to the men's shoes section. That's US1, navigating to a specific page or section. Then, once there, they need to apply a price filter. The site might have a filter option where you can input a maximum price. That's US2, using filters to narrow down data. After setting the filter to $30, the agent would apply it, which is part of US2 as well. Then, the results would show the products under $30. The agent might need to view those products, but since the task is just to show them, maybe executing the filter is enough. Wait, but generating the filtered list might be part of executing the action, so maybe US4? Or is applying the filter part of configuring settings? Hmm.\n\nWait, the strategies are: navigate to the category (US1), set the price filter under $30 (US3 or US2?), then execute the filter (US4). Or is setting the filter part of US2 (search/filter/sort)? Because US2 includes using filters. So maybe the steps are: navigate to men's shoes category (US1), apply price filter under $30 (US2), and maybe execute the filter if needed (but sometimes filters apply automatically). So maybe US2 covers both setting the filter and applying it. Or perhaps configuring the filter is US3. Wait, US3 is about configuring parameters before executing an action. So maybe first navigate (US1), then configure the price parameter (US3), then execute the filter (US4). But in many interfaces, setting the filter and applying it might be part of the same step. For example, entering a max price and clicking \"apply\" would be US2 (filter) which includes both setting and applying. So perhaps the steps are: navigate to the category (US1), use the price filter to set under $30 (US2). Then maybe view the results, but the task is to show the products, which would be the result of the filter. So the strategies would be navigate to the men's shoes category, filter products by price under $30. The universal strategies would be US1 and US2. Let me check the example. In the example given, \"Filter issues by the label 'Bug'\" is US2. So applying a filter is US2. So in this case, navigating to the category (US1), then applying the price filter (US2). So the strategies would be: Navigate to \"men shoes\" category, Apply price filter under $30. The universal strategies are US1 and US2. That makes sense. So the answer should include those steps and the corresponding US IDs.\n\n\n```json\n{\n \"task_id\": 270,\n \"strategies\": [\n \"Navigate to the 'Men Shoes' category page\",\n \"Apply a price filter for products under $30\",\n \"View filtered results\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategies\": [\n \"Navigate To Page/Section\",\n \"Search/Filter/Sort Data\",\n \"View/Inspect Item Details\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategy_ids\": [\"US1\", \"US2\", \"US5\"]\n}\n```",
"model_reasoning": null
},
{
"task_id": 276,
"task_intent": "Search for \"switch accessories\"",
"expected_ids": [
"US2"
],
"actual_ids": [
"US1",
"US2",
"US4"
],
"correct": false,
"model": "aiproxy/deepseek-reasoner",
"model_output": "\nOkay, let's tackle this task. The user wants to search for \"switch accessories\" on the shopping site. First, I need to figure out the steps involved in performing a search.\n\nThe first step is probably navigating to the search bar or the section where you can input a search query. That aligns with US1, Navigate To Page/Section, but maybe more specifically, just focusing on the search area. Wait, US1 is about moving to a specific page or section. So maybe the user needs to go to the search page or ensure they're on the page where the search bar is available.\n\nNext, they need to input the search term \"switch accessories\" into the search box. That's part of US2, which involves using search boxes to locate data. So configuring the search parameters here would be US2. Then executing the search by hitting enter or clicking the search button would be US4, Execute Action/Process.\n\nSo the strategies would be: Navigate to the search section, input the search term, and execute the search. The corresponding universal strategies are US1, US2, and US4. Let me check the example. In the example, searching or filtering uses US2. So inputting the search term is under US2. Then executing the search is US4. So the steps would be: Navigate to the search page/bar (US1), input \"switch accessories\" (US2), and execute the search (US4). That makes sense.\n\n\n```json\n{\n \"task_id\": 276,\n \"strategies\": [\n \"Navigate to the search input field\",\n \"Input the search term \\\"switch accessories\\\"\",\n \"Execute the search action\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategies\": [\n \"Navigate To Page/Section\",\n \"Search/Filter/Sort Data\",\n \"Execute Action/Process\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategy_ids\": [\"US1\", \"US2\", \"US4\"]\n}\n```",
"model_reasoning": null
},
{
"task_id": 279,
"task_intent": "Provide me with the complete names of Bluetooth headphones from Sony, and also share the price range for the available models",
"expected_ids": [
"US2",
"US2",
"US6"
],
"actual_ids": [
"US1",
"US3",
"US4",
"US8",
"US5",
"US6",
"US7"
],
"correct": false,
"model": "aiproxy/deepseek-reasoner",
"model_output": "\nOkay, let's tackle this task. The user wants the complete names of Sony Bluetooth headphones and their price ranges from the shopping site. First, I need to figure out how to approach this.\n\nStarting with navigation: the user is on a shopping site, so maybe there's a search bar. They need to search for Sony Bluetooth headphones. That's probably US2, searching or filtering. Then, after searching, they might need to sort or filter the brand to Sony specifically, which is another US2 step.\n\nOnce the results are filtered, the agent has to look through each product. For each item, they need to view the details (US5) to get the full product name. Then extract the name and price (US6). If there are multiple pages of results, they might need to navigate through them using pagination (US8).\n\nAfter collecting all the data, the agent has to analyze it to compile the list and determine the price ranges, which is US7. So putting it all together: search, filter, navigate through pages, view details, extract info, and analyze.\n\nWait, maybe after searching, they need to apply a brand filter for Sony. Then execute the search. Then go through each product, extract names and prices. Then figure out the price ranges. So the strategies would be: navigate to search, configure search parameters (Sony and Bluetooth), execute search, navigate through pages, view each product, extract info, then analyze to compile the list and price ranges. \n\nThe universal strategies involved here would be US1 for navigating to the search section, US3 for setting the parameters (Sony and Bluetooth), US4 to execute the search, US8 to go through pages, US5 to view each product, US6 to extract the data, and US7 to analyze and compile the price ranges. But maybe some steps can be combined. Let me check the example again. The example for a similar task used US1, US3, US4. But here, there's more steps. So the strategies would be:\n\n1. Navigate to the product search or category section (US1)\n2. Configure search filters for brand (Sony) and product type (Bluetooth headphones) (US3)\n3. Execute the search to retrieve relevant products (US4)\n4. Navigate through all pages of search results (US8)\n5. For each product, view details to get the complete name (US5)\n6. Extract the product name and price information (US6)\n7. Analyze the collected data to compile the list and determine price ranges (US7)\n\nSo the strategies array would list these steps, and the universal strategies would be the corresponding US IDs. Let me make sure each step maps correctly. Yes, that seems right. The final answer should include these steps and the US IDs.\n\n\n```json\n{\n \"task_id\": 279,\n \"strategies\": [\n \"Navigate to the product search/category section\",\n \"Configure search filters for brand (Sony) and product type (Bluetooth headphones)\",\n \"Execute search to retrieve relevant products\",\n \"Navigate through all pages of search results\",\n \"View product details for each item to identify complete names\",\n \"Extract product names and prices from details\",\n \"Analyze data to compile the list and determine price ranges\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategies\": [\n \"Navigate To Page/Section\",\n \"Configure Parameters/Settings\",\n \"Execute Action/Process\",\n \"Navigate Within Data/Results\",\n \"View/Inspect Item Details\",\n \"Extract/Retrieve Information\",\n \"Analyze/Evaluate/Verify Data\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategy_ids\": [\"US1\", \"US3\", \"US4\", \"US8\", \"US5\", \"US6\", \"US7\"]\n}\n```",
"model_reasoning": null
},
{
"task_id": 283,
"task_intent": "Look up the most recent models of XBox controllers released between 2020-2021?",
"expected_ids": [
"US2",
"US2",
"US8",
"US5"
],
"actual_ids": [
"US1",
"US2",
"US2",
"US6"
],
"correct": false,
"model": "aiproxy/deepseek-reasoner",
"model_output": "\nOkay, let's tackle this task. The user wants to find the most recent models of XBox controllers released between 2020 and 2021 on a shopping site. First, I need to figure out the steps a GUI agent would take.\n\nStarting with navigation. The shopping site probably has a section for gaming accessories or specifically for XBox. So the first step would be to go to the XBox controllers page. That's US1: Navigate To Page/Section.\n\nNext, there might be a lot of controllers listed. The user wants models from 2020-2021. So applying a filter for release date within that range makes sense. That's US2: Search/Filter/Sort Data. Maybe there's a filter option by year or release date.\n\nAfter filtering, the agent needs to sort the results by release date in descending order to get the most recent ones first. That's another use of US2, since sorting is part of that strategy.\n\nOnce the list is there, the agent might need to look through the items, maybe check each product's details to confirm the release year. That's US5: View/Inspect Item Details. But since the list is already filtered, maybe just extracting the top 3 or so would work. However, the task says \"most recent models,\" so maybe after sorting, the top entries are the answer. But the agent might need to verify the dates, which could involve US7: Extract/Retrieve Information or US6. Wait, US6 is about extracting info, so maybe after filtering and sorting, the agent retrieves the model names and release dates. But the user's intent is to look up the models, so the steps would be navigate, filter, sort, and then extract the info. But maybe the extraction is part of the analysis. Hmm.\n\nWait, the strategies should be steps the agent takes. So after filtering and sorting, the agent would list the models. But how? Maybe the steps are: navigate to the section, apply release date filter, sort by release date descending, then extract the top models. So the strategies would be:\n\n1. Navigate to XBox Controllers section (US1)\n2. Filter by release date 2020-2021 (US2)\n3. Sort results by release date descending (US2 again)\n4. Retrieve the top models (US6)\n\nBut the output example for a similar task used \"Generate and Review Report\" as a step, which was US4. But in this case, maybe after applying filters and sorting, the agent just needs to extract the information. So the strategies would be:\n\n- Navigate to XBox Controllers page\n- Configure filters for release date between 2020 and 2021\n- Sort by most recent release\n- Extract the list of models\n\nBut \"configure parameters\" is US3. Wait, configuring filters might be part of US2 (Search/Filter/Sort). Because US2 includes using filters. So maybe the steps are:\n\n1. Navigate to the appropriate section (US1)\n2. Apply release date filter (US2)\n3. Sort by release date descending (US2)\n4. Extract the top models (US6)\n\nAlternatively, if the site has a search function where you can input the date range, that's part of US2. So the strategies would be:\n\nStrategies:\n- Navigate to XBox Controllers section (US1)\n- Filter products by release years 2020-2021 (US2)\n- Sort products by release date in descending order (US2)\n- Retrieve the most recent models from the sorted list (US6)\n\nUniversal strategies would be US1, US2 (twice?), but in the output example, they list the strategy IDs as [\"US1\", \"US3\", \"US4\"], which corresponds to three steps. Here, maybe three steps: US1, US2 (for filter and sort), and US6. But since US2 can be used for both filter and sorting, maybe the strategies are:\n\nStrategies array:\n1. \"Navigate to XBox Controllers section\",\n2. \"Filter products by release date between 2020 and 2021\",\n3. \"Sort products by most recent release date\",\n4. \"Retrieve the top models\"\n\nBut the output example had three steps. Maybe combining filter and sort into one step? Or maybe the site's interface allows setting both in one go. But more likely, they are separate steps. So four steps, but the universal strategies would be US1, US2 (twice), US6. However, the output example lists each strategy ID once, even if a strategy is used multiple times. Wait, in the example given, the user had \"Configure Parameters/Settings\" (US3) and \"Execute Action\" (US4). So in that case, the strategies were three steps, each mapped to a different US. But in this case, the user might have two US2 steps. But the output example lists the universal_strategies as [\"US1\", \"US3\", \"US4\"], each once. So perhaps even if a strategy is used multiple times, the IDs are unique. Wait, no. Let me check the example:\n\nIn the example, the strategies were:\n\n1. Navigate to Bestsellers Report (US1)\n2. Configure Report Parameters for January 2023 (US3)\n3. Generate and Review Bestsellers Report (US4)\n\nSo each step is mapped to a different US. But in the current task, applying a filter and then a sort would both be US2. So how to represent that? The output example's JSON has \"universal_strategies\" as a list of the strategy names, and \"universal_strategy_ids\" as the list of IDs. So if two steps use US2, then the list would have US2 twice. But in the example, each step is mapped to a different US. So perhaps in this case, the steps are:\n\n1. US1\n2. US2 (filter)\n3. US2 (sort)\n4. US6 (extract)\n\nBut the output example's JSON includes the strategies and their corresponding US. So the universal_strategies array would have [\"Navigate To Page/Section\", \"Search/Filter/Sort Data\", \"Search/Filter/Sort Data\", \"Extract/Retrieve Information\"], and the IDs would be [\"US1\", \"US2\", \"US2\", \"US6\"]. But the example given in the problem shows that even if a step uses the same US, it's listed. For example, if two steps use US2, they would both be in the list. However, in the example provided, the user's task was to generate a report, which involved three steps each with different US. So perhaps in this case, the answer would have four steps, with US1, US2, US2, US6. But maybe the assistant can combine the filter and sort into a single step. For example, \"Apply filters and sorting to display the most recent models from 2020-2021\" which would be US2. Then the steps would be:\n\n1. Navigate to XBox Controllers section (US1)\n2. Apply filters and sorting for release date 2020-2021 and sort by most recent (US2)\n3. Retrieve the list of models (US6)\n\nBut is applying both filter and sort considered a single step? It depends on the interface. If the user has to first set the filter and then the sort, they are two separate actions. But in the strategy, they can be considered as two steps. However, the problem says to break the task into steps. So perhaps each action (filtering and sorting) is a separate step. So the strategies would be:\n\nStrategies:\n1. Navigate to the XBox Controllers section (US1)\n2. Filter products by release date between 2020 and 2021 (US2)\n3. Sort products by most recent release date (US2)\n4. Retrieve the most recent models from the sorted list (US6)\n\nThen the universal_strategies would be [\"US1\", \"US2\", \"US2\", \"US6\"], but the output example didn't repeat US2. Wait, in the example given, the user had to configure parameters (US3) and execute (US4). So perhaps in this case, the steps are separate. But the problem's output example allows for the same US to be used multiple times. So the answer should list each step's US. So the answer would have:\n\nstrategies: [\n \"Navigate to the XBox Controllers section\",\n \"Filter products by release date between 2020 and 2021\",\n \"Sort products by most recent release date\",\n \"Retrieve the most recent models from the sorted list\"\n],\nuniversal_strategies: [\n \"Navigate To Page/Section\",\n \"Search/Filter/Sort Data\",\n \"Search/Filter/Sort Data\",\n \"Extract/Retrieve Information\"\n],\nuniversal_strategy_ids: [\"US1\", \"US2\", \"US2\", \"US6\"]\n\nBut the output example didn't have repeated US IDs. However, the user's output example had three steps with three different US. But perhaps in this case, it's acceptable to have US2 twice. Alternatively, maybe the sorting is part of the same step as filtering. For example, \"Apply filters and sort to display most recent models from 2020-2021\" as a single step. But that's two actions. So perhaps the answer should split them. \n\nAlternatively, maybe the agent can configure the parameters (release date range and sort order) in a single step, which would be US3 (Configure Parameters/Settings). But US3 is about setting parameters before executing an action. For example, if there's a form where you set the date range and sorting, then clicking apply. But in many shopping sites, filtering and sorting are separate controls. So the user would first apply the filter, then apply the sort. So two separate steps. So the answer should include both as US2. \n\nTherefore, the final answer would have four steps, with US1, US2, US2, US6. But the output example had three steps. However, the user's instructions don't limit the number of steps. So the correct approach is to list each step with their respective US. \n\nSo the JSON would be:\n\n{\n \"task_id\": 283,\n \"strategies\": [\n \"Navigate to the XBox Controllers section\",\n \"Filter products by release date between 2020 and 2021\",\n \"Sort products by most recent release date\",\n \"Retrieve the most recent models from the sorted list\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategies\": [\n \"Navigate To Page/Section\",\n \"Search/Filter/Sort Data\",\n \"Search/Filter/Sort Data\",\n \"Extract/Retrieve Information\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategy_ids\": [\"US1\", \"US2\", \"US2\", \"US6\"]\n}\n\nBut I need to check if \"Retrieve the most recent models\" is US6 (Extract/Retrieve Information) or US7 (Analyze/Evaluate/Verify Data). Since the agent is extracting the information (model names) from the list, it's US6. US7 would involve analysis, like checking if they meet certain criteria. Here, it's just retrieving the data, so US6.\n\nYes, that makes sense. So the answer is as above.\n\n\n```json\n{\n \"task_id\": 283,\n \"strategies\": [\n \"Navigate to the XBox Controllers section\",\n \"Filter products by release date between 2020 and 2021\",\n \"Sort products by most recent release date\",\n \"Retrieve the most recent models from the sorted list\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategies\": [\n \"Navigate To Page/Section\",\n \"Search/Filter/Sort Data\",\n \"Search/Filter/Sort Data\",\n \"Extract/Retrieve Information\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategy_ids\": [\"US1\", \"US2\", \"US2\", \"US6\"]\n}\n```",
"model_reasoning": null
},
{
"task_id": 285,
"task_intent": "Show the least expensive switch card holder with a minimum storage capacity of 15 cards.",
"expected_ids": [
"US2",
"US7",
"US7"
],
"actual_ids": [
"US1",
"US2",
"US5"
],
"correct": false,
"model": "aiproxy/deepseek-reasoner",
"model_output": "\nOkay, let's tackle this task. The user wants to find the least expensive switch card holder that can hold at least 15 cards. First, I need to figure out the steps a GUI agent would take on a shopping site.\n\nStarting with navigation. The user is on a shopping site, so they probably need to go to the section where card holders are listed. Maybe a search bar or a specific category page. So the first step would be navigating to the right page or section. That aligns with US1: Navigate To Page/Section.\n\nNext, they need to search or filter the products. Since the requirement is a minimum storage of 15 cards, the agent should apply a filter for storage capacity. Also, sorting by price from low to high would show the least expensive first. That's US2: Search/Filter/Sort Data.\n\nAfter applying the filters and sorting, the agent would look at the results. The top result after sorting by price should be the cheapest one that meets the storage requirement. So viewing the details of that product would be necessary to confirm it meets the criteria. That's US5: View/Inspect Item Details.\n\nWait, but do they need to extract the information? The intent is to \"show\" the product, which might involve displaying its details. So after viewing, maybe extracting the price and storage info to verify. But the main steps are navigating, filtering/sorting, and viewing. Maybe the extraction is part of the viewing step. Alternatively, maybe the execute action is generating the list, but in this case, the main actions are filtering and sorting, which are part of US2.\n\nSo the strategies would be: Navigate to the card holders section, filter for storage >=15 and sort by price ascending, then view the top result. The universal strategies would be US1, US2, US5. Let me check the example. The output example had US1, US3, US4. In this case, configuring parameters (like setting the storage and sorting) is part of US2. So the strategies would be:\n\n1. Navigate to the card holders section (US1)\n2. Filter and sort by price (US2)\n3. View the details of the top result (US5)\n\nYes, that makes sense. The user needs to go to the right place, apply the necessary filters and sorting, then check the top item. So the JSON should reflect those steps with the corresponding US IDs.\n\n\n```json\n{\n \"task_id\": 285,\n \"strategies\": [\n \"Navigate to the card holders product category\",\n \"Filter products by storage capacity (≥15 cards) and sort by price ascending\",\n \"View details of the top result to confirm specifications\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategies\": [\n \"Navigate To Page/Section\",\n \"Search/Filter/Sort Data\",\n \"View/Inspect Item Details\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategy_ids\": [\"US1\", \"US2\", \"US5\"]\n}\n```",
"model_reasoning": null
},
{
"task_id": 287,
"task_intent": "How much time does it take from Pittsburgh to Philadelphia by car?",
"expected_ids": [
"US1",
"US3",
"US4"
],
"actual_ids": [
"US1",
"US3",
"US4",
"US6"
],
"correct": false,
"model": "aiproxy/deepseek-reasoner",
"model_output": "\nOkay, let's tackle this task. The user wants to know the driving time from Pittsburgh to Philadelphia using a map site. First, I need to figure out the steps a GUI agent would take. \n\nStarting with the first step, the agent would probably need to go to the directions section of the map site. That's like navigating to where you input start and end points. So that's US1: Navigate To Page/Section.\n\nNext, they have to input the cities. Pittsburgh as the starting point and Philadelphia as the destination. That's part of configuring parameters, right? So US3: Configure Parameters/Settings.\n\nThen, after setting the locations, the agent would execute the action to get the route. That's clicking the button to find directions, which is US4: Execute Action/Process.\n\nOnce the route is displayed, the agent needs to look at the time shown. That's retrieving information, so US6: Extract/Retrieve Information.\n\nWait, but maybe there's a step to check if the travel time is displayed correctly. But the main steps are navigate, input cities, get route, and read the time. So the strategies would be: navigate to directions, set start and end points, get directions, and then extract the travel time. The universal strategies match US1, US3, US4, and US6. That should cover it.\n\n\n```json\n{\n \"task_id\": 287,\n \"strategies\": [\n \"Navigate to the Directions/Route Planning section\",\n \"Set Pittsburgh as the starting point and Philadelphia as the destination\",\n \"Select 'Car' as the travel mode and request route calculation\",\n \"Extract the estimated driving time from the route summary\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategies\": [\n \"Navigate To Page/Section\",\n \"Configure Parameters/Settings\",\n \"Execute Action/Process\",\n \"Extract/Retrieve Information\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategy_ids\": [\"US1\", \"US3\", \"US4\", \"US6\"]\n}\n```",
"model_reasoning": null
},
{
"task_id": 288,
"task_intent": "Tell me the name of the customer who has the most cancellations in the history",
"expected_ids": [
"US1",
"US3",
"US4"
],
"actual_ids": [
"US1",
"US3",
"US4",
"US2",
"US6"
],
"correct": false,
"model": "aiproxy/deepseek-reasoner",
"model_output": "\nOkay, let's tackle this task. The user wants to know the name of the customer with the most cancellations in history on the shopping admin site.\n\nFirst, I need to figure out where that information would be stored. Probably in some kind of report or customer management section. So the first step would be navigating to the right page, maybe a cancellations report or customer analytics section. That's US1: Navigate To Page/Section.\n\nNext, once on that page, there might be a list of customers with their counts. But to find the top one, the agent might need to sort the data by the number of cancellations in descending order. That's US2: Search/Filter/Sort Data.\n\nAfter sorting, the top entry would be the customer with the most cancellations. The agent needs to view that customer's details to get their name. So US5: View/Inspect Item Details.\n\nThen, from the details page, extract the customer's name. That's US6: Extract/Retrieve Information.\n\nWait, but do they need to generate a report first? Maybe. If the data isn't already presented, they might have to configure parameters (like all-time history) and execute the report. But the task says \"in the history,\" so maybe the default is all time. If the page already shows the data, then sorting is enough. But if not, maybe configure parameters (US3) and execute (US4). Hmm, the example given in the original input didn't include that. Let me check the example again.\n\nIn the example, the task was about best-selling products in a specific month. The strategies were navigate, configure parameters, execute. So for this task, if the cancellations data isn't already aggregated, the agent might need to configure the report to include all history. But the user's intent is \"in the history,\" so maybe the default parameters are okay. Or maybe the page requires setting a date range to all time. So perhaps:\n\n1. Navigate to the customer cancellations report page (US1).\n2. Configure parameters to include all historical data (US3) if necessary.\n3. Sort the customers by cancellation count descending (US2).\n4. View the top customer's details (US5).\n5. Extract the customer's name (US6).\n\nBut maybe steps 2 and 3 can be combined if the sorting is sufficient. Alternatively, if the report needs to be generated after setting parameters, then execute action (US4) would be needed. Let me think. The original example had \"Generate and submit the sales report\" as US4. So if generating the report is required after setting parameters, then:\n\nStrategies would be:\n\n1. Navigate to the Cancellations Report section (US1).\n2. Configure the report parameters to cover all historical data (US3).\n3. Generate the report (US4).\n4. Sort the results by cancellation count descending (US2).\n5. View the top customer's details (US5).\n6. Retrieve the customer's name (US6).\n\nBut maybe the sorting is part of configuring parameters. Alternatively, maybe the report can be sorted directly. The exact UI steps might vary, but the universal strategies are more about the high-level steps. So the key steps are navigate, configure (if needed), generate (if needed), sort, view, extract. But the user's task is to get the name, so the main steps would be navigating to the right place, ensuring the data is sorted to show the top customer, viewing their details, and extracting the name. So the strategies could be:\n\n- Navigate to Customer Cancellations Report (US1)\n- Sort customers by cancellation count in descending order (US2)\n- View details of the top customer (US5)\n- Retrieve the customer's name from the details (US6)\n\nBut maybe the report isn't pre-sorted, so sorting is necessary. Alternatively, if the report requires parameters like date range, then configure that. Since the task is \"in the history,\" maybe the default parameters are all-time, but if not, the agent needs to set that. So perhaps:\n\n1. Navigate to the appropriate report/section (US1)\n2. Configure parameters to include all time (US3)\n3. Generate the report (US4)\n4. Sort by cancellation count (US2)\n5. View top customer (US5)\n6. Extract name (US6)\n\nBut the original example for task 4 had three steps: navigate, configure, execute. So maybe here, the steps would be similar. But the answer needs to be concise. Let me check the output example again. The example had three strategies, but the actual steps might involve more. However, the user's answer example for task 4 had three steps. But the current task might need more steps. Let's see.\n\nThe user's intent is to find the customer with the most cancellations. So steps could be:\n\n1. Navigate to the customer cancellations report or analytics page (US1)\n2. Sort the customer list by number of cancellations descending (US2)\n3. Identify the top entry and view their details (US5)\n4. Extract the customer's name from the details (US6)\n\nBut maybe viewing the details isn't necessary if the name is already in the list. So perhaps:\n\n1. Navigate to the customer cancellations report (US1)\n2. Sort the list by cancellation count descending (US2)\n3. Retrieve the name of the top customer from the list (US6)\n\nBut if the list only shows counts and not names, then viewing details is needed. So the steps would depend on the UI. Since the agent is supposed to be general, perhaps assuming that the list shows names and counts, then sorting and extracting would be enough. But if the name is not visible until details are viewed, then view details is needed.\n\nAlternatively, maybe the report requires generating after setting parameters. For example, if the default report is for a specific time frame, then configuring the date range to all time (US3), generating (US4), then sorting (US2), then extracting (US6).\n\nSo possible strategies:\n\n- Navigate to the Cancellations Report page (US1)\n- Configure the date range to cover all history (US3)\n- Generate the report (US4)\n- Sort the results by cancellation count descending (US2)\n- Retrieve the customer name from the top entry (US6)\n\nIn this case, viewing details (US5) is not needed if the name is in the list. So the answer would be:\n\nStrategies:\n1. Navigate to the Cancellations Report page\n2. Configure the date range to include all historical data\n3. Generate the report\n4. Sort customers by cancellation count in descending order\n5. Retrieve the name of the top customer\n\nUniversal strategies: US1, US3, US4, US2, US6\n\nBut the output example had three steps. Maybe the answer can combine some steps. For example, \"Generate the report sorted by cancellation count\" but that's not accurate. The sorting is a separate step.\n\nAlternatively, maybe the report can be done with parameters that sort. For example, configuring the report to sort by cancellation count. But the universal strategies have US2 for sorting. So the steps would be:\n\n1. US1: Navigate to the report page\n2. US3: Configure parameters (date range)\n3. US4: Generate report\n4. US2: Sort by cancellation count\n5. US6: Extract name\n\nBut the sorting is a separate step after generating the report.\n\nSo the strategies would be:\n\n[\"Navigate to the Customer Cancellations Report page\", \"Configure report parameters to include all historical data\", \"Generate the report\", \"Sort the customer list by cancellation count in descending order\", \"Retrieve the name of the customer with the highest cancellations\"]\n\nUniversal strategies: US1, US3, US4, US2, US6\n\nBut the answer example had three steps. Maybe in this case, the steps can be combined. For example, \"Generate a report of all customer cancellations\" which would include US1, US3, US4. Then sort and retrieve. But the answer example had three steps. However, the user's example for task 4 had three steps. But the current task might need more steps. The key is to follow the universal strategies.\n\nSo the final answer would be:\n\nStrategies:\n1. Navigate to the Customer Cancellations Report section (US1)\n2. Configure the report to include all historical data (US3)\n3. Generate the report (US4)\n4. Sort the results by cancellation count descending (US2)\n5. Retrieve the customer name from the top entry (US6)\n\nBut the output example had three steps. However, the user's example had three steps, but the current task may require more. The answer should include all necessary steps. So the strategies would be as above, with five steps. But maybe some steps can be merged. For example, \"Generate a report sorted by cancellation count\" combines US4 and US2, but according to the universal strategies, sorting is a separate step. So the answer should list each step separately.\n\nThus, the JSON output would be:\n\n{\n \"task_id\": 288,\n \"strategies\": [\n \"Navigate to the Customer Cancellations Report section\",\n \"Configure the report parameters to include all historical data\",\n \"Generate the report\",\n \"Sort the customer list by cancellation count in descending order\",\n \"Retrieve the name of the customer with the highest cancellations\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategies\": [\n \"Navigate To Page/Section\",\n \"Configure Parameters/Settings\",\n \"Execute Action/Process\",\n \"Search/Filter/Sort Data\",\n \"Extract/Retrieve Information\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategy_ids\": [\"US1\", \"US3\", \"US4\", \"US2\", \"US6\"]\n}\n\n\n```json\n{\n \"task_id\": 288,\n \"strategies\": [\n \"Navigate to the Customer Cancellations Report section\",\n \"Configure the report parameters to include all historical data\",\n \"Generate the report\",\n \"Sort the customer list by cancellation count in descending order\",\n \"Retrieve the name of the customer with the highest cancellations\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategies\": [\n \"Navigate To Page/Section\",\n \"Configure Parameters/Settings\",\n \"Execute Action/Process\",\n \"Search/Filter/Sort Data\",\n \"Extract/Retrieve Information\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategy_ids\": [\"US1\", \"US3\", \"US4\", \"US2\", \"US6\"]\n}\n```",
"model_reasoning": null
},
{
"task_id": 296,
"task_intent": "Show me the command to clone the best GAN python implementation with SSH.",
"expected_ids": [
"US1",
"US4"
],
"actual_ids": [
"US2",
"US5",
"US6"
],
"correct": false,
"model": "aiproxy/deepseek-reasoner",
"model_output": "\nOkay, let's tackle this task. The user wants to clone the best GAN Python implementation using SSH on GitLab. First, I need to figure out the steps involved.\n\nHmm, GitLab's interface. To clone a repository with SSH, the user probably needs to find the repository first. So the first step is to search for the best GAN implementations. That would involve using the search feature, maybe filtering by Python. That's US2, Search/Filter/Sort Data.\n\nOnce they find the right repository, they need to view its details to get the SSH URL. That's US5, View/Inspect Item Details. Then, they have to retrieve the specific clone command, which is part of the repository's details. That's US6, Extract/Retrieve Information.\n\nPutting it all together: search for the repo, view it, and get the SSH command. The strategies would be searching, viewing details, and extracting the command. The corresponding universal strategies are US2, US5, US6.\n\n\n```json\n{\n \"task_id\": 296,\n \"strategies\": [\n \"Search for GAN Python repositories using GitLab's search/filter tools\",\n \"Inspect the top repository's details to confirm SSH clone availability\",\n \"Retrieve the SSH clone command from the repository's clone options\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategies\": [\n \"Search/Filter/Sort Data\",\n \"View/Inspect Item Details\",\n \"Extract/Retrieve Information\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategy_ids\": [\"US2\", \"US5\", \"US6\"]\n}\n```",
"model_reasoning": null
},
{
"task_id": 305,
"task_intent": "How many commits did Philip make in 2023/1?",
"expected_ids": [
"US1",
"US2",
"US7"
],
"actual_ids": [
"US1",
"US2",
"US3",
"US6"
],
"correct": false,
"model": "aiproxy/deepseek-reasoner",
"model_output": "\nOkay, let's tackle this task. The user wants to know how many commits Philip made in January 2023 on GitLab. First, I need to figure out the steps a GUI agent would take.\n\nStarting with navigation. The user would probably go to the project's repository page where commits are listed. That's US1: Navigate To Page/Section.\n\nNext, they need to filter the commits by author, which is Philip. So they'd use the filter options, maybe a dropdown or search bar. That's US2: Search/Filter/Sort Data.\n\nThen, setting the date range to January 2023. That's configuring parameters, so US3: Configure Parameters/Settings.\n\nAfter applying the filters, the system would display the commits. The agent needs to check the count, which might be shown as a number next to the results. That's US6: Extract/Retrieve Information.\n\nWait, maybe after filtering, the count is visible without generating a report. So steps would be navigate to commits, filter by author, set date, then retrieve the count. Let me make sure the strategies align with the universal templates. Yes, that makes sense. So the strategies would be:\n\n1. Navigate to the Commits section of the repository.\n2. Filter commits by author \"Philip\".\n3. Configure the date range for January 2023.\n4. Retrieve the number of commits from the results.\n\nThe corresponding universal strategies are US1, US2, US3, US6. The IDs are US1, US2, US3, US6.\n\n\n```json\n{\n \"task_id\": 305,\n \"strategies\": [\n \"Navigate to the Commits section of the repository\",\n \"Filter commits by author 'Philip'\",\n \"Configure the date range to January 2023\",\n \"Retrieve the number of commits from the filtered results\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategies\": [\n \"Navigate To Page/Section\",\n \"Search/Filter/Sort Data\",\n \"Configure Parameters/Settings\",\n \"Extract/Retrieve Information\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategy_ids\": [\"US1\", \"US2\", \"US3\", \"US6\"]\n}\n```",
"model_reasoning": null
},
{
"task_id": 313,
"task_intent": "Which number to call for the customer service?",
"expected_ids": [
"US1",
"US6"
],
"actual_ids": [
"US1",
"US5",
"US6"
],
"correct": false,
"model": "aiproxy/deepseek-reasoner",
"model_output": "\nOkay, let's tackle this task. The user wants to know which number to call for customer service on a shopping site. First, I need to figure out the steps a GUI agent would take.\n\nThe first thing the agent would do is navigate to the customer service section of the website. That makes sense because the contact information is usually found there. So that's US1: Navigate To Page/Section.\n\nOnce on the customer service page, the agent needs to look for the contact details. They might check different sections like FAQs, contact us, or help center. This involves viewing or inspecting the details on the page, which aligns with US5: View/Inspect Item Details.\n\nAfter locating the phone number, the agent needs to extract that information. That's US6: Extract/Retrieve Information. They might read the number displayed on the page and note it down.\n\nSo the strategies would be navigating to the right page, inspecting the details there, and then extracting the phone number. The corresponding universal strategies are US1, US5, and US6. Let me make sure there's no other steps needed. Maybe verifying the number, but the user just wants the number, so extracting it should suffice. Alright, that's the plan.\n\n\n```json\n{\n \"task_id\": 313,\n \"strategies\": [\n \"Navigate to Customer Service/Contact Support page\",\n \"Inspect contact information section for phone numbers\",\n \"Retrieve the customer service phone number from the page\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategies\": [\n \"Navigate To Page/Section\",\n \"View/Inspect Item Details\",\n \"Extract/Retrieve Information\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategy_ids\": [\"US1\", \"US5\", \"US6\"]\n}\n```",
"model_reasoning": null
},
{
"task_id": 321,
"task_intent": "How much refund I should expect from my order canlled in 2022, including shipping fee",
"expected_ids": [
"US1",
"US2",
"US7"
],
"actual_ids": [
"US1",
"US2",
"US5",
"US6",
"US1",
"US6",
"US7"
],
"correct": false,
"model": "aiproxy/deepseek-reasoner",
"model_output": "\nOkay, let's tackle this task. The user wants to know how much refund they should expect from an order canceled in 2022, including the shipping fee. First, I need to figure out the steps a GUI agent would take on a shopping site.\n\nStarting with navigation. The user probably needs to access their order history, so the first step would be to go to the order section. That's US1: Navigate To Page/Section. Then, they need to find the specific order from 2022. Since there might be many orders, they might need to search or filter by year 2022. That's US2: Search/Filter/Sort Data.\n\nOnce the order is located, they need to view the details to see the refund information. That's US5: View/Inspect Item Details. After opening the order details, the agent would extract the refund amount and shipping fee details, which is US6: Extract/Retrieve Information. \n\nBut wait, maybe the refund policy affects the amount. The agent might need to check the refund policy section, so another navigation step (US1 again) to the policy page. Then extract the relevant info (US6). Finally, calculate the total refund by adding the order amount and shipping fee as per the policy. That analysis step is US7: Analyze/Evaluate/Verify Data.\n\nPutting it all together: navigate to orders, filter, view details, extract data, navigate to policy, extract policy, analyze. The universal strategies involved are US1, US2, US5, US6, US1 again, US6, and US7. But since strategies can be grouped, maybe combine some. The final strategies would be steps like navigating to order history, filtering, viewing order details, checking refund policy, and calculating the total. The corresponding US IDs would be 1, 2, 5, 6, 1, 6, 7. But need to present them concisely in the output.\n\n\n```json\n{\n \"task_id\": 321,\n \"strategies\": [\n \"Navigate to Order History/Cancelled Orders section\",\n \"Filter orders by cancellation date in 2022\",\n \"View details of the specific cancelled order\",\n \"Extract original order amount and shipping fee from order details\",\n \"Navigate to Refund Policy documentation\",\n \"Retrieve refund rules for cancelled orders (shipping fee inclusion)\",\n \"Calculate expected refund based on policy and order data\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategies\": [\n \"Navigate To Page/Section\",\n \"Search/Filter/Sort Data\",\n \"View/Inspect Item Details\",\n \"Extract/Retrieve Information\",\n \"Navigate To Page/Section\",\n \"Extract/Retrieve Information\",\n \"Analyze/Evaluate/Verify Data\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategy_ids\": [\"US1\", \"US2\", \"US5\", \"US6\", \"US1\", \"US6\", \"US7\"]\n}\n```",
"model_reasoning": null
},
{
"task_id": 324,
"task_intent": "Show me the \"chairs\" listings by ascending price.",
"expected_ids": [
"US2",
"US2"
],
"actual_ids": [
"US2",
"US2"
],
"correct": true,
"model": "aiproxy/deepseek-reasoner",
"model_output": "\nOkay, let's tackle this task. The user wants to see \"chairs\" listings sorted by ascending price on a shopping site. First, I need to figure out the steps.\n\nStarting with navigation. The user probably needs to go to the section where chairs are listed. So maybe a search for \"chairs\" or navigating through categories. That's US1, Navigate To Page/Section.\n\nNext, once the chairs are listed, the default might not be sorted by price. So the user needs to apply a sort. That's US2, which involves using sorting controls. They need to select ascending order. So Configure Parameters/Settings (US3) might come into play here, but wait, sorting is part of filtering or sorting data. US2 covers Search/Filter/Sort Data. So setting the sort order would be US2.\n\nWait, the steps would be: navigate to chairs listings, then sort by price ascending. So strategies would be: Navigate to chairs listings (US1), then sort by ascending price (US2). But maybe the initial step is part of search. So maybe first search for \"chairs\", then apply the sort. So strategies could be: Search for \"chairs\" listings, then sort by ascending price. But according to the universal strategies, searching is part of US2. Hmm.\n\nWait, the task is to show the listings by ascending price. So the steps might be:\n\n1. Search or navigate to the chairs listings. If the site has a search bar, searching for \"chairs\" would be part of US2 (Search/Filter/Sort Data). Alternatively, if navigating through categories, that's US1. But the user's intent is to show chairs listings, so maybe the first step is using the search function to find chairs, which is US2. Then, after the results are displayed, apply a sort by price ascending, which is also US2. So two steps under US2? Or maybe the first is US1 if it's navigating to a category. But the example given in the universal strategies for US2 includes \"Filter issues by label 'Bug'\", which is similar to searching. So maybe searching is part of US2. So the first step would be using the search box to find chairs (US2), then applying the sort (US2 again). But the example output for the input given earlier used US1, US3, US4. Wait, in the example, the task was to find top products in a date range. The strategies were navigate to report, configure parameters (date), then generate. So in that case, navigating to the report page was US1, configuring the date was US3, then executing the action was US4.\n\nIn the current task, the user wants to show chairs listings sorted by price. So perhaps:\n\nStrategies:\n\n1. Search for \"chairs\" listings (US2: Search/Filter/Sort Data)\n2. Sort the results by ascending price (US2 again)\nBut the universal strategies can be applied multiple times. So the strategies array would have two entries, both under US2. But looking at the output example, each strategy step is mapped to a universal strategy. So in the example, \"Navigate to Bestsellers Report\" is US1, \"Configure Parameters\" is US3, etc.\n\nSo for the current task, the first step is to navigate to the chairs listings. How? If the site has a specific page or category for chairs, then US1 (Navigate To Page/Section). If not, then using the search function (US2). The user's intent is \"show me the chairs listings\", which implies that they need to first get to the chairs listings. So depending on the site structure, but since the site is \"shopping\", which is a general term, perhaps the first step is to search for \"chairs\" using the search bar, which is US2. Then, once the results are displayed, apply a sort by price ascending, which is also US2. So the strategies would be:\n\n1. Search for \"chairs\" in the search bar. (US2)\n2. Sort the search results by price in ascending order. (US2)\n\nBut the output example had \"Navigate To Page/Section\" as the first step. So maybe in this case, the first step is navigating to the chairs section, which would be US1. But if the site doesn't have a direct page, then search is needed. Since the user's intent is to show chairs listings, perhaps the first step is to perform a search, which is part of US2. So the strategies would be:\n\nStrategies: [\"Search for 'chairs' listings\", \"Sort listings by ascending price\"]\n\nUniversal strategies: [\"Search/Filter/Sort Data\", \"Search/Filter/Sort Data\"]\n\nBut the same US2 is used twice. Is that allowed? The example in the user's input had three steps with different US IDs. But perhaps in this case, two steps under US2. Alternatively, maybe the first step is US1 if navigating to a search results page via a category, but that's less likely. So the answer would be:\n\n{\n \"task_id\": 324,\n \"strategies\": [\n \"Search for 'chairs' listings\",\n \"Sort the results by ascending price\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategies\": [\n \"Search/Filter/Sort Data\",\n \"Search/Filter/Sort Data\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategy_ids\": [\"US2\", \"US2\"]\n}\n\nBut the example output had different US IDs for each step. However, the universal strategies can be applied multiple times. So this is acceptable. Alternatively, maybe the first step is navigating to the search page (US1), then applying the search and sort. But that's splitting hairs. The key is that the user needs to first get to the chairs listings, then sort them. So the first step is using the search box to input \"chairs\" and search, which is US2. Then, in the results page, use the sort dropdown to select ascending price, which is also US2. So the answer would have two US2 entries.\n\n\n```json\n{\n \"task_id\": 324,\n \"strategies\": [\n \"Search for 'chairs' listings using the search bar\",\n \"Sort the search results by ascending price\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategies\": [\n \"Search/Filter/Sort Data\",\n \"Search/Filter/Sort Data\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategy_ids\": [\"US2\", \"US2\"]\n}\n```",
"model_reasoning": null
},
{
"task_id": 33,
"task_intent": "I will arrive Pittsburgh Airport soon. Provide the name of a Hilton hotel in the vicinity, if available. Then, tell me the the shortest walking distance to a supermarket from the hotel.",
"expected_ids": [
"US2",
"US2",
"US4"
],
"actual_ids": [
"US2",
"US6",
"US5",
"US2",
"US6",
"US7"
],
"correct": false,
"model": "aiproxy/deepseek-reasoner",
"model_output": "\nOkay, let's tackle this task. The user is arriving at Pittsburgh Airport and wants a nearby Hilton hotel, then the shortest walking distance to a supermarket from that hotel. \n\nFirst, I need to find a Hilton hotel near the airport. So, the first step would be to search for hotels in the vicinity of Pittsburgh Airport. Using the map site, maybe there's a search function where I can input \"Hilton near Pittsburgh Airport\". That would fall under US2 (Search/Filter/Sort Data) because we're filtering hotels by name and location.\n\nOnce the search results come up, the next step is to look through them to find a Hilton. If there are multiple, maybe the closest one is best. But the user just wants the name, so after searching, we need to extract the hotel's name. That's US6 (Extract/Retrieve Information).\n\nNow, the second part is finding the shortest walking distance to a supermarket from that hotel. So, once we have the hotel's name and location, we need to search for supermarkets near it. Again, using the map's search or nearby features. That's another US2. Then, check the walking distances for each supermarket result. The system might show distances, so we can extract that info (US6 again). But we also need to determine which is the shortest, which involves analyzing the distances. That's US7 (Analyze/Evaluate/Verify Data).\n\nWait, but how do we navigate to the hotel's page? Maybe after searching for the hotel, we click on it to view details, which would be US5 (View/Inspect Item Details). Then, from there, look for nearby supermarkets. So the steps might be: search for the hotel, view its details to get location, then search nearby supermarkets, and analyze the walking distances.\n\nPutting it all together:\n\n1. Search for Hilton hotels near Pittsburgh Airport (US2)\n2. View the details of the found Hilton hotel to confirm location (US5)\n3. Extract the hotel's name (US6)\n4. Search for supermarkets near the hotel's location (US2)\n5. Retrieve the walking distances of each supermarket (US6)\n6. Analyze to find the shortest distance (US7)\n\nBut the user might not need to view details if the search results already show the name. Maybe step 2 isn't necessary if the name is visible in the search list. Then step 3 would be extracting from the list. But sometimes, you might need to click into the hotel to get accurate location data for the subsequent supermarket search. So including US5 makes sense to ensure we have the exact location.\n\nSo the strategies would be:\n\n- Navigate to the map and search for Hilton hotels near Pittsburgh Airport (US1? Wait, US1 is Navigate To Page/Section. But the initial page might already be the map. Maybe the first step is using the search function, which is US2. So maybe US2 first.)\n\nWait, the user is on the map site. So maybe the first step is using the search bar to look for the hotel. So:\n\n1. Search for \"Hilton hotels near Pittsburgh Airport\" using the map's search function (US2)\n2. From the results, extract the name of a Hilton hotel (US6)\n3. Click on the hotel's marker to view its details and location (US5)\n4. Search for supermarkets near the hotel's location (US2)\n5. Retrieve the walking distances for each supermarket listed (US6)\n6. Determine the shortest walking distance from the options (US7)\n\nSo the strategies would be:\n\nStrategies:\n- Search for Hilton hotels near Pittsburgh Airport\n- Extract the name of the Hilton hotel from search results\n- View the selected Hilton hotel's details\n- Search for nearby supermarkets relative to the hotel\n- Retrieve supermarket walking distances\n- Identify the shortest walking distance\n\nUniversal strategies: US2, US6, US5, US2, US6, US7\n\nBut the task is to first provide the hotel name, then the shortest distance. So the steps need to be ordered correctly. Also, the user might not need to click on the hotel if the search results already show the name and allow searching nearby without viewing details. But to ensure accuracy, viewing details might be necessary to get precise location data.\n\nSo the final answer would reference US2 (search for hotel), US6 (extract name), US5 (view details), US2 (search supermarkets), US6 (get distances), US7 (find shortest). The strategy steps would be written in a more natural way, like:\n\n1. Search for Hilton hotels near Pittsburgh Airport.\n2. Identify and note the name of a Hilton hotel from the results.\n3. Access the hotel's detailed information to confirm its location.\n4. Search for supermarkets within walking distance of the hotel.\n5. Collect the walking distances to each nearby supermarket.\n6. Determine the shortest walking distance from the hotel to a supermarket.\n\nSo the universal strategies involved are US2, US6, US5, US2, US6, US7. But the output example groups steps into broader strategies. For instance, maybe \"Search for Hilton hotels...\" is US2, \"Extract the name\" is US6, \"View details\" is US5, then \"Search supermarkets\" is US2 again, \"Retrieve distances\" US6, and \"Analyze for shortest\" US7.\n\nThe output needs to list the strategies in order, with their US IDs. So the JSON would have strategies array and the corresponding universal_strategies and their IDs.\n\n\n```json\n{\n \"task_id\": 33,\n \"strategies\": [\n \"Search for Hilton hotels near Pittsburgh Airport on the map\",\n \"Extract the name of a Hilton hotel from the search results\",\n \"View the selected Hilton hotel's location details\",\n \"Search for supermarkets near the hotel's location\",\n \"Retrieve walking distances to supermarkets from the hotel\",\n \"Identify the shortest walking distance to a supermarket\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategies\": [\n \"Search/Filter/Sort Data\",\n \"Extract/Retrieve Information\",\n \"View/Inspect Item Details\",\n \"Search/Filter/Sort Data\",\n \"Extract/Retrieve Information\",\n \"Analyze/Evaluate/Verify Data\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategy_ids\": [\"US2\", \"US6\", \"US5\", \"US2\", \"US6\", \"US7\"]\n}\n```",
"model_reasoning": null
},
{
"task_id": 333,
"task_intent": "How much did I spend on shopping at One Stop Market on November 2022? They gave me a 20% discount on the total amount for orders exceeding $200 in cash",
"expected_ids": [
"US1",
"US7"
],
"actual_ids": [
"US1",
"US2",
"US7",
"US6"
],
"correct": false,
"model": "aiproxy/deepseek-reasoner",
"model_output": "\nOkay, let's tackle this task. The user wants to know how much they spent at One Stop Market in November 2022, considering a 20% discount on orders over $200 paid in cash.\n\nFirst, I need to figure out where the user would be in the shopping site. They need to access their order history. So the first step is navigating to the order history or reports section. That's US1: Navigate To Page/Section.\n\nNext, they need to filter the orders. The criteria are specific: One Stop Market, November 2022, payment method as cash, and orders over $200. So applying filters using US2: Search/Filter/Sort Data makes sense here.\n\nAfter filtering, the user might need to check each order meets the criteria. They have to verify if the orders are over $200 and applied the discount. That's US7: Analyze/Evaluate/Verify Data.\n\nThen, calculate the total spent. Since there's a discount, the system might show the discounted total, or the user has to compute it. Either way, extracting the amounts and applying the 20% discount falls under US6: Extract/Retrieve Information and possibly US7 again for calculation.\n\nPutting it all together, the strategies would involve navigating, filtering, verifying, and calculating. The universal strategies would be US1, US2, US7, and US6.\n\n\n```json\n{\n \"task_id\": 333,\n \"strategies\": [\n \"Navigate to Order History/Reports page\",\n \"Filter orders for One Stop Market in November 2022 with cash payment\",\n \"Identify orders exceeding $200 to apply 20% discount\",\n \"Calculate total spent after discount application\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategies\": [\n \"Navigate To Page/Section\",\n \"Search/Filter/Sort Data\",\n \"Analyze/Evaluate/Verify Data\",\n \"Extract/Retrieve Information\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategy_ids\": [\"US1\", \"US2\", \"US7\", \"US6\"]\n}\n```",
"model_reasoning": null
},
{
"task_id": 335,
"task_intent": "Tell me when I last ordered my body butter?",
"expected_ids": [
"US1",
"US5",
"US8"
],
"actual_ids": [
"US1",
"US2",
"US5",
"US6"
],
"correct": false,
"model": "aiproxy/deepseek-reasoner",
"model_output": "\nOkay, let's tackle this task. The user wants to know when they last ordered their body butter. The site involved is \"shopping,\" which I assume is an e-commerce platform like Amazon or similar.\n\nFirst, I need to figure out the steps the user would take. The user probably needs to check their order history. So the first step would be navigating to the order history section. That's US1: Navigate To Page/Section.\n\nNext, once in the order history, they might need to search or filter their orders to find the specific product, which is body butter. Searching or filtering would fall under US2: Search/Filter/Sort Data. They could use a search bar to type \"body butter\" and maybe sort by date to see the most recent.\n\nAfter finding the relevant orders, the user would need to look into the details of the most recent order containing body butter. That's US5: View/Inspect Item Details. They might click on the order to see more info.\n\nThen, from the order details, they need to extract the date. That's US6: Extract/Retrieve Information. The purchase date should be listed there.\n\nPutting it all together, the strategies would be: go to order history, search for the product, check the order, and get the date. The corresponding universal strategies are US1, US2, US5, US6. Let me make sure each step aligns correctly. Yes, that makes sense. The user might also need to sort if there are many orders, but the main steps are covered.\n\n\n```json\n{\n \"task_id\": 335,\n \"strategies\": [\n \"Navigate to Order History page\",\n \"Search/filter orders for 'body butter'\",\n \"Inspect the most recent matching order details\",\n \"Retrieve the order date from the details\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategies\": [\n \"Navigate To Page/Section\",\n \"Search/Filter/Sort Data\",\n \"View/Inspect Item Details\",\n \"Extract/Retrieve Information\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategy_ids\": [\"US1\", \"US2\", \"US5\", \"US6\"]\n}\n```",
"model_reasoning": null
},
{
"task_id": 341,
"task_intent": "List all opened issues requesting new features",
"expected_ids": [
"US1",
"US2"
],
"actual_ids": [
"US1",
"US2",
"US2"
],
"correct": true,
"model": "aiproxy/deepseek-reasoner",
"model_output": "\nOkay, let's tackle this task. The user wants to list all opened issues in GitLab that are requesting new features. First, I need to figure out the steps a GUI agent would take.\n\nStarting with navigation. The user probably needs to go to the issues section. In GitLab, issues are usually under a project or group, so navigating to the Issues page is the first step. That aligns with US1 (Navigate To Page/Section).\n\nNext, they need to find open issues. GitLab has filters for issue status. So applying a filter to show only open issues makes sense. That's US2 (Search/Filter/Sort Data).\n\nThen, the issues should be those requesting new features. Labels are commonly used in GitLab to categorize issues. So filtering by a label like \"feature request\" or similar would work. Another use of US2 here.\n\nAfter setting the filters, the agent might need to execute the action to apply them, but maybe the filtering is automatic. However, sometimes you have to click a button to apply filters, so maybe US4 (Execute Action/Process) if needed. But in GitLab, when you select a label, it usually updates automatically. So maybe not necessary. Hmm.\n\nWait, the example given in US2 is \"Filter issues by the label 'Bug'.\" So that's part of US2. So maybe two US2 here: one for status open and another for label. So the strategies would be: Navigate to Issues, filter by Open status, filter by feature request label. Then list the issues. But the agent might need to extract the list, but the task is to list them, which is just viewing. So maybe the strategies are Navigate, then two filter steps. But the output example for the previous task had three steps, including generating the report. Here, after filtering, the list is displayed. So maybe the strategies are:\n\n1. Navigate to the Issues page (US1)\n2. Filter issues to show only 'Open' status (US2)\n3. Filter issues with the 'Feature Request' label (US2)\n4. List all resulting issues (maybe US6 or US7? But listing is part of the view. The task is to list them, which is the result of filtering. So maybe the third step is enough. Or perhaps the third step is part of the filtering. So the strategies would be three steps: navigate, filter status, filter label. Then the list is there. So the strategies would be:\n\nStrategies:\n- Navigate to the Issues page\n- Filter issues by status 'Open'\n- Apply label 'Feature Request' to filter\n\nUniversal strategies: US1, US2, US2. But the output example for the previous task had three steps with US1, US3, US4. So here, maybe three steps, but two US2s. So the universal strategy IDs would be US1, US2, US2. But the output example had unique strategies, but maybe duplicates are allowed. Let me check the output example again. In the example, they had three strategies with US1, US3, US4. So in this case, two US2s are acceptable.\n\nSo the final answer would be:\n\nStrategies: [\n \"Navigate to the Issues page\",\n \"Filter issues by status 'Open'\",\n \"Filter issues by label 'Feature Request'\"\n]\n\nUniversal_strategies: [\"Navigate To Page/Section\", \"Search/Filter/Sort Data\", \"Search/Filter/Sort Data\"]\n\nUniversal_strategy_ids: [\"US1\", \"US2\", \"US2\"]\n\nBut wait, maybe the labels are part of the same filter step. For example, in GitLab, you can set multiple filters at once. But the user might need to set both status and label. So two separate steps. So the answer is correct.\n\n\n```json\n{\n \"task_id\": 341,\n \"strategies\": [\n \"Navigate to the Issues page\",\n \"Filter issues by status 'Open'\",\n \"Filter issues by label 'Feature Request'\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategies\": [\n \"Navigate To Page/Section\",\n \"Search/Filter/Sort Data\",\n \"Search/Filter/Sort Data\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategy_ids\": [\"US1\", \"US2\", \"US2\"]\n}\n```",
"model_reasoning": null
},
{
"task_id": 348,
"task_intent": "How many reviews our shop received in May 2023?",
"expected_ids": [
"US1",
"US2",
"US4"
],
"actual_ids": [
"US1",
"US2",
"US6"
],
"correct": false,
"model": "aiproxy/deepseek-reasoner",
"model_output": "\nOkay, let's tackle this task. The user wants to know how many reviews their shop received in May 2023 on the shopping_admin site.\n\nFirst, I need to figure out where the review data is located. In most admin panels, there's a section for reviews or customer feedback. So the first step would be navigating to that section. That aligns with US1 (Navigate To Page/Section).\n\nNext, once on the reviews page, the user needs to filter the data to May 2023. They might use a date filter, which is a dropdown or a date picker. Applying that filter would fall under US2 (Search/Filter/Sort Data).\n\nAfter setting the filter, the system should display the reviews from that period. The number of reviews might be shown as a total count, maybe at the top or bottom of the list. The user would need to extract that number, which is US6 (Extract/Retrieve Information).\n\nWait, maybe there's a report generation step? But the question is straightforward—just the count. If the interface shows the total immediately after filtering, then generating a report might not be necessary. So the steps would be navigate, filter, then retrieve the count. That makes sense. So the strategies would be: navigate to reviews section, filter by May 2023, then retrieve the count. The corresponding US IDs are US1, US2, US6.\n\n\n```json\n{\n \"task_id\": 348,\n \"strategies\": [\n \"Navigate to the Reviews/Feedback section\",\n \"Filter reviews by May 2023 date range\",\n \"Retrieve the total review count from filtered results\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategies\": [\n \"Navigate To Page/Section\",\n \"Search/Filter/Sort Data\",\n \"Extract/Retrieve Information\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategy_ids\": [\"US1\", \"US2\", \"US6\"]\n}\n```",
"model_reasoning": null
},
{
"task_id": 349,
"task_intent": "Who else have access to my repo gimmiethat.space, show me their usernames",
"expected_ids": [
"US1",
"US5",
"US7"
],
"actual_ids": [
"US1",
"US1",
"US6"
],
"correct": false,
"model": "aiproxy/deepseek-reasoner",
"model_output": "\nOkay, let's tackle this task. The user wants to know who else has access to their GitLab repo named \"gimmiethat.space\" and see their usernames. \n\nFirst, I need to figure out the steps a user would take on GitLab. The first thing is to navigate to the specific repository. That makes sense because you can't check access without being on the repo's page. So that's probably US1 (Navigate To Page/Section).\n\nOnce on the repo page, the user needs to find where the access settings are. In GitLab, that's usually under the project settings, maybe under \"Members\" or a similar section. So navigating to the Members or Access section would be another US1 step.\n\nAfter getting to the Members section, the page should list all users with access. The user needs to view these details, which is US5 (View/Inspect Item Details). Then, extract the usernames from that list, which would be US6 (Extract/Retrieve Information). \n\nWait, but the Members page might already display the usernames directly. So maybe after navigating to the Members section, the user just needs to retrieve the usernames listed there. So maybe US6 is sufficient without needing to inspect individual items. Hmm. Or perhaps the Members page is a list, so viewing the list itself is part of navigating, and extracting is separate. \n\nLet me think. The steps would be: go to the repo, go to Members section, then extract the usernames. So strategies would be Navigate to repo (US1), Navigate to Members (US1), then extract info (US6). Maybe also, if the list is paginated, but the user didn't mention that. So the main strategies are three steps, using US1 twice and US6 once. \n\nWait, maybe the second step is part of the first navigation. Or maybe it's a separate navigation within the repo. Either way, breaking it down into navigating to the repo, then to the access section, then extracting the usernames. That makes sense. So the universal strategies would be US1, US1, US6. But the output example had unique strategies, but maybe it's okay to repeat US1 if needed. \n\nSo the strategies would be: \n1. Navigate to the \"gimmiethat.space\" repository.\n2. Access the repository's Members or Permissions section.\n3. Retrieve the list of usernames with access.\n\nAnd the universal strategies would be US1, US1, US6. But maybe the second step is US1 again. Alternatively, maybe the second step is part of the first navigation. But in GitLab, you have to go to the repo, then click on Settings -> Members. So two separate navigations. So two US1 steps. Then extract the data (US6). \n\nYes, that seems right. So the final answer would include those three strategies with US1, US1, US6.\n\n\n```json\n{\n \"task_id\": 349,\n \"strategies\": [\n \"Navigate to the 'gimmiethat.space' repository\",\n \"Access the repository's Members or Permissions section\",\n \"Retrieve the list of usernames with access\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategies\": [\n \"Navigate To Page/Section\",\n \"Navigate To Page/Section\",\n \"Extract/Retrieve Information\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategy_ids\": [\"US1\", \"US1\", \"US6\"]\n}\n```",
"model_reasoning": null
},
{
"task_id": 354,
"task_intent": "List products from living room furtniture category by descending price",
"expected_ids": [
"US1",
"US2"
],
"actual_ids": [
"US1",
"US2"
],
"correct": true,
"model": "aiproxy/deepseek-reasoner",
"model_output": "\nOkay, let's tackle this task. The user wants to list products from the living room furniture category sorted by descending price on a shopping site. \n\nFirst, I need to figure out the steps. The user is on the shopping site, so they probably need to navigate to the living room furniture category. That's like going to a specific section, which matches US1 (Navigate To Page/Section). \n\nOnce there, the products are likely displayed, but they need to be sorted by price descending. Sorting is part of US2 (Search/Filter/Sort Data) because it's adjusting how data is ordered. So the strategy would involve applying a sort option.\n\nWait, maybe there's a filter or sort dropdown. Selecting the sort option to arrange by price from high to low. That's definitely US2. \n\nSo the steps would be: 1. Go to the living room category page. 2. Use the sort function to set descending price. \n\nNo other actions like executing a process or configuring parameters beyond sorting. So the strategies are US1 and US2. \n\nCheck the universal strategies again. US2 covers sorting, which is exactly what's needed here. So the strategies are Navigate to the category, then sort. The final answer should list those steps with the corresponding US IDs.\n\n\n```json\n{\n \"task_id\": 354,\n \"strategies\": [\n \"Navigate to the Living Room Furniture category page\",\n \"Sort products by descending price using the sort/filter controls\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategies\": [\n \"Navigate To Page/Section\",\n \"Search/Filter/Sort Data\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategy_ids\": [\"US1\", \"US2\"]\n}\n```",
"model_reasoning": null
},
{
"task_id": 357,
"task_intent": "Checkout merge requests requiring my review",
"expected_ids": [
"US1",
"US2"
],
"actual_ids": [
"US1",
"US2",
"US7"
],
"correct": false,
"model": "aiproxy/deepseek-reasoner",
"model_output": "\nOkay, let's tackle this task. The user wants to check out merge requests that require their review on GitLab. First, I need to figure out the steps they would take.\n\nStarting with navigation. GitLab's interface has a menu, so the user would probably go to the Merge Requests section. That's US1, Navigate To Page/Section. Then, they might need to filter the list to show only those MRs that need their review. GitLab has filters, maybe a dropdown or a search bar where they can set \"Reviewer\" to themselves. That's US2, Search/Filter/Sort Data. \n\nAfter applying the filter, the user would look through the list. But maybe they need to check each MR's details to see if it's pending their action. So viewing details would be US5, View/Inspect Item Details. But wait, the main intent is to \"checkout\" which might mean just listing them, not necessarily viewing each detail. Hmm. Alternatively, maybe after filtering, the user just reviews the list, which could involve analyzing the data to identify which ones require their review. That might be US7, Analyze/Evaluate/Verify Data. But since the filter already narrows it down, maybe analysis isn't needed. Or perhaps verifying that the filtered list is correct. \n\nWait, the task is to \"checkout\" which might mean to look at them, so after filtering, the user would view the list. But maybe the initial steps are navigate, filter, and then execute an action to retrieve the list. Or maybe the execution is part of applying the filter. Let me think. \n\nThe strategies would be: Navigate to Merge Requests page (US1). Then set filter to show MRs where the user is a reviewer (US2). Then maybe view the list, which is part of the same step as filtering. Or perhaps generating the filtered list is an execute action (US4). But in web interfaces, filters usually apply automatically without a separate execute step. So maybe US2 covers applying the filter. Then the user would review the list, which might involve US7 to verify which ones are pending their review. But if the filter is accurate, maybe that's not necessary. Alternatively, the user might need to sort or check each MR's status. \n\nAlternatively, maybe after filtering, the user needs to navigate through pages if there are many results (US8), but the task doesn't mention that. The main goal is to find MRs needing their review. So the steps are: navigate to MR section, filter by reviewer = me, and then view the list. So strategies would be:\n\n1. Navigate to the Merge Requests section. (US1)\n2. Filter merge requests by reviewer as yourself. (US2)\n3. Review the list of merge requests requiring your review. (US7?)\n\nWait, reviewing the list could be part of the filter step, but maybe the agent needs to verify that the list is correct, which is US7. Or maybe the third step is just viewing the list, which is part of the existing interface after filtering. Hmm. Alternatively, maybe the third step is not needed, but the user's intent is to \"checkout\" which implies they need to see the list, so maybe the strategies are just navigate and filter. But the example given in the output example for a task had three steps. Let me check the example again.\n\nIn the example, the task was to find top products, and the strategies were navigate, configure parameters, execute. So maybe here, after filtering, the user might need to execute the filter (if it's a button), but in GitLab, when you set a filter, it's applied automatically. So maybe the steps are navigate, filter, and then view. But viewing is part of the result of filtering. Alternatively, maybe the third step is to extract the list, but the intent is just to check them out, not extract data. So perhaps the strategies are:\n\n- Navigate to Merge Requests (US1)\n- Apply filter for \"Requiring my review\" (US2)\n- Verify the list of MRs (US7)\n\nBut I'm not sure if US7 is needed here. Alternatively, maybe the third step is to execute the filter, but if the filter is applied upon selection, then US2 covers that. So maybe the strategies are:\n\n1. Navigate to Merge Requests page (US1)\n2. Filter merge requests to those requiring your review (US2)\n3. [Maybe not needed, but perhaps viewing the list is implied]\n\nAlternatively, maybe the third step is to view the details of each MR, but the task is to check them out, not view each one. So perhaps the strategies are just the first two. But the example output had three steps, so maybe the assistant should include three. Let me think again.\n\nAnother approach: The user needs to go to the MR section, set the filter to their reviews, and then maybe sort or check the list. But the main actions are navigate and filter. Maybe the third step is to execute the filter, but in GitLab, when you select a filter, it's applied immediately. So perhaps the strategies are:\n\nStrategies:\n1. Navigate to the Merge Requests section. (US1)\n2. Filter the merge requests by those requiring your review. (US2)\n3. Review the filtered list to identify MRs needing attention. (US7)\n\nYes, because even after filtering, the user might need to look through the list to confirm which ones are pending their review, especially if the filter isn't perfect. So US7 would be analyzing the data to verify. So the three steps would be US1, US2, US7.\n\nSo the universal strategies would be US1, US2, US7.\n\n\n```json\n{\n \"task_id\": 357,\n \"strategies\": [\n \"Navigate to the Merge Requests section\",\n \"Filter merge requests by those requiring your review\",\n \"Review the list to identify pending review requests\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategies\": [\n \"Navigate To Page/Section\",\n \"Search/Filter/Sort Data\",\n \"Analyze/Evaluate/Verify Data\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategy_ids\": [\"US1\", \"US2\", \"US7\"]\n}\n```",
"model_reasoning": null
},
{
"task_id": 361,
"task_intent": "Show me the order statuses for order number 170 and 189.",
"expected_ids": [
"US1"
],
"actual_ids": [
"US1",
"US2",
"US5",
"US6"
],
"correct": false,
"model": "aiproxy/deepseek-reasoner",
"model_output": "\nOkay, let's tackle this task. The user wants to see the order statuses for order numbers 170 and 189 on a shopping site. First, I need to figure out the steps a GUI agent would take.\n\nStarting with the first step: the agent probably needs to go to the order details page. That's like navigating to a specific section, so US1 (Navigate To Page/Section) makes sense here. Maybe there's an \"Orders\" section where you can view orders by number.\n\nNext, for each order number, the agent has to search or filter. Since the orders are specific, searching by their numbers would be US2 (Search/Filter/Sort Data). They might enter 170 first, check the status, then do the same for 189.\n\nAfter searching, the agent needs to view the details of each order to get the status. That's US5 (View/Inspect Item Details). Clicking on the order or a details button would show the status.\n\nThen, they have to extract the status information from the details page, which is US6 (Extract/Retrieve Information). They read the status value and record it.\n\nSince there are two orders, the agent might need to repeat the search and view steps for the second order. But maybe the process is streamlined if they can search both at once, but likely they have to do each separately. However, the strategies listed in the example don't include loops, so perhaps the steps are written as general for both orders.\n\nPutting it all together: navigate to the order section, search for each order, view their details, and extract the status. The universal strategies involved are US1, US2, US5, US6. The strategies would be phrased as navigating to the order page, searching each order, viewing details, and retrieving the statuses.\n\n\n```json\n{\n \"task_id\": 361,\n \"strategies\": [\n \"Navigate to the Orders section\",\n \"Search for Order #170 and inspect its status\",\n \"Search for Order #189 and inspect its status\",\n \"Retrieve order statuses for both orders\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategies\": [\n \"Navigate To Page/Section\",\n \"Search/Filter/Sort Data\",\n \"View/Inspect Item Details\",\n \"Extract/Retrieve Information\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategy_ids\": [\"US1\", \"US2\", \"US5\", \"US6\"]\n}\n```",
"model_reasoning": null
},
{
"task_id": 367,
"task_intent": "Measure distance between Carnegie Mellon University and CVS (closet one) by walking",
"expected_ids": [
"US3",
"US2",
"US4"
],
"actual_ids": [
"US1",
"US2",
"US3",
"US4",
"US6"
],
"correct": false,
"model": "aiproxy/deepseek-reasoner",
"model_output": "\nOkay, let's tackle this task. The user wants to measure the walking distance between Carnegie Mellon University and the closest CVS using a map site. First, I need to figure out the steps a GUI agent would take.\n\nStarting with navigation. The agent needs to go to the map site's distance measurement tool. Maybe there's a menu or a specific button for that. So that's US1: Navigate To Page/Section.\n\nNext, input the starting point as Carnegie Mellon University. Then, the destination is the closest CVS. But how to find the closest one? The agent might need to search for CVS near CMU. That involves searching or filtering, which is US2. Alternatively, the map might automatically find the nearest when you input \"CVS\" near the university.\n\nAfter setting the points, the agent needs to select the walking mode. That's configuring parameters, so US3. Then, execute the measurement, which is US4. Finally, retrieve the distance result, which is US6. Wait, but the user just needs the distance, so after executing, the result is displayed, and the agent extracts that info. So the steps would be: navigate to the distance tool, input start and end points (with a search for the closest CVS), set walking mode, run the measurement, and read the result. \n\nChecking the universal strategies: US1 for navigating, US2 for searching CVS, US3 for setting walking mode, US4 to execute, and US6 to get the distance. But maybe the search for CVS is part of configuring parameters. Hmm. Let me structure the strategies step by step.\n\n\n```json\n{\n \"task_id\": 367,\n \"strategies\": [\n \"Navigate to the distance measurement tool on the map interface\",\n \"Input Carnegie Mellon University as the starting point\",\n \"Search for the nearest CVS location as the destination\",\n \"Configure the travel mode to 'Walking'\",\n \"Execute the distance measurement process\",\n \"Retrieve the displayed walking distance result\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategies\": [\n \"Navigate To Page/Section\",\n \"Search/Filter/Sort Data\",\n \"Configure Parameters/Settings\",\n \"Execute Action/Process\",\n \"Extract/Retrieve Information\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategy_ids\": [\"US1\", \"US2\", \"US3\", \"US4\", \"US6\"]\n}\n```",
"model_reasoning": null
},
{
"task_id": 368,
"task_intent": "find discounted items.",
"expected_ids": [
"US1",
"US4",
"US7"
],
"actual_ids": [
"US1",
"US2",
"US8"
],
"correct": false,
"model": "aiproxy/deepseek-reasoner",
"model_output": "\nOkay, let's tackle this task. The user wants to find discounted items on a shopping site. First, I need to figure out the steps a GUI agent would take.\n\nStarting with navigation. The shopping site probably has a section for sales or discounts. So the first step would be to go to that page. That's US1: Navigate To Page/Section.\n\nNext, once on the deals page, there are likely filters to sort or narrow down the items. The user might need to apply a filter for discounted\" or \"on sale\" items. That's US2: Search/Filter/Sort Data.\n\nAfter applying the filter, the agent would view the results. But maybe there are multiple pages, so they might need to navigate through them. That's US8: Navigate Within Data/Results.\n\nWait, but do they need to configure any parameters? Maybe set a minimum discount percentage? Hmm, but the task just says \"discounted items,\" not specifying. Maybe not necessary. So the main steps are navigate to the deals section, filter for discounts, and browse through the results. So strategies would be: Navigate to the Deals or Sales section, Apply filter for discounted items, Browse through the discounted items. The universal strategies would be US1, US2, US8. Let me check the example. The output example had three steps. So this makes sense. Yeah, that should cover it.\n\n\n```json\n{\n \"task_id\": 368,\n \"strategies\": [\n \"Navigate to the Deals/Sales/Discounts section\",\n \"Apply a filter to show only discounted items\",\n \"Browse through the filtered results\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategies\": [\n \"Navigate To Page/Section\",\n \"Search/Filter/Sort Data\",\n \"Navigate Within Data/Results\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategy_ids\": [\"US1\", \"US2\", \"US8\"]\n}\n```",
"model_reasoning": null
},
{
"task_id": 369,
"task_intent": "Pull up the description page of Carnegie Music Hall on Map",
"expected_ids": [
"US2",
"US5",
"US7"
],
"actual_ids": [
"US1",
"US5"
],
"correct": false,
"model": "aiproxy/deepseek-reasoner",
"model_output": "\nOkay, let's tackle this task. The user wants to pull up the description page of Carnegie Music Hall on a map. First, I need to figure out the steps involved.\n\nStarting with the map site, the first step would be to navigate to the specific location of Carnegie Music Hall. That makes sense because you can't view details without first finding it on the map. So that's US1: Navigate To Page/Section. Maybe searching for the name in the search bar.\n\nOnce the location is found on the map, the next step is to view its details. Typically, you click on the marker or the name to open the description page. That's US5: View/Inspect Item Details. \n\nAfter accessing the details page, the user needs to retrieve the information presented there. But the task is just to pull up the page, so maybe the info extraction isn't necessary. Wait, the intent is to \"pull up the description page,\" which means the main action is opening it. So maybe the steps are: search for the place, click to view details. So two steps. \n\nWait, the example given in the output example had three steps, but maybe here it's two. Let me check the universal strategies again. US1 is navigate to the page/section, which could be the initial search. Then US5 to view the details. So strategies would be: 1. Search for Carnegie Music Hall on the map. 2. Access its description page. The universal strategies would be US1 and US5. \n\nAlternatively, maybe the first step is navigating to the map site itself, but the user is already on the map. The task is to pull up the description, so the main steps are searching and viewing. So the strategies would be: \"Search for Carnegie Music Hall on the map interface\", \"Access the description page of Carnegie Music Hall\". The universal strategies are US1 (navigate to the location via search) and US5 (view details). \n\nI think that's correct. So the JSON output would list those two strategies and their corresponding US IDs.\n\n\n```json\n{\n \"task_id\": 369,\n \"strategies\": [\n \"Search for Carnegie Music Hall on the map interface\",\n \"Access the description page of Carnegie Music Hall\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategies\": [\n \"Navigate To Page/Section\",\n \"View/Inspect Item Details\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategy_ids\": [\"US1\", \"US5\"]\n}\n```",
"model_reasoning": null
},
{
"task_id": 37,
"task_intent": "Check if the police station in pittsburgh can be reached in one hour by car from gates building at CMU",
"expected_ids": [
"US1",
"US3",
"US3",
"US4"
],
"actual_ids": [
"US1",
"US3",
"US3",
"US4",
"US6",
"US7"
],
"correct": false,
"model": "aiproxy/deepseek-reasoner",
"model_output": "\nOkay, let's tackle this task. The user wants to check if the police station in Pittsburgh can be reached within one hour by car from the Gates Building at CMU. \n\nFirst, I need to figure out the steps a GUI agent would take on a map site. The first thing would be to navigate to the directions section. That's probably US1, Navigate To Page/Section. Then, they need to set the starting point as Gates Building, CMU, and the destination as the police station in Pittsburgh. That sounds like US3, Configure Parameters/Settings. \n\nNext, they have to input the travel mode as car. That's another configuration step, so US3 again. Then, they need to execute the search for directions, which is US4, Execute Action/Process. \n\nAfter getting the results, the agent needs to check the estimated travel time. That's retrieving information, so US6. Finally, they have to evaluate if the time is under an hour, which is US7, Analyze/Evaluate/Verify Data.\n\nWait, let me make sure. The steps are: navigate to directions, set start and end points, set mode to car, execute, get time, check if it's <=60 minutes. Each step maps to the correct universal strategies. Yeah, that makes sense. So the strategies and their corresponding US IDs should be in order.\n\n\n```json\n{\n \"task_id\": 37,\n \"strategies\": [\n \"Navigate to Directions/Route Planning Section\",\n \"Set Start Point as Gates Building at CMU and Destination as Pittsburgh Police Station\",\n \"Configure Travel Mode to 'Car'\",\n \"Execute Route Calculation\",\n \"Retrieve Estimated Travel Time\",\n \"Verify if Travel Time is ≤ 60 Minutes\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategies\": [\n \"Navigate To Page/Section\",\n \"Configure Parameters/Settings\",\n \"Configure Parameters/Settings\",\n \"Execute Action/Process\",\n \"Extract/Retrieve Information\",\n \"Analyze/Evaluate/Verify Data\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategy_ids\": [\"US1\", \"US3\", \"US3\", \"US4\", \"US6\", \"US7\"]\n}\n```",
"model_reasoning": null
},
{
"task_id": 374,
"task_intent": "Preview the Magento Blank theme for my shop",
"expected_ids": [
"US1",
"US10",
"US5"
],
"actual_ids": [
"US1",
"US2",
"US4"
],
"correct": false,
"model": "aiproxy/deepseek-reasoner",
"model_output": "\nOkay, let's tackle this task. The user wants to preview the Magento Blank theme for their shop in the shopping admin. First, I need to figure out the steps to do that.\n\nSo, the first thing would be navigating to where themes are managed. In an admin panel, themes are usually under a design or appearance section. So maybe go to the Themes Management page. That's US1, Navigate To Page/Section.\n\nNext, once on the Themes page, they need to find the specific Magento Blank theme. They might need to search or filter the list of themes. Using a search bar to type \"Magento Blank\" would make sense here. That's US2, Search/Filter/Sort Data.\n\nAfter locating the theme, there should be an option to preview it. The user would click a \"Preview\" button or similar. That action would execute the preview, which is US4, Execute Action/Process.\n\nSo the strategies would be: navigate to themes, search for the specific theme, then execute the preview. The corresponding universal strategies are US1, US2, US4. Let me check if that covers all steps. Yes, that should do it.\n\n\n```json\n{\n \"task_id\": 374,\n \"strategies\": [\n \"Navigate to Themes Management section\",\n \"Search for 'Magento Blank' theme in themes list\",\n \"Execute preview action for the Magento Blank theme\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategies\": [\n \"Navigate To Page/Section\",\n \"Search/Filter/Sort Data\",\n \"Execute Action/Process\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategy_ids\": [\"US1\", \"US2\", \"US4\"]\n}\n```",
"model_reasoning": null
},
{
"task_id": 376,
"task_intent": "Summarize customer reviews for Amazon Echo Dot 3rd generation.",
"expected_ids": [
"US1",
"US1"
],
"actual_ids": [
"US1",
"US1",
"US2",
"US8",
"US6",
"US7"
],
"correct": false,
"model": "aiproxy/deepseek-reasoner",
"model_output": "\nOkay, let's tackle this task. The user wants to summarize customer reviews for the Amazon Echo Dot 3rd generation on the shopping site. First, I need to figure out the steps a GUI agent would take.\n\nStarting with navigation. The agent would probably go to the product page for the Echo Dot 3rd gen. That's US1, Navigate To Page/Section. Once there, the reviews section needs to be accessed. Maybe there's a \"See all reviews\" link or button. That's another US1 step.\n\nNext, the agent might need to sort or filter the reviews. For a summary, looking at the most helpful or highest-rated reviews could be useful. So using US2, Search/Filter/Sort Data to sort by helpfulness or rating. Also, if there are many pages of reviews, the agent might need to navigate through them using pagination (US8).\n\nThen, the agent needs to extract information from the reviews. Reading through them and pulling out common themes, positive and negative points. That's US6, Extract/Retrieve Information. But also, analyzing the content to identify trends, which is US7, Analyze/Evaluate/Verify Data.\n\nWait, but the actual steps would be: navigate to product page, go to reviews, sort them, maybe go through multiple pages, extract the text, and then analyze to summarize. So strategies would be like Navigate to product page, Access reviews section, Sort reviews by helpfulness, Navigate through review pages, Extract review content, Analyze for common themes. \n\nUniversal strategies would be US1, US1 again for accessing the section, US2 for sorting, US8 for pagination, US6 for extraction, and US7 for analysis. Let me check the order. The Execute Action (US4) might not be needed here unless generating a report, but the task is to summarize existing reviews. So maybe no US4. The main steps are navigation, filtering, extracting, and analyzing. So the strategies would map to those US steps.\n\n\n```json\n{\n \"task_id\": 376,\n \"strategies\": [\n \"Navigate to Amazon Echo Dot 3rd Gen product page\",\n \"Access the 'Customer Reviews' section\",\n \"Sort/filter reviews by relevance or rating\",\n \"Navigate through review pages (if paginated)\",\n \"Extract key review content and ratings\",\n \"Analyze reviews to identify common themes and sentiments\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategies\": [\n \"Navigate To Page/Section\",\n \"Navigate To Page/Section\",\n \"Search/Filter/Sort Data\",\n \"Navigate Within Data/Results\",\n \"Extract/Retrieve Information\",\n \"Analyze/Evaluate/Verify Data\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategy_ids\": [\"US1\", \"US1\", \"US2\", \"US8\", \"US6\", \"US7\"]\n}\n```",
"model_reasoning": null
},
{
"task_id": 381,
"task_intent": "Find the hotel around Carnegie Music Hall",
"expected_ids": [
"US2"
],
"actual_ids": [
"US1",
"US2",
"US2",
"US3",
"US5"
],
"correct": false,
"model": "aiproxy/deepseek-reasoner",
"model_output": "\nOkay, let's tackle this task. The user wants to find hotels around Carnegie Music Hall using a map site. First, I need to figure out the steps a GUI agent would take.\n\nStarting with navigation. The agent probably needs to go to the map's search or explore section. That's US1: Navigate To Page/Section. Then, they need to search for Carnegie Music Hall. That's part of US2: Search/Filter/Sort Data. Once the location is found, the next step is to look for nearby hotels. Maybe there's a \"Nearby\" or \"Hotels\" button, which would be another US1. Alternatively, searching for hotels near the pinned location, which would be US2 again. After that, the agent might need to adjust filters like distance or ratings, which is US3: Configure Parameters/Settings. Finally, viewing the results and maybe checking the list or map view, which could be US5: View/Inspect Item Details or US6: Extract/Retrieve Information. But since the main goal is to find the hotels, not extract data, maybe US5 is more about viewing the list. So putting it all together: navigate to the map, search for the location, search nearby hotels, apply filters, and view the results. The universal strategies would be US1, US2, US3, and US5.\n\n\n```json\n{\n \"task_id\": 381,\n \"strategies\": [\n \"Navigate to the map's search/explore interface\",\n \"Search for 'Carnegie Music Hall' to locate it on the map\",\n \"Search for 'hotels' near the pinned Carnegie Music Hall location\",\n \"Adjust filters (e.g., radius, ratings) to refine hotel results\",\n \"View the list/map of hotels around Carnegie Music Hall\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategies\": [\n \"Navigate To Page/Section\",\n \"Search/Filter/Sort Data\",\n \"Search/Filter/Sort Data\",\n \"Configure Parameters/Settings\",\n \"View/Inspect Item Details\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategy_ids\": [\"US1\", \"US2\", \"US2\", \"US3\", \"US5\"]\n}\n```",
"model_reasoning": null
},
{
"task_id": 382,
"task_intent": "I am arriving at Carnegie Mellon University. Find the nearby US Citizenship and Immigration Services and the walking distance to the nearest Social Security Administration from US Citizenship and Immigration Services",
"expected_ids": [
"US2",
"US2",
"US4"
],
"actual_ids": [
"US1",
"US2",
"US7",
"US2",
"US6"
],
"correct": false,
"model": "aiproxy/deepseek-reasoner",
"model_output": "\nOkay, let's tackle this task. The user wants to find two things: the nearby US Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) from Carnegie Mellon University and the walking distance from that USCIS office to the nearest Social Security Administration (SSA). \n\nFirst, I need to figure out the steps. Starting with the map site, the first step would be to search for Carnegie Mellon University to set the starting point. Then, search for the USCIS offices near that location. Once found, the next step is to get the nearest one. Now, from that USCIS location, the user needs the walking distance to the closest SSA. So, I need to search for SSA offices near USCIS and then check the walking distance between them.\n\nLooking at the universal strategies, navigating to the map and searching for locations would fall under US1 (Navigate To Page/Section) and US2 (Search/Filter/Sort Data). Then, extracting the information like addresses and distances would be US6. Analyzing the results to find the nearest ones might involve US7. Finally, calculating the walking distance between two points could be another US7 step. So putting it all together, the strategies would involve navigating, searching, extracting info, analyzing for proximity, and then repeating the search and analysis for the SSA from the USCIS location.\n\n\n```json\n{\n \"task_id\": 382,\n \"strategies\": [\n \"Search for Carnegie Mellon University location on the map\",\n \"Search nearby US Citizenship and Immigration Services offices from the university\",\n \"Identify and select the nearest USCIS office\",\n \"Search nearby Social Security Administration offices from the selected USCIS location\",\n \"Calculate and verify walking distance between USCIS and nearest SSA\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategies\": [\n \"Navigate To Page/Section\",\n \"Search/Filter/Sort Data\",\n \"Analyze/Evaluate/Verify Data\",\n \"Search/Filter/Sort Data\",\n \"Extract/Retrieve Information\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategy_ids\": [\"US1\", \"US2\", \"US7\", \"US2\", \"US6\"]\n}\n```",
"model_reasoning": null
},
{
"task_id": 383,
"task_intent": "I am arriving at Pittsburgh Airport. Show me the name of a Hyatt hotel if there is any nearby. Tell me the names of supermarkets that are within 15mins driving from the hotel",
"expected_ids": [
"US2",
"US2"
],
"actual_ids": [
"US2",
"US7",
"US6",
"US3",
"US4",
"US6"
],
"correct": false,
"model": "aiproxy/deepseek-reasoner",
"model_output": "\nOkay, let's tackle this task. The user is arriving at Pittsburgh Airport and wants to know if there's a Hyatt hotel nearby. Then, they need supermarkets within a 15-minute drive from that hotel. \n\nFirst, I need to figure out the steps. Starting with the airport, the first action is to search for Hyatt hotels near Pittsburgh Airport. That's probably using the map's search function. So that's US2 (Search/Filter/Sort Data) because they're filtering for Hyatt.\n\nNext, once the hotel is found, the user needs to check if there's at least one. If there is, note the name. That's US6 (Extract/Retrieve Information) to get the hotel's name.\n\nThen, from the hotel's location, search for supermarkets within a 15-minute drive. That involves setting the parameters for the search, like driving time. So that's US3 (Configure Parameters/Settings) to set the 15-minute filter.\n\nAfter configuring, execute the search for supermarkets. That's US4 (Execute Action/Process) to run the search.\n\nFinally, extract the names of those supermarkets, which is again US6. \n\nSo the strategies would be: search for Hyatt near the airport, check if any exist, configure the supermarket search parameters, execute the search, and retrieve the names. The universal strategies involved are US2, US6, US3, US4, and US6 again. But since US6 is used twice, maybe list it once but mention both instances. Wait, the output example lists each step's strategy, even if repeated. So the strategies array would have each step, and the universal strategies list each ID in order. Let me check the example again. In the example, they had three strategies with US1, US3, US4. So each step corresponds to a strategy. So here, the steps are:\n\n1. Search for Hyatt hotels near Pittsburgh Airport. (US2)\n2. Check if any Hyatt hotels are present. (US7, since it's verifying)\n3. If present, note the hotel name. (US6)\n4. Configure search for supermarkets within 15min drive from the hotel. (US3)\n5. Execute the search. (US4)\n6. Retrieve the supermarket names. (US6)\n\nWait, step 2 is checking presence, which is analysis/evaluation (US7). Then step 3 is extracting the name (US6). Then steps 4-6 as before. So the strategies would be:\n\n- Search for Hyatt hotels near Pittsburgh Airport (US2)\n- Verify presence of Hyatt hotels (US7)\n- Retrieve the name of the Hyatt hotel (US6)\n- Configure search parameters for supermarkets within 15 minutes driving (US3)\n- Execute search for supermarkets (US4)\n- Extract names of supermarkets (US6)\n\nBut the user's intent is to \"show me the name of a Hyatt hotel if there is any nearby\" and then the supermarkets. So maybe the steps are:\n\n1. Navigate to the area around Pittsburgh Airport on the map. (US1)\n2. Search for Hyatt hotels in that area. (US2)\n3. Check if any Hyatt exists. (US7)\n4. If exists, get the hotel name. (US6)\n5. From the hotel's location, set a 15-minute driving time filter. (US3)\n6. Search for supermarkets within that range. (US4)\n7. Extract the supermarket names. (US6)\n\nBut the initial navigation might be part of the search. Maybe the user starts at the airport, so the first step is to search for Hyatt nearby. So maybe:\n\nStrategies:\n1. Search for Hyatt hotels near Pittsburgh Airport. (US2)\n2. Analyze results to confirm presence. (US7)\n3. Retrieve the hotel name. (US6)\n4. Configure 15-minute driving time filter from the hotel. (US3)\n5. Execute search for supermarkets. (US4)\n6. Extract supermarket names. (US6)\n\nSo the universal strategies would be US2, US7, US6, US3, US4, US6. But in the output example, they list unique strategies but in order. Wait, the output example lists the universal_strategies and their IDs in the sequence they are used. So even if US6 is used twice, it's listed twice. Wait, looking at the output example:\n\nIn the example, the strategies are three steps, and the universal strategies are [\"US1\", \"US3\", \"US4\"], each used once. So in this case, the steps would be:\n\nStrategies array:\n1. Search for Hyatt hotels near Pittsburgh Airport (US2)\n2. Verify if any Hyatt hotels are present (US7)\n3. Retrieve the name of the Hyatt hotel (US6)\n4. Configure search parameters for supermarkets within 15 minutes driving distance from the hotel (US3)\n5. Execute search for supermarkets (US4)\n6. Extract the names of supermarkets found (US6)\n\nSo the universal_strategies list would be [\"Search/Filter/Sort Data\", \"Analyze/Evaluate/Verify Data\", \"Extract/Retrieve Information\", \"Configure Parameters/Settings\", \"Execute Action/Process\", \"Extract/Retrieve Information\"] and the IDs [\"US2\", \"US7\", \"US6\", \"US3\", \"US4\", \"US6\"].\n\nBut the output example grouped some steps. Maybe the user's task can be broken down into fewer steps. For example:\n\n1. Search for Hyatt hotels near Pittsburgh Airport. (US2)\n2. Check for Hyatt presence and retrieve name. (US7 and US6 combined?)\nBut according to the universal strategies, each step should correspond to one strategy. So each action is a separate step.\n\nSo the final answer would have strategies as the list of steps, each mapped to a universal strategy. The output example had three steps, each with a strategy. So here, the task requires:\n\n- Navigate to the area (maybe US1 if needed, but perhaps the search includes that. So maybe the first step is US2.\n\nSo the strategies array would be:\n\n[\n \"Search for Hyatt hotels near Pittsburgh Airport\",\n \"Verify if any Hyatt hotels are present in the results\",\n \"Retrieve the name of the Hyatt hotel if available\",\n \"Configure search parameters to find supermarkets within a 15-minute drive from the hotel\",\n \"Execute the search for supermarkets\",\n \"Extract the names of the supermarkets found\"\n]\n\nAnd the universal_strategy_ids would be [\"US2\", \"US7\", \"US6\", \"US3\", \"US4\", \"US6\"].\n\nBut the user might not need to explicitly verify presence; maybe the search results will show if any exist, and extracting the name would imply that. But according to the task, the user wants to know \"if there is any\" so checking is necessary. So the answer would include US7 for the analysis step.\n\n\n```json\n{\n \"task_id\": 383,\n \"strategies\": [\n \"Search for Hyatt hotels near Pittsburgh Airport\",\n \"Verify if any Hyatt hotels are present in the results\",\n \"Retrieve the name of the Hyatt hotel if available\",\n \"Configure search parameters to find supermarkets within a 15-minute drive from the hotel\",\n \"Execute the search for supermarkets\",\n \"Extract the names of the supermarkets found\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategies\": [\n \"Search/Filter/Sort Data\",\n \"Analyze/Evaluate/Verify Data\",\n \"Extract/Retrieve Information\",\n \"Configure Parameters/Settings\",\n \"Execute Action/Process\",\n \"Extract/Retrieve Information\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategy_ids\": [\"US2\", \"US7\", \"US6\", \"US3\", \"US4\", \"US6\"]\n}\n```",
"model_reasoning": null
},
{
"task_id": 384,
"task_intent": "List the customer names who complain about the quality of EYZUTAK phone cases",
"expected_ids": [
"US1",
"US1",
"US8",
"US6"
],
"actual_ids": [
"US1",
"US2",
"US6"
],
"correct": false,
"model": "aiproxy/deepseek-reasoner",
"model_output": "\nOkay, let's tackle this task. The user wants to list customer names who complained about the quality of EYZUTAK phone cases. First, I need to figure out how to approach this on a shopping site's admin interface.\n\nStarting with navigation. The agent probably needs to go to where customer complaints or reviews are stored. That's likely a section like \"Customer Support\" or \"Product Reviews\". So US1 (Navigate To Page/Section) applies here.\n\nNext, they need to filter the data. They're looking for complaints specifically about EYZUTAK phone cases. So using search or filter functions to narrow down by product name \"EYZUTAK\" and maybe a keyword like \"quality\" in the complaints. That's US2 (Search/Filter/Sort Data).\n\nAfter filtering, the agent would need to extract the customer names from the filtered results. So viewing the details of each complaint to get the names. That's US6 (Extract/Retrieve Information).\n\nWait, but do they need to check each complaint individually? Or can they get the names directly from the list? If the list shows customer names, then extraction is straightforward. If not, they have to open each entry. But the task is to list the names, so maybe after filtering, the names are visible in the list, so extraction is possible without viewing each detail. So maybe US6 is sufficient.\n\nSo the steps would be: Navigate to the complaints section, filter by product and keyword, then extract the names from the results. So strategies would be:\n\n1. Navigate to the customer complaints/reviews section.\n2. Filter complaints for EYZUTAK phone cases mentioning quality issues.\n3. Extract customer names from the filtered complaints.\n\nThe universal strategies would be US1, US2, US6.\n\n\n```json\n{\n \"task_id\": 384,\n \"strategies\": [\n \"Navigate to Customer Complaints/Reviews Section\",\n \"Filter Complaints for EYZUTAK Phone Cases with Quality Mentions\",\n \"Extract Customer Names from Filtered Complaints\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategies\": [\n \"Navigate To Page/Section\",\n \"Search/Filter/Sort Data\",\n \"Extract/Retrieve Information\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategy_ids\": [\"US1\", \"US2\", \"US6\"]\n}\n```",
"model_reasoning": null
},
{
"task_id": 386,
"task_intent": "What is the rating of Ugreen lightning to 3.5mm cable. Please round to the nearest whole number",
"expected_ids": [
"US2",
"US5",
"US6"
],
"actual_ids": [
"US1",
"US6",
"US7"
],
"correct": false,
"model": "aiproxy/deepseek-reasoner",
"model_output": "\nOkay, let's tackle this task. The user wants the rating of the Ugreen lightning to 3.5mm cable, rounded to the nearest whole number. First, I need to figure out how to approach this on a shopping site.\n\nStep 1: Navigate to the product page. The user needs to find the specific product, so searching for it makes sense. That's US1 (Navigate To Page/Section) because they might use the search bar to get to the product page.\n\nStep 2: Once on the product page, the rating is probably displayed there. The agent needs to extract that information. That's US6 (Extract/Retrieve Information) since they're retrieving the numerical rating.\n\nStep 3: The rating might be a decimal, so rounding it to the nearest whole number is required. This involves evaluating and processing the data, which falls under US7 (Analyze/Evaluate/Verify Data). The agent checks the number and rounds it accordingly.\n\nI should check if there are any other steps, but it seems straightforward. No need to filter or configure settings here. Just search, extract, and round. The strategies align with US1, US6, and US7.\n\n\n```json\n{\n \"task_id\": 386,\n \"strategies\": [\n \"Search for the Ugreen lightning to 3.5mm cable product page\",\n \"Retrieve the product's rating value from the page\",\n \"Round the rating to the nearest whole number\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategies\": [\n \"Navigate To Page/Section\",\n \"Extract/Retrieve Information\",\n \"Analyze/Evaluate/Verify Data\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategy_ids\": [\"US1\", \"US6\", \"US7\"]\n}\n```",
"model_reasoning": null
},
{
"task_id": 387,
"task_intent": "Who gave 4 or 5 stars for phone cases from EYZUTAK",
"expected_ids": [
"US2",
"US5",
"US7"
],
"actual_ids": [
"US1",
"US2",
"US6"
],
"correct": false,
"model": "aiproxy/deepseek-reasoner",
"model_output": "\nOkay, let's tackle this task. The user wants to find out who gave 4 or 5 stars for phone cases from the brand EYZUTAK on a shopping site. \n\nFirst, I need to figure out the steps required. The user is looking for reviews, specifically ratings of 4 or 5 stars for a certain brand's product. So, the first step would be to navigate to the section where product reviews are managed. In a shopping admin site, that's probably the product reviews page or a section where all reviews are listed.\n\nNext, once on the reviews page, the user needs to filter these reviews. They need to set two filters: one for the brand EYZUTAK and another for the rating being 4 or 5 stars. So, applying filters would be the next step. Maybe there's a dropdown or a search option to select the brand and another to choose the rating range.\n\nAfter filtering, the results should show the relevant reviews. Then, the user would need to extract the information about who left those reviews. That might involve looking at each review's details to get the reviewer's name or username. If there are multiple pages of results, they might need to navigate through them to collect all the data.\n\nWait, but the task is to find out \"who\" the reviewers are. So, after filtering, the agent would view each review's details to retrieve the reviewer's information. Alternatively, if the list view already displays the reviewer names, then extracting directly from the list might be possible. But if not, they might need to click into each review to get the details.\n\nSo the steps would be: navigate to the reviews section, apply filters for brand and rating, then extract the reviewer names from the filtered list. If the list doesn't show names upfront, maybe they need to view each review's details. But since the example strategies use US6 (Extract/Retrieve Information) without necessarily US5 (View Details), perhaps the assumption is that the list displays the necessary info.\n\nPutting it all together, the strategies would be:\n\n1. Navigate to the product reviews section (US1).\n2. Filter reviews by brand EYZUTAK and ratings 4-5 stars (US2).\n3. Extract the names of the reviewers from the filtered list (US6).\n\nChecking the universal strategies: US1 for navigation, US2 for filtering, US6 for extracting info. That makes sense. No need to execute an action like generating a report here, just filtering and extracting. So the final answer should reference these three strategies.\n\n\n```json\n{\n \"task_id\": 387,\n \"strategies\": [\n \"Navigate to Product Reviews Section\",\n \"Filter Reviews for EYZUTAK Phone Cases with 4-5 Star Ratings\",\n \"Extract Reviewer Names from Filtered Results\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategies\": [\n \"Navigate To Page/Section\",\n \"Search/Filter/Sort Data\",\n \"Extract/Retrieve Information\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategy_ids\": [\"US1\", \"US2\", \"US6\"]\n}\n```",
"model_reasoning": null
},
{
"task_id": 392,
"task_intent": "Post \"Good idea\" for the merge request related to color ulitity in a11yproject.com project",
"expected_ids": [
"US1",
"US2",
"US4"
],
"actual_ids": [
"US1",
"US1",
"US2",
"US5",
"US4"
],
"correct": false,
"model": "aiproxy/deepseek-reasoner",
"model_output": "\nOkay, let's tackle this task. The user wants to post a comment \"Good idea\" on a merge request related to color utility in the a11yproject.com project on GitLab.\n\nFirst, I need to figure out the steps to achieve this. Let's start by navigating to the right project. GitLab's structure usually has projects under groups or user accounts. So the first step would be to go to the a11yproject.com project page. That's US1: Navigate To Page/Section.\n\nNext, the user needs to find the specific merge request. Merge requests are usually listed under the project's Merge Requests section. So navigating there is the next step. Again, that's US1.\n\nOnce in the Merge Requests list, the user might need to search or filter to find the one related to color utility. Using the search or filter feature here would be US2: Search/Filter/Sort Data.\n\nAfter locating the correct merge request, the user needs to view its details to post a comment. That's US5: View/Inspect Item Details.\n\nThen, they have to actually post the comment. On GitLab, you can comment in the discussion section. So entering the comment \"Good idea\" and submitting it would involve US4: Execute Action/Process (like clicking the comment button).\n\nWait, but creating a comment is adding a new item, which might be US9: Create Item. But in the context of GitLab, posting a comment is more of an action within the merge request, so maybe US4 is more appropriate here. Let me check the definitions. US4 is about initiating an action like submitting, which fits. So the steps would be navigate to project, navigate to merge requests, search for the specific one, view it, then post the comment. So the strategies would be:\n\n1. Navigate to the a11yproject.com project page. (US1)\n2. Navigate to the Merge Requests section. (US1)\n3. Search for the merge request related to color utility. (US2)\n4. View the details of the identified merge request. (US5)\n5. Post the comment \"Good idea\" in the discussion. (US4)\n\nSo the universal strategies involved are US1, US1, US2, US5, US4. But the example output sometimes combines steps. Wait, the example for task 4 had three steps but three strategies. Maybe each strategy is a separate step. So in this case, five steps. But maybe some can be combined. Let me see. Navigating to the project and then to merge requests are two separate navigations, so two US1s. Then search, view, and post. So the strategies array would have five entries, but the universal strategies would list each US used. However, in the output example, they sometimes group similar steps under the same US. For example, in the example, they have three strategies but three USs. So perhaps each strategy is a step, and each step corresponds to a US. So in this case, the steps would be:\n\nStrategies:\n- Navigate to the a11yproject.com project page.\n- Navigate to the Merge Requests section. (both US1)\nBut maybe these can be combined into a single step? Or are they separate? Since navigating to the project is one action, then within the project, navigating to Merge Requests is another. So two US1 steps.\n\nThen search for the MR (US2), view it (US5), post comment (US4). So the universal strategies would be US1, US1, US2, US5, US4. But the output example lists unique US IDs. Wait, in the example, the user had three strategies and three USs. So perhaps even if a US is used multiple times, it's listed once. Wait, looking at the output example:\n\nThe example task had strategies: Navigate to Bestsellers Report (US1), Configure Parameters (US3), Generate (US4). So each strategy step uses a different US. So in this case, if there are two US1 steps, how to handle? Maybe the strategies are broken down into steps each using a different US, even if the same US is used again. But the output example's strategies are each mapped to a US. So perhaps each strategy step is associated with a US, even if the same US is used again. For example, if two steps are US1, then the universal_strategies array would have two US1. But in the example, the output's universal_strategies array lists the US names in order, even if repeated. Wait, no. The example output has:\n\n\"universal_strategies\": [\n \"Navigate To Page/Section\",\n \"Configure Parameters/Settings\",\n \"Execute Action/Process\"\n],\n\"universal_strategy_ids\": [\"US1\", \"US3\", \"US4\"]\n\nSo each strategy step is mapped to a US, and the USs are listed in order. So if there are two steps using US1, then the universal_strategies array would have two entries of US1. But in the current task, the steps would be:\n\n1. Navigate to project (US1)\n2. Navigate to MR section (US1)\n3. Search for MR (US2)\n4. View MR (US5)\n5. Post comment (US4)\n\nSo the universal_strategies array would be [US1, US1, US2, US5, US4]. But the output example's arrays have unique entries. Wait, no. Let me check the example again. The example's strategies are three steps, each mapped to a different US. So the arrays have three entries. But in the current case, there are two US1 steps. So the arrays would have five entries. But the user's example shows that the strategies and the US lists are in order. So each strategy step is mapped to a US, and the US lists are in the same order as the strategies. So in this case, the universal_strategies and their IDs would be in the order of the steps. So even if US1 is used twice, it's listed twice. But in the example given, the user's output example has three strategies and three USs. So perhaps the answer should list each step's US, even if repeated. So the answer would be:\n\nstrategies: [\n \"Navigate to the a11yproject.com project page\",\n \"Navigate to the Merge Requests section\",\n \"Search for the merge request related to color utility\",\n \"View the details of the identified merge request\",\n \"Post the comment \\\"Good idea\\\" in the discussion section\"\n],\nuniversal_strategies: [\n \"Navigate To Page/Section\",\n \"Navigate To Page/Section\",\n \"Search/Filter/Sort Data\",\n \"View/Inspect Item Details\",\n \"Execute Action/Process\"\n],\nuniversal_strategy_ids: [\"US1\", \"US1\", \"US2\", \"US5\", \"US4\"]\n\nBut the output example didn't have repeated US entries, but perhaps that's because the steps used different USs. So in this case, the answer should include all steps and their corresponding USs, even if US1 is used twice. So the final answer would have five strategies and five US entries. But maybe the first two steps can be combined into a single step. For example, \"Navigate to the Merge Requests section of the a11yproject.com project\". Then that's a single US1 step. But how? Because navigating to the project is one step, then within the project to the MR section is another. But perhaps in the actual interface, the user can directly navigate to the MR section via a URL, but the agent would need to click through the project's menu. So two separate steps. So the answer would have five steps. But maybe the user's example had three steps, but the actual steps could be more. So the correct approach is to break down each necessary action into a strategy, each mapped to a US. So the answer would be as above.\n\n\n```json\n{\n \"task_id\": 392,\n \"strategies\": [\n \"Navigate to the a11yproject.com project page\",\n \"Navigate to the Merge Requests section\",\n \"Search for the merge request related to color utility\",\n \"View the details of the identified merge request\",\n \"Post the comment \\\"Good idea\\\" in the discussion section\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategies\": [\n \"Navigate To Page/Section\",\n \"Navigate To Page/Section\",\n \"Search/Filter/Sort Data\",\n \"View/Inspect Item Details\",\n \"Execute Action/Process\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategy_ids\": [\"US1\", \"US1\", \"US2\", \"US5\", \"US4\"]\n}\n```",
"model_reasoning": null
},
{
"task_id": 4,
"task_intent": "What are the top-3 best-selling product in Jan 2023",
"expected_ids": [
"US1",
"US3",
"US4"
],
"actual_ids": [
"US1",
"US3",
"US4"
],
"correct": true,
"model": "aiproxy/deepseek-reasoner",
"model_output": "\nOkay, let's tackle this task. The user wants to find the top-3 best-selling products in January 2023 on the shopping admin site.\n\nHmm, first, I need to figure out where the bestseller data is located. The admin site probably has a reports section, maybe a sales or products report. So the first step would be navigating to that specific report page. That's US1: Navigate To Page/Section.\n\nNext, once on the report page, they'll need to set the date range to January 2023. That involves configuring parameters, which is US3. They might have to select the start and end dates from a date picker or input fields.\n\nAfter setting the parameters, generating the report would be the next step. That's executing an action, so US4. Clicking a \"Generate Report\" button or similar.\n\nOnce the report is generated, the user needs to view the results. They might have to look at a list or table sorted by sales. But the task is to get the top 3, so maybe the report already sorts them, or they might need to sort the data. Wait, the original intent is to retrieve the top 3, so maybe after generating, they need to extract that info. But the example output uses \"Generate and Review\" as a step. Alternatively, maybe there's a step to analyze the data to identify the top 3. But if the report is already sorted, then extracting the top 3 would be part of viewing or extracting info. Let me check the universal strategies again.\n\nUS6 is Extract/Retrieve Information. So after generating the report, they need to extract the top 3 products. But the report might list them in order, so maybe the step is \"Review the generated report to identify the top-3 products.\" But the example given in the output example for a similar task used \"Generate and Review Bestsellers Report\" as a strategy, which maps to US4 (Execute Action) and maybe US6 or US7. However, in the example, the third strategy was \"Generate and Review Bestsellers Report\" which was under US4. So perhaps combining the execution and review into one step. Alternatively, maybe the review is part of the analysis.\n\nWait, the example for the input \"What are the top-3 best-selling product in Jan 2023\" had strategies: Navigate to Bestsellers Report, Configure Parameters, Generate and Review. The universal strategies were US1, US3, US4. So the review part is part of the Execute Action step. So maybe in this case, generating the report includes viewing it, and the data is presented in a way that the top 3 are immediately visible. Therefore, the steps would be navigate, configure, execute (generate), and then the data is there. But the user's intent is to get the top 3, so maybe there's an additional step of extracting or analyzing. But the example didn't include that. Hmm.\n\nAlternatively, maybe the report, once generated with the correct parameters, already lists the products in order of sales, so the top 3 are the first three entries. So the steps would be navigate to the report, configure the date, generate it, and then the information is there. So the strategies would be US1, US3, US4. But the example output included \"Generate and Review\" as a single step under US4. So perhaps the review is part of the execution step. Therefore, in this case, the strategies would be similar to the example.\n\nSo the strategies would be:\n\n1. Navigate to the Sales or Bestsellers Report page (US1)\n2. Configure the report parameters to January 2023 (US3)\n3. Generate the report and identify the top-3 products (US4 and maybe US6 or US7)\n\nBut the example used \"Generate and Review Bestsellers Report\" as a single step under US4. So perhaps the third step is \"Generate and Review the Bestsellers Report\" which maps to US4 (Execute Action). Then, the review part is part of the execution, and the data is presented. So the user can then extract the top 3 from the generated report. But the example didn't include an extraction step. Maybe the act of generating the report includes displaying the data, so the agent can then retrieve the information. But according to the output example, the third strategy is \"Generate and Review Bestsellers Report\" under US4. So perhaps the extraction is implied in the review.\n\nAlternatively, maybe the steps are:\n\n1. Navigate to the report page (US1)\n2. Set the date parameters (US3)\n3. Generate the report (US4)\n4. Extract the top 3 from the report (US6)\n\nBut the example didn't include the extraction step. So maybe the answer should follow the example's structure. Let me check the example again.\n\nIn the example, the task was the same: \"What are the top-3 best-selling product in Jan 2023\". The strategies were:\n\n- Navigate to Bestsellers Report (US1)\n- Configure Report Parameters for January 2023 (US3)\n- Generate and Review Bestsellers Report (US4)\n\nSo the third step combines generating and reviewing. So perhaps the review includes identifying the top 3. Therefore, the strategies would be those three steps. So in this case, the answer would follow that structure. So the user's task is the same as the example, so the strategies would be the same. Therefore, the answer would be:\n\nstrategies: [\n \"Navigate to Bestsellers Report\",\n \"Configure Report Parameters for January 2023\",\n \"Generate and Review Bestsellers Report\"\n],\nuniversal_strategies: [\"Navigate To Page/Section\", \"Configure Parameters/Settings\", \"Execute Action/Process\"],\nuniversal_strategy_ids: [\"US1\", \"US3\", \"US4\"]\n\nBut the user's input is exactly the same as the example, so the answer would mirror that. Therefore, the output should be as in the example.\n\n\n```json\n{\n \"task_id\": 4,\n \"strategies\": [\n \"Navigate to Bestsellers Report\",\n \"Configure Report Parameters for January 2023\",\n \"Generate and Review Bestsellers Report\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategies\": [\n \"Navigate To Page/Section\",\n \"Configure Parameters/Settings\",\n \"Execute Action/Process\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategy_ids\": [\"US1\", \"US3\", \"US4\"]\n}\n```",
"model_reasoning": null
},
{
"task_id": 404,
"task_intent": "Upvote the newest post in books subreddit",
"expected_ids": [
"US1",
"US2",
"US4"
],
"actual_ids": [
"US1",
"US2",
"US4"
],
"correct": true,
"model": "aiproxy/deepseek-reasoner",
"model_output": "\nOkay, let's tackle this task. The user wants to upvote the newest post in the books subreddit on Reddit. First, I need to figure out the steps required.\n\nStarting with navigation. The user needs to get to the books subreddit. So, navigating to that specific subreddit would be the first step. That aligns with US1 (Navigate To Page/Section).\n\nOnce there, the newest post is probably sorted by 'new'. So the next step would be to sort the posts to show the most recent ones. That's US2 (Search/Filter/Sort Data) because sorting is a way to reorder data.\n\nAfter sorting, the user needs to identify the newest post. That's about viewing or inspecting the details to ensure it's the correct one. Wait, maybe not. Maybe just locating it in the list. But since upvoting is an action on the post itself, perhaps the step is to execute the upvote. But how? The process would be: find the newest post (after sorting), then click the upvote button. So the action of upvoting is US4 (Execute Action/Process). \n\nSo the strategies would be: navigate to the subreddit, sort by new, upvote the first post. The corresponding universal strategies are US1, US2, US4. Let me check if that makes sense. Yes, navigating to the page, sorting to get the newest, then executing the upvote action. That should cover it.\n\n\n```json\n{\n \"task_id\": 404,\n \"strategies\": [\n \"Navigate to the books subreddit\",\n \"Sort posts by 'New' to identify the latest post\",\n \"Upvote the newest post\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategies\": [\n \"Navigate To Page/Section\",\n \"Search/Filter/Sort Data\",\n \"Execute Action/Process\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategy_ids\": [\"US1\", \"US2\", \"US4\"]\n}\n```",
"model_reasoning": null
},
{
"task_id": 419,
"task_intent": "Set my gitlab status as Enjoying life.",
"expected_ids": [
"US1",
"US10",
"US7"
],
"actual_ids": [
"US1",
"US10",
"US4"
],
"correct": false,
"model": "aiproxy/deepseek-reasoner",
"model_output": "\nOkay, let's tackle this task. The user wants to set their GitLab status to \"Enjoying life.\" First, I need to figure out the steps involved in doing that on GitLab.\n\nHmm, starting with navigation. The user probably needs to go to their profile settings because that's where such options usually are. So, the first step is navigating to the user's profile page. That aligns with US1 (Navigate To Page/Section).\n\nOnce on the profile page, there's a section for setting the status. The user would need to input the new status message \"Enjoying life\" into the appropriate field. That's modifying an existing item, which is US10 (Update/Modify Item). But wait, maybe it's part of configuring settings? Or is it creating a new status? Actually, setting a status might involve filling out a form and saving it. So maybe US10 is correct here because they're updating their profile's status.\n\nAfter entering the status, they need to save or submit the changes. That's executing an action, so US4 (Execute Action/Process) applies here. They might hit a \"Save\" or \"Update status\" button.\n\nLet me double-check. On GitLab, to set your status, you go to your profile, find the status section, type the message, maybe choose an emoji, and save. So the steps would be: navigate to profile, input the status, save. The strategies would be Navigate To Page/Section, Update/Modify Item, and Execute Action/Process. The corresponding US IDs are US1, US10, US4.\n\nI think that's right. The user isn't creating a new item but updating their existing profile, so US10 makes sense. The execution is saving the changes, which is US4.\n\n\n```json\n{\n \"task_id\": 419,\n \"strategies\": [\n \"Navigate to the user profile settings page/section\",\n \"Update the status field with 'Enjoying life'\",\n \"Save the updated status\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategies\": [\n \"Navigate To Page/Section\",\n \"Update/Modify Item\",\n \"Execute Action/Process\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategy_ids\": [\"US1\", \"US10\", \"US4\"]\n}\n```",
"model_reasoning": null
},
{
"task_id": 423,
"task_intent": "Mark all Hollister shirts on sale",
"expected_ids": [
"US1",
"US2",
"US10"
],
"actual_ids": [
"US1",
"US2",
"US3",
"US4"
],
"correct": false,
"model": "aiproxy/deepseek-reasoner",
"model_output": "\nOkay, let's tackle this task. The user wants to mark all Hollister shirts as on sale in the shopping admin site. First, I need to figure out the steps involved.\n\nHmm, starting with navigation. The admin site probably has a section for managing products. So the first step would be to go to the product management or inventory section. That's US1: Navigate To Page/Section.\n\nNext, they need to find all Hollister shirts. That would involve searching or filtering the product list. Using a search bar or filter by brand (Hollister) and product type (shirts). That's US2: Search/Filter/Sort Data.\n\nOnce the list is filtered, selecting all those products is necessary. Maybe there's a \"Select All\" checkbox or similar. Then applying a bulk action to mark them on sale. Updating the sale status falls under modifying items, so US10: Update/Modify Item.\n\nBut wait, after selecting, there might be a bulk edit option where you set the sale status. So configuring the sale parameters (like sale price, dates) would be part of that step. That's US3: Configure Parameters/Settings.\n\nFinally, executing the bulk update. Clicking a \"Save\" or \"Apply\" button to confirm the changes. That's US4: Execute Action/Process.\n\nWait, let me check the universal strategies again. The bulk update involves both modifying items (US10) and configuring settings (US3). But maybe the main action here is the bulk edit, which is a configuration of sale parameters. So steps would be: go to products, filter Hollister shirts, select all, configure sale settings (mark on sale), then execute the update.\n\nSo strategies would be:\n\n1. Navigate to Product Management section (US1)\n2. Filter products by brand Hollister and category shirts (US2)\n3. Select all filtered products (maybe part of US2 or a separate step? Hmm, selecting is part of preparing for bulk action, but the universal strategies don't have a specific one for selection. Maybe the selection is part of the configuration or update step. Alternatively, maybe the selection is part of the process leading to US10 or US3.\n\nAlternatively, maybe after filtering, the next step is to use a bulk action which involves configuring the sale parameters. So:\n\nStrategies:\n\n- Navigate to Product Management (US1)\n- Search/Filter for Hollister shirts (US2)\n- Configure sale parameters for selected items (US3)\n- Execute bulk update (US4)\n\nBut how does the selection happen? Maybe the filtering automatically selects, or there's a select all button. The exact UI steps might vary, but the key is after filtering, you configure the sale settings (like marking on sale) and execute. So the strategies would be those four steps. The universal strategies would be US1, US2, US3, US4.\n\nWait, the user wants to mark them on sale. So configuring the sale status (like enabling the sale flag, setting sale price, etc.) is part of US3. Then executing the bulk action is US4. So the strategies would be:\n\n1. Navigate to the product management page (US1)\n2. Filter the list to show Hollister shirts (US2)\n3. Configure sale parameters for the selected items (US3)\n4. Execute the bulk update to mark them on sale (US4)\n\nYes, that makes sense. The bulk action involves setting parameters (sale status) and then executing. So the universal strategies are US1, US2, US3, US4.\n\n\n```json\n{\n \"task_id\": 423,\n \"strategies\": [\n \"Navigate to Product Management Section\",\n \"Filter Products by Brand 'Hollister' and Category 'Shirts'\",\n \"Bulk Configure Sale Status for Selected Items\",\n \"Execute Bulk Update to Mark Items on Sale\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategies\": [\n \"Navigate To Page/Section\",\n \"Search/Filter/Sort Data\",\n \"Configure Parameters/Settings\",\n \"Execute Action/Process\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategy_ids\": [\"US1\", \"US2\", \"US3\", \"US4\"]\n}\n```",
"model_reasoning": null
},
{
"task_id": 426,
"task_intent": "Find the page of the place in Pennsylvania where a plane crashed during the September 11th attacks on the map.",
"expected_ids": [
"US1",
"US1"
],
"actual_ids": [
"US2",
"US6",
"US1",
"US2",
"US7"
],
"correct": false,
"model": "aiproxy/deepseek-reasoner",
"model_output": "\nOkay, let's tackle this task. The user wants to find the page of the place in Pennsylvania where a plane crashed during 9/11 on the map. First, I need to figure out the steps are involved here.\n\nStarting with Wikipedia. The user probably needs to look up the specific location of the crash. The plane crash in Pennsylvania on 9/11 was United Airlines Flight 93. So the first step would be to search Wikipedia for that flight. Once on the page, they can extract the location details, like the town or coordinates.\n\nNext, using the map site. After getting the location name or coordinates from Wikipedia, the user would navigate to the map site. They might search for \"Shanksville, Pennsylvania\" or the exact coordinates. Then, they need to verify that the location on the map matches the crash site mentioned in the Wikipedia article. This ensures accuracy.\n\nSo breaking it down: first, search and retrieve info from Wikipedia, then use that info to find and verify the location on the map. The universal strategies involved here are searching (US2), extracting info (US6), navigating to the map (US1), and verifying the data (US7).\n\n\n```json\n{\n \"task_id\": 426,\n \"strategies\": [\n \"Search Wikipedia for 'September 11th Pennsylvania plane crash'\",\n \"Extract location name/coordinates from the Flight 93 Memorial page\",\n \"Navigate to map application\",\n \"Search map for extracted location (e.g., Shanksville, PA)\",\n \"Verify crash site marker matches Wikipedia description\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategies\": [\n \"Search/Filter/Sort Data\",\n \"Extract/Retrieve Information\",\n \"Navigate To Page/Section\",\n \"Search/Filter/Sort Data\",\n \"Analyze/Evaluate/Verify Data\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategy_ids\": [\"US2\", \"US6\", \"US1\", \"US2\", \"US7\"]\n}\n```",
"model_reasoning": null
},
{
"task_id": 43,
"task_intent": "List the top 3 search terms in my store",
"expected_ids": [
"US1",
"US7"
],
"actual_ids": [
"US1",
"US3",
"US4"
],
"correct": false,
"model": "aiproxy/deepseek-reasoner",
"model_output": "\nOkay, let's tackle this task. The user wants to list the top 3 search terms in their store using the shopping_admin site. First, I need to figure out how to approach this.\n\nHmm, in an admin panel, there's usually a section for reports or analytics. So the first step would be navigating to where search terms are reported. That's probably under a \"Reports\" or \"Analytics\" section. So US1 (Navigate To Page/Section) makes sense here.\n\nOnce on the right page, the user might need to configure the report parameters. Maybe they need to set the date range if it's not defaulting to the desired period, or select the type of report to show search terms. That would be US3 (Configure Parameters/Settings).\n\nAfter setting up the parameters, they'd generate the report. That's executing an action, so US4 (Execute Action/Process). Then, the report would display the top search terms. The user needs to view and extract the top 3, which involves US6 (Extract/Retrieve Information).\n\nWait, but the steps need to be concise. Let me check the example again. The example for a similar task used US1, US3, US4. But here, after generating, they need to look at the data. Maybe the strategies are: navigate to the search terms report, configure parameters (like date range if needed), generate the report, then extract the top 3 terms. But the example didn't include extraction as a separate step. Hmm.\n\nWait, the user's intent is to list the top 3, so after generating the report, the data is there, but maybe the agent needs to extract it. However, in the output example, the third step was \"Generate and Review Bestsellers Report\" which combines execution and viewing. So maybe here, after generating, the agent would review the report and list the top 3. But how to represent that in strategies.\n\nAlternatively, maybe the steps are: navigate to the report page, configure parameters (if necessary), generate the report, and then the top 3 are listed. But the actual extraction might be part of the execute action. Or perhaps the extraction is a separate step. Let me think.\n\nThe universal strategies include US6 (Extract/Retrieve Information). So maybe after generating the report, the agent would need to extract the top 3 terms. So the strategies would be:\n\n1. Navigate to the search terms report section (US1)\n2. Configure parameters if needed (US3)\n3. Generate the report (US4)\n4. Extract the top 3 search terms (US6)\n\nBut the example given in the problem had three steps. Maybe in this case, the configuration might not be necessary if the default parameters are correct. But the user might need to ensure the report is set to show top items. Alternatively, maybe the configuration includes selecting to sort by most searched terms. So perhaps the steps are:\n\n- Navigate to the search analytics page (US1\n- Configure the report to show top search terms, maybe by selecting a sort order or setting the limit to top 3 (US3)\n- Generate the report (US4)\n- Then extract the top 3 (US6)\n\nBut the output example had three steps. Maybe the extraction is part of the execute action. Or maybe the report, once generated, directly lists the top 3, so the steps are navigate, configure, execute. But the user's intent is to list them, so maybe the extraction is implied in the execute step. Hmm.\n\nAlternatively, maybe the steps are:\n\n1. Navigate to the search terms report (US1)\n2. Sort the search terms by popularity (US2)\n3. Retrieve the top 3 terms (US6)\n\nBut US2 is search/filter/sort. So maybe that's applicable here. Let me check the universal strategies. US2 is for search, filter, or sort data. So if the report is a list, and you can sort it by count, that would be US2. Then after sorting, the top 3 would be visible, and extraction is US6.\n\nBut the original example used US3\"Configure Parameters/Settings\" for setting date ranges. So perhaps configuring the report parameters (like date range, or number of results) is US3, while sorting the existing data is US2.\n\nSo possible steps:\n\n- Navigate to the search terms report (US1)\n- Configure the report parameters to show top 3 (US3)\n- Generate the report (US4)\n- Extract the top 3 terms (US6)\n\nBut maybe generating the report already includes the top 3 if configured. So maybe the steps are:\n\n1. Navigate to the search terms section (US1)\n2. Configure parameters to show top 3 (US3)\n3. Generate and view the report (US4)\n4. Extract the data (US6)\n\nBut the example given in the problem's output example didn't include extraction as a separate step. Let me check the example again. The example, the task was to find top-3 best-selling products. The strategies were navigate, configure, generate and review. The universal strategies were US1, US3, US4. So the extraction was part of the review step. So perhaps in this case, the generate step includes viewing the report, and the extraction is part of that. So maybe the current task's steps would be:\n\n1. Navigate to the search terms report page (US1)\n2. Configure parameters (like date range, or to show top 3) (US3)\n3. Generate and review the report (US4)\n4. Then extract the top 3 (US6)\n\nBut the example didn't include US6. Hmm. Maybe the extraction is considered part of the execute action. Or perhaps the agent, after generating the report, can see the top 3 listed, so the steps are part of the execute action. But according to the universal strategies, US6 is for extracting information. So maybe the steps are:\n\nStrategies:\n\n1. Navigate to the search terms report section (US1)\n2. Configure the report to display top search terms (US3)\n3. Generate the report (US4)\n4. Extract the top 3 search terms from the report (US6)\n\nBut the example in the problem's output didn't include US6. However, the example's task was to \"what are the top-3 best-selling product\", and the strategies were navigate, configure, generate and review. So perhaps the \"review\" part includes extraction. But according to the universal strategies, US7 is analyze/evaluate/verify data, which is a cognitive step. US6 is extract/retrieve, which is reading and capturing. So in the example, the third step \"Generate and Review Bestsellers Report\" would involve US4 (execute) and US6 or US7. But the example's universal strategies were US1, US3, US4. So perhaps the extraction is considered part of the execute step. But that might not be accurate. Maybe the example's third step combines generating and then viewing, which would be US4 and US5 or US6. But the example's output only listed US4. So perhaps the extraction is considered part of the execute action. \n\nAlternatively, maybe the steps are:\n\n1. Navigate to the search terms report (US1)\n2. Sort the search terms by most frequent (US2)\n3. Retrieve the top 3 terms (US6)\n\nBut that would be US1, US2, US6. But maybe the report requires configuration. For example, if the report has parameters like date range, or number of results to show. So if the user needs to set the number of results to 3, that's US3. If they need to sort, that's US2. \n\nAlternatively, the steps could be:\n\n1. Navigate to the search analytics page (US1)\n2. Filter the data to the desired time frame (US2)\n3. Sort the terms by search count (US2)\n4. Extract the top 3 (US6)\n\nBut that's using US2 twice. But the example used US3 for configuring parameters. So perhaps setting the date range is US3, and sorting is US2. But maybe in the interface, configuring the report (like selecting a date range and setting it to show top 3) is part of US3. Then generating the report (US4) would display the top 3, and then extraction (US6) is needed. \n\nBut the user's intent is to list the top 3. So the steps would be:\n\n- Navigate to the search terms report (US1)\n- Configure parameters (e.g., date range, top N results) (US3)\n- Generate the report (US4)\n- Extract the top 3 terms (US6)\n\nBut the example didn't include US6. So perhaps the answer should follow the example's structure, which combines generating and reviewing. So maybe the steps are:\n\n1. Navigate to the search terms report section (US1)\n2. Configure the report to show top 3 (US3)\n3. Generate and review the report (US4)\n\nBut then the extraction is part of the review. However, according to the universal strategies, US4 is execute action/process, which is initiating the action. The actual extraction would be US6. But the example didn't include US6. So perhaps the answer should follow the example's approach, using US1, US3, US4. \n\nAlternatively, maybe the report, once generated, automatically lists the top terms, so the steps are navigate, configure, execute. But the user's intent is to list them, which requires extraction. So maybe the answer should include US6. \n\nBut the example given in the problem's output example didn't include US6. Let me check the example again. The example's task was to find the top-3 best-selling products. The strategies were:\n\n- Navigate to Bestsellers Report (US1)\n- Configure Report Parameters for January 2023 (US3)\n- Generate and Review Bestsellers Report (US4)\n\nThe universal strategies used were US1, US3, US4. So the \"review\" part is part of the execute step. So perhaps in this case, the extraction is considered part of the execute action. Therefore, for the current task, the steps would be:\n\n1. Navigate to the search terms report page (US1)\n2. Configure parameters (like date range, and to show top 3) (US3)\n3. Generate and review the report (US4)\n\nThus, the universal strategies would be US1, US3, US4. \n\nBut wait, the user's intent is to list the top 3 search terms. So after generating the report, the agent would need to extract the top 3. But according to the example, the extraction is part of the review. So maybe the answer should follow that structure. Therefore, the strategies would be:\n\nStrategies:\n- Navigate to the Search Terms Report section\n- Configure report parameters to display top 3 terms\n- Generate and review the report\n\nUniversal strategies: US1, US3, US4.\n\nBut maybe the configuration step includes setting the number of results to 3. Alternatively, the report might default to showing top 10, and the user needs to adjust it. So configuring parameters (US3) would be setting the number of results to 3. Then generating the report (US4) would display the top 3, which the agent can then review. \n\nTherefore, the answer would be:\n\n{\n \"task_id\": 43,\n \"strategies\": [\n \"Navigate to the Search Terms Report section\",\n \"Configure report parameters to display top 3 search terms\",\n \"Generate and review the search terms report\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategies\": [\n \"Navigate To Page/Section\",\n \"Configure Parameters/Settings\",\n \"Execute Action/Process\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategy_ids\": [\"US1\", \"US3\", \"US4\"]\n}\n\n\n```json\n{\n \"task_id\": 43,\n \"strategies\": [\n \"Navigate to the Search Terms Report section\",\n \"Configure report parameters to display top 3 search terms\",\n \"Generate and review the search terms report\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategies\": [\n \"Navigate To Page/Section\",\n \"Configure Parameters/Settings\",\n \"Execute Action/Process\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategy_ids\": [\"US1\", \"US3\", \"US4\"]\n}\n```",
"model_reasoning": null
},
{
"task_id": 44,
"task_intent": "Check out my todos",
"expected_ids": [
"US1",
"US2",
"US1",
"US5"
],
"actual_ids": [
"US1",
"US7"
],
"correct": false,
"model": "aiproxy/deepseek-reasoner",
"model_output": "\nOkay, let's tackle this task. The user wants to check their todos on GitLab. First, I need to figure out how GitLab structures its features. GitLab has a To-Do list that aggregates activities like issues, merge requests, etc., assigned to the user.\n\nSo, the first step would be navigating to the To-Do section. In GitLab, there's usually a navigation bar with a To-Do list link. That's US1: Navigate To Page/Section.\n\nOnce on the To-Do page, the user might need to sort or filter their todos to find the most relevant ones. Maybe they want to sort by due date or filter by project. That's US2: Search/Filter/Sort Data.\n\nAfter applying any necessary filters or sorting, the user would view the list of todos. They need to look through each item to see what's pending. That's US5: View/Inspect Item Details. But wait, maybe they just need to see the list without clicking into each item. Hmm, maybe US7 is better here. US7 is about analyzing or verifying data. The user checks the todos listed, verifies which ones are pending, etc. So US7: Analyze/Evaluate/Verify Data.\n\nWait, the original task is just to \"check out\" the todos, which might not require detailed inspection of each item. Maybe the steps are: navigate to the todos page, maybe sort them, and then view the list. But the main actions are navigating, maybe filtering/sorting, and then viewing. But the strategies need to be in steps. Let me think again.\n\nFirst, navigate to the To-Do page (US1). Then, perhaps sort or filter if needed (US2). Then, the user would look at the list, which might involve US7 to analyze or verify which todos are there. Alternatively, maybe just viewing the list is part of US1, but the actual checking requires analysis. So the strategies would be:\n\n1. Navigate to the To-Do list section (US1).\n2. Sort or filter todos if necessary (US2).\n3. Review the list of todos to check their statuses (US7).\n\nAlternatively, maybe after navigating, the user just needs to view the todos, which is US5. But US5 is about inspecting item details. If the todos are listed on the page without needing to click into each, then US7 is more appropriate. So the strategies would be:\n\n- Navigate To Page/Section (US1)\n- Analyze/Evaluate/Verify Data (US7)\n\nBut maybe the user needs to check each todo's details, so US5. But the intent is \"check out my todos\", which might not require opening each one. So the main steps are navigating to the todos page and then reviewing them. So the strategies are US1 and US7. But maybe the user also needs to sort them, so US2. Let me check the universal strategies again.\n\nUS2 is for search/filter/sort. If the user needs to sort by date or priority, that's US2. But if the default view is sufficient, maybe US2 isn't needed. The task doesn't specify any filtering, just checking todos. So perhaps the steps are:\n\n1. Navigate to the To-Do section (US1).\n2. Review the list of todos (US7).\n\nBut maybe the user needs to view details of each todo, which would be US5. But the intent is to check out todos, which could mean just seeing the list. So the answer would be:\n\nStrategies: [\"Navigate to the To-Do List section\", \"Review the list of todos\"]\nUniversal strategies: US1 and US7.\n\nAlternatively, maybe the To-Do list is under the user's profile, so navigating there. But the main idea is US1 and US7. Let me confirm with the example given. In the example, the task was to check todos, which would involve going to the page and then reviewing the data. So the answer would be US1 and US7.\n\n\n```json\n{\n \"task_id\": 44,\n \"strategies\": [\n \"Navigate to the To-Do List section\",\n \"Review the list of todos and their statuses\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategies\": [\n \"Navigate To Page/Section\",\n \"Analyze/Evaluate/Verify Data\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategy_ids\": [\"US1\", \"US7\"]\n}\n```",
"model_reasoning": null
},
{
"task_id": 440,
"task_intent": "I previously ordered some a make up removal kit during summer 2022 and later cancelled. Can you reorder it for me?",
"expected_ids": [
"US1",
"US4",
"US4"
],
"actual_ids": [
"US1",
"US2",
"US6",
"US4"
],
"correct": false,
"model": "aiproxy/deepseek-reasoner",
"model_output": "\nOkay, let's tackle this task. The user wants to reorder a makeup removal kit they ordered in summer 2022 but later canceled. The site is \"shopping\", so probably a customer-facing site, not the admin.\n\nFirst, I need to figure out the steps. The user needs to reorder a canceled item. Since it's canceled, maybe it's not in their order history anymore. But perhaps they can find the product again and reorder it.\n\nStep 1: Navigate to the order history. The user might need to go to their past orders to find the canceled item. But if it's canceled, maybe it's in a separate section like \"Cancelled Orders\" or \"Order History\" with a filter. So US1 (Navigate To Page/Section) applies here.\n\nStep 2: Search or filter the orders to find the specific one from summer 2022. The user mentioned summer 2022, so filtering by date or status (cancelled) would help. That's US2 (Search/Filter/Sort Data).\n\nStep 3: View the details of that canceled order to get the product info. They need to see what exactly was ordered, maybe the product name or SKU. So US5 (View/Inspect Item Details).\n\nStep 4: Extract the product information from the order details. Like the product name or ID. US6 (Extract/Retrieve Information).\n\nStep 5: Then, they need to search for that product again on the site. So another US2, maybe using the product details they retrieved.\n\nStep 6: Once found, add to cart and reorder. That's executing an action, so US4 (Execute Action/Process).\n\nWait, maybe after extracting the product info, they can directly reorder if the system allows reordering canceled items. But since it's canceled, maybe they have to add it to the cart again. So steps would be: navigate to order history, filter, view details, get product info, search product, add to cart, checkout. So the strategies would be US1, US2, US5, US6, US2 again, then US4. But the output example groups steps into strategies, not necessarily each action. So maybe:\n\nStrategies could be:\n\n1. Navigate to Order History (US1)\n2. Filter orders to find the canceled makeup kit from summer 2022 (US2)\n3. View the order details to get product information (US5 and US6)\n4. Search for the product using the retrieved info (US2)\n5. Add the product to cart and proceed to checkout (US4)\n\nBut the output example had 3 strategies. Maybe combine some steps. For example, \"View order details and retrieve product information\" combines US5 and US6. Then \"Search for the product using the retrieved details\" is US2, and \"Add to cart and checkout\" is US4. So the strategies would be:\n\n- Navigate to the Order History section (US1)\n- Filter and locate the cancelled makeup removal kit order from Summer 2022 (US2)\n- View order details to retrieve product information (US5, US6)\n- Search for the product using the retrieved details (US2)\n- Add the product to the cart and complete the reorder (US4)\n\nBut the output example had 3 steps. Maybe the user can't directly reorder a canceled item, so they have to manually find the product again. So the strategies would be:\n\n1. Navigate to the user's order history. (US1)\n2. Filter orders to find the canceled makeup removal kit from summer 2022. (US2)\n3. View the order details to retrieve the product information. (US5, US6)\n4. Search the store for the product using the retrieved details. (US2)\n5. Add the product to the cart and proceed to checkout. (US4)\n\nBut how to structure this into strategies. Maybe group some steps. For example, steps 1-3 as three strategies, then 4 and 5 as two more. But the example had three strategies. Let me check the output example again. The example had three strategies, each mapped to a US. So perhaps here, the strategies are:\n\n1. Navigate to the Order History section (US1)\n2. Filter and locate the cancelled order from Summer 2022 (US2)\n3. Retrieve product details from the order (US5 and US6)\n4. Search for the product in the store (US2)\n5. Add to cart and checkout (US4)\n\nBut that's five steps. Maybe some can be combined. Alternatively, maybe the process is:\n\n- Navigate to Order History (US1)\n- Filter to find the canceled order (US2)\n- View details and get product info (US5, US6)\n- Then, search for the product (US2)\n- Add to cart and checkout (US4)\n\nBut the output example had three strategies. Maybe the answer would have:\n\nStrategies:\n\n1. Navigate to the Order History section to locate the cancelled order. (US1)\n2. Filter orders by date and status to find the makeup removal kit. (US2)\n3. Retrieve product details from the order and reorder the item. (US5, US6, US4)\n\nWait, but reordering would involve searching again. Hmm. Alternatively, maybe after retrieving the product info, the user can directly reorder if there's a \"Reorder\" button. But if the order was canceled, maybe that's not available. So the user has to manually search for the product again. So the strategies would be:\n\n1. Navigate to the Order History section (US1)\n2. Filter and locate the canceled order from Summer 2022 (US2)\n3. View order details to retrieve product information (US5, US6)\n4. Search for the product using the retrieved details (US2)\n5. Add the product to the cart and complete the purchase (US4)\n\nBut how to present this as strategies list. The output example had three steps. Maybe in this case, the steps are:\n\n- Navigate to Order History (US1)\n- Locate the canceled order via filtering (US2)\n- Retrieve product info (US5, US6)\n- Search and reorder (US2 and US4)\n\nBut perhaps the answer would combine some steps. For example:\n\nStrategies:\n\n1. Navigate to the user's order history. (US1)\n2. Filter orders to find the canceled makeup removal kit from Summer 2022. (US2)\n3. Retrieve product details from the order. (US5, US6)\n4. Search for the product and add it to the cart for reordering. (US2, US4)\n\nBut the output example grouped steps, so maybe:\n\nStrategies:\n\n1. Navigate to Order History section (US1)\n2. Filter and locate the canceled order (US2)\n3. Retrieve product details and reorder (US6 and US4)\n\nBut how? If reordering requires adding to cart again, then after retrieving the product info, they need to search for it (US2), then add to cart (US4). So maybe:\n\nStrategies:\n\n1. Navigate to the Order History page. (US1)\n2. Apply filters to locate the canceled makeup removal kit order from Summer 2022. (US2)\n3. View order details to extract product information. (US5, US6)\n4. Search for the product using the extracted details. (US2)\n5. Add the product to the cart and proceed to checkout. (US4)\n\nBut the output example had three strategies. Maybe the answer combines steps. For example, steps 3 and 4 could be part of the same strategy. Alternatively, maybe the answer is:\n\nStrategies:\n\n1. Navigate to the Order History section. (US1)\n2. Filter orders to find the canceled item from Summer 2022. (US2)\n3. Retrieve product details and reorder the item. (US6, US4)\n\nBut how to reorder? If after retrieving the product details, there's a reorder button, then US4. But if not, then need to search again. So perhaps the answer would need to include searching again. But maybe the original order's details have a link to the product, so they can click to go to the product page. Then:\n\nStrategies:\n\n1. Navigate to Order History (US1)\n2. Filter to find the canceled order (US2)\n3. Open the order details and click on the product to view (US5)\n4. Add to cart and checkout (US4)\n\nBut that's four steps. Maybe the answer is:\n\nStrategies:\n\n1. Navigate to the user's order history. (US1)\n2. Filter and locate the canceled order from Summer 2022. (US2)\n3. Retrieve product information and reorder the item. (US6, US4)\n\nBut how? If the product is still available, but assuming it is. So the answer would be:\n\nStrategies:\n\n- Navigate to Order History (US1)\n- Filter orders to find the canceled makeup kit (US2)\n- View details and retrieve product info (US5, US6)\n- Search for the product (US2)\n- Add to cart and checkout (US4)\n\nBut the output example had three strategies. Maybe the answer combines some steps. For example:\n\n1. Navigate to Order History (US1)\n2. Locate the canceled order via filtering (US2)\n3. Retrieve product info and reorder (US6, US4)\n\nBut how? If reorder is possible after retrieving info. Alternatively, maybe the answer is:\n\nStrategies:\n\n1. Navigate to the Order History section. (US1)\n2. Filter the orders to find the specific canceled item. (US2)\n3. Retrieve product details and proceed to reorder. (US6, US4)\n\nBut the actual steps would involve after retrieving, searching for the product again. So maybe the answer is:\n\nStrategies:\n\n1. Navigate to the Order History page. (US1)\n2. Apply date and status filters to locate the canceled order. (US2)\n3. Extract product details and initiate reordering. (US6, US4)\n\nBut initiating reordering would require adding to cart. So maybe the answer is:\n\nThe strategies would be:\n\n1. Navigate to the Order History section. (US1)\n2. Filter orders to find the canceled makeup removal kit from Summer 2022. (US2)\n3. Retrieve product information from the order details. (US5, US6)\n4. Search for the product using the retrieved information. (US2)\n5. Add the product to the cart and complete the purchase. (US4)\n\nBut the output example had three strategies. Maybe the answer combines steps 3-5 into one strategy. For example:\n\n3. Retrieve product information and reorder the item. (US6, US4)\n\nBut how? Unless there's a direct reorder button. If the order details page has a \"Reorder\" button even for canceled orders, then step 3 would be to click that button (US4). But if not, then the user has to manually search. So the answer depends on the site's functionality. Since the site is \"shopping\", which is a customer site, perhaps there's no reorder button for canceled orders, so the user has to find the product again.\n\nIn that case, the strategies would be:\n\n1. Navigate to the Order History section. (US1)\n2. Filter orders to locate the canceled makeup removal kit from Summer 2022. (US2)\n3. View the order details to retrieve the product information. (US5, US6)\n4. Search the store for the product using the retrieved details. (US2)\n5. Add the product to the cart and proceed to checkout. (US4)\n\nBut how to present this in the required JSON format. The example had three strategies. Maybe the answer groups some steps. For example:\n\nStrategies:\n\n1. Navigate to the Order History page. (US1)\n2. Filter and locate the canceled order from Summer 2022. (US2)\n3. Retrieve product details and reorder the item. (US6, US4)\n\nBut how? If after retrieving, they have to search and add to cart. So maybe the answer is:\n\nStrategies:\n\n1. Navigate to the user's order history. (US1)\n2. Apply filters to find the canceled makeup removal kit order. (US2)\n3. Retrieve product information and add the item to the cart for reordering. (US6, US4)\n\nBut adding to cart would require navigating to the product page. So maybe the answer assumes that after retrieving the product info, the user can directly add it. But that's not typical. So perhaps the correct approach is:\n\nThe strategies are:\n\n1. Navigate to the Order History section. (US1)\n2. Filter orders to locate the canceled makeup removal kit from Summer 2022. (US2)\n3. View order details to retrieve product information. (US5, US6)\n4. Search for the product using the retrieved details. (US2)\n5. Add the product to the cart and complete the purchase. (US4)\n\nBut the output example had three strategies. Maybe the answer combines steps 3-5 into one strategy. For example:\n\n3. Retrieve product details and reorder the item. (US6, US4)\n\nBut that's assuming that after retrieving, there's a way to reorder. Alternatively, the answer might be:\n\nStrategies:\n\n1. Navigate to the Order History page. (US1)\n2. Filter and find the canceled order. (US2)\n3. Retrieve product information and proceed to reorder. (US6, US4)\n\nBut how? If the product info includes a link to the product page, then clicking it (US1 again?), then adding to cart (US4). But the answer needs to reference the universal strategies. So perhaps the answer is:\n\nStrategies:\n\n1. Navigate to the Order History section. (US1)\n2. Filter orders to locate the canceled makeup removal kit. (US2)\n3. Retrieve product details and add to cart for reordering. (US6, US4)\n\nBut adding to cart would require navigating to the product page, which might be another US1. Hmm. This is a bit tricky. Maybe the correct approach is to list each step as a separate strategy, even if it's more than three. Let's see the example again. The example had three strategies. So perhaps the answer should have:\n\nStrategies:\n\n1. Navigate to the Order History section. (US1)\n2. Filter orders to find the canceled item from Summer 2022. (US2)\n3. Retrieve product details and reorder the item. (US6, US4)\n\nBut how? If reordering requires adding to cart, then US4 is the last step. So the answer would be:\n\n{\n \"task_id\": 440,\n \"strategies\": [\n \"Navigate to the Order History section\",\n \"Filter orders to locate the canceled makeup removal kit from Summer 2022\",\n \"Retrieve product details and reorder the item\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategies\": [\n \"Navigate To Page/Section\",\n \"Search/Filter/Sort Data\",\n \"Extract/Retrieve Information\",\n \"Execute Action/Process\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategy_ids\": [\"US1\", \"US2\", \"US6\", \"US4\"]\n}\n\nWait, but the example had three strategies and three US IDs. But here, the third strategy combines two US steps (US6 and US4). So the universal_strategies would include both. But the example had three strategies and three US IDs. So perhaps the answer, the third strategy is \"Retrieve product details and reorder the item\", which combines US6 and US4. So the universal_strategies would be [\"US1\", \"US2\", \"US6\", \"US4\"], but the example had three US IDs. Hmm, maybe the answer should have three strategies and three US IDs. Let me check the example again.\n\nIn the example, the strategies were:\n\n1. Navigate to Bestsellers Report (US1)\n2. Configure Report Parameters for January 2023 (US3)\n3. Generate and Review Bestsellers Report (US4)\n\nSo each strategy maps to one US. But in reality, the third strategy involves both US4 (execute) and US7 (analyze), but the example only listed US4. So perhaps the answer should map each strategy to one US, even if the strategy involves multiple steps. So in this case, the third strategy \"Retrieve product details and reorder the item\" would be two US steps, but the answer might only list the primary one. But according to the instructions, the user should select the appropriate templates and generate the specific strategy content. So perhaps each strategy is mapped to one US.\n\nBut in the example, the third strategy \"Generate and Review Bestsellers Report\" maps to US4 (Execute Action) and possibly US7 (Analyze), but the example only lists US4. So maybe the answer should select the primary US for each strategy.\n\nSo for the current task:\n\nStrategies:\n\n1. Navigate to Order History (US1)\n2. Filter orders to find the canceled item (US2)\n3. View order details to retrieve product info (US5)\n4. Search for the product (US2)\n5. Add to cart and checkout (US4)\n\nBut the example had three strategies. So perhaps the steps can be grouped into three strategies:\n\n1. Navigate to the Order History section. (US1)\n2. Filter and locate the canceled order. (US2)\n3. Retrieve product information and reorder the item. (US6 and US4)\n\nBut how to map each strategy to one US. Maybe the third strategy is \"Execute Action/Process (US4) for reordering, but the retrieval is part of that. Alternatively, the answer might have:\n\nStrategies:\n\n1. Navigate to Order History (US1)\n2. Filter orders to find the canceled item (US2)\n3. Retrieve product details and proceed to reorder (US6 and US4)\n\nBut the US IDs would be US1, US2, and a combination of US6 and US4. But the example had three US IDs. So perhaps the answer strategy must have each strategy mapped to one US. So maybe:\n\nStrategies:\n\n1. Navigate to Order History (US1)\n2. Filter orders to locate the canceled item (US2)\n3. Retrieve product details (US6)\n4. Search for the product (US2)\n5. Add to cart (US4)\n\nBut the example had three strategies. So perhaps the answer is:\n\nStrategies:\n\n1. Navigate to the Order History section. (US1)\n2. Apply filters to locate the canceled order. (US2)\n3. Retrieve product information and add to cart for reordering. (US6, US4)\n\nBut the US IDs would be US1, US2, and US6 and US4. But the output example had three US IDs. So perhaps the answer should have three strategies, each mapped to one US. So:\n\nStrategies:\n\n1. Navigate to the Order History page. (US1)\n2. Filter orders to find the canceled makeup removal kit. (US2)\n3. Retrieve product details and reorder the item. (US4)\n\nBut US4 is Execute Action. But retrieving is US6. So this is conflicting. Alternatively, maybe the third strategy is \"Execute reorder\" (US4), but that requires having the product info. So perhaps the answer is:\n\nStrategies:\n\n1. Navigate to Order History (US1)\n2. Filter to find the canceled order (US2)\n3. Reorder the item from the order details (US4)\n\nAssuming there's a \"Reorder\" button in the order details. But if the order was canceled, maybe that button is available. If not, then this approach wouldn't work. But since the user is asking to reorder, perhaps the site allows that. So the answer would be:\n\n{\n \"task_id\": 440,\n \"strategies\": [\n \"Navigate to the Order History section\",\n \"Filter orders to locate the canceled makeup removal kit from Summer 2022\",\n \"Reorder the item from the order details\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategies\": [\n \"Navigate To Page/Section\",\n \"Search/Filter/Sort Data\",\n \"Execute Action/Process\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategy_ids\": [\"US1\", \"US2\", \"US4\"]\n}\n\nBut this assumes that there's a reorder button even for canceled orders. If that's the case, then this would be correct. But if not, then the user has to manually search and add to cart. So the absence of knowing the site's specific features, the answer should assume standard functionality. Since the example given in the problem statement is about a shopping site, perhaps the standard process is to reorder from order history, even canceled ones. But I'm not sure. Alternatively, the user might need to find the product again. So the answer would need to include searching for the product after retrieving the details.\n\nBut given the ambiguity, the safest approach is to follow the example's structure. So the answer would have three strategies, each mapped to a US. So:\n\nStrategies:\n\n1. Navigate to Order History (US1)\n2. Filter orders to find the canceled item (US2)\n3. Retrieve product details and reorder (US6 and US4)\n\nBut the US IDs would be US1, US2, US6, US4. But the example had three US IDs. So perhaps the answer should combine US6 and US4 into one strategy, but how? Maybe the third strategy is \"Execute reorder\" (US4), which involves retrieving the product info. So the answer would be:\n\n{\n \"task_id\": 440,\n \"strategies\": [\n \"Navigate to the Order History section\",\n \"Filter orders to locate the canceled makeup removal kit from Summer 2022\",\n \"Retrieve product details and reorder the item\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategies\": [\n \"Navigate To Page/Section\",\n \"Search/Filter/Sort Data\",\n \"Extract/Retrieve Information\",\n \"Execute Action/Process\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategy_ids\": [\"US1\", \"US2\", \"US6\", \"US4\"]\n}\n\nBut the example had three strategies and three US IDs. However, the instructions say to include all referenced US strategies. So if a strategy combines two US steps, both should be listed. So the answer would include all US IDs involved. Hence, the correct answer would list four US IDs. But the example had three. However, the instructions say to include all referenced. So the answer should list all US IDs used in the order of the strategies. For example, if the third strategy uses US6 and US4, then the universal_strategy_ids would be [\"US1\", \"US2\", \"US6\", \"US4\"].\n\nBut the example had three strategies and three US IDs. So perhaps the answer should have three strategies mapped to three US IDs. But in reality, the third strategy may involve two US steps. However, the example's third strategy was \"Generate and Review Bestsellers Report\" which maps to US4 (execute) and possibly US7 (analyze), but the example only listed US4. So perhaps the answer should select the primary US for each strategy. So in this case, the third strategy's primary action is US4 (execute reorder), even though it involves US6 (retrieve info). So the answer would list US4 as the third US ID.\n\nBut that's not accurate. The user needs to retrieve the product info (US6) before reordering. So the answer should include US6 and US4. But how to fit that into three strategies. Maybe the third strategy is \"Retrieve product details and reorder\", which combines US6 and US4. So the US IDs would be US1, US2, US6, US4. But the example had three. So perhaps the answer is allowed to have more US IDs than strategies. Let's check the example:\n\nIn the example, the strategies were three, and the US IDs were three. So the answer should have the same number of US IDs as strategies. So each strategy must be mapped to one US. Therefore, the third strategy must be mapped to one US. So perhaps the third strategy is \"Execute reorder\" (US4), assuming that after finding the order, there's a reorder button. So the steps would be:\n\n1. Navigate to Order History (US1)\n2. Filter to find the order (US2)\n3. Click reorder (US4)\n\nThus, the answer would be:\n\n{\n \"task_id\": 440,\n \"strategies\": [\n \"Navigate to the Order History section\",\n \"Filter orders to locate the canceled makeup removal kit from Summer 2022\",\n \"Execute the reorder action for the item\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategies\": [\n \"Navigate To Page/Section\",\n \"Search/Filter/Sort Data\",\n \"Execute Action/Process\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategy_ids\": [\"US1\", \"US2\", \"US4\"]\n}\n\nBut this assumes that there's a reorder button available for canceled orders. If that's the case, then this is correct. Otherwise, if the user has to manually retrieve the product info and search again, then the answer would need to include those steps. But without knowing the site's specific features, it's safer to assume that reordering is possible directly from the order history, even if canceled. So the answer would be as above.\n\n\n```json\n{\n \"task_id\": 440,\n \"strategies\": [\n \"Navigate to the Order History section\",\n \"Filter orders to locate the canceled makeup removal kit from Summer 2022\",\n \"Retrieve product details and reorder the item\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategies\": [\n \"Navigate To Page/Section\",\n \"Search/Filter/Sort Data\",\n \"Extract/Retrieve Information\",\n \"Execute Action/Process\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategy_ids\": [\"US1\", \"US2\", \"US6\", \"US4\"]\n}\n```",
"model_reasoning": null
},
{
"task_id": 443,
"task_intent": "Update the project site's title to \"Not an interesting site\"",
"expected_ids": [
"US10",
"US4"
],
"actual_ids": [
"US1",
"US10",
"US4"
],
"correct": false,
"model": "aiproxy/deepseek-reasoner",
"model_output": "\nOkay, let's tackle this task. The user wants to update the project site's title to \"Not an interesting site\" on GitLab. First, I need to figure out the steps involved. \n\nStarting with navigation. The user probably needs to go to the project settings where the site title is configured. So, the first step would be navigating to the project's settings page. That aligns with US1 (Navigate To Page/Section).\n\nNext, once in the settings, they need to find the specific section or form where the site title is located. Maybe under a \"General\" or \"Project Settings\" section. They would then modify the title field to the new value. That's updating an item, which is US10 (Update/Modify Item).\n\nAfter changing the title, they have to save the changes. Saving typically involves clicking a \"Save\" or \"Update\" button, which is an action execution. So that's US4 (Execute Action/Process).\n\nSo the strategies would be: navigate to the project settings, update the title field, and save the changes. The corresponding universal strategies are US1, US10, and US4. Let me make sure there's no missing step. Maybe verifying after saving, but the user didn't mention needing confirmation, just the update. So the three steps should cover it.\n\n\n```json\n{\n \"task_id\": 443,\n \"strategies\": [\n \"Navigate to Project Settings page\",\n \"Update the site title field to \\\"Not an interesting site\\\"\",\n \"Save/Apply the updated project settings\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategies\": [\n \"Navigate To Page/Section\",\n \"Update/Modify Item\",\n \"Execute Action/Process\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategy_ids\": [\"US1\", \"US10\", \"US4\"]\n}\n```",
"model_reasoning": null
},
{
"task_id": 448,
"task_intent": "set the homepage URL on my GitLab profile to https://egg.tart.com",
"expected_ids": [
"US1",
"US10"
],
"actual_ids": [
"US1",
"US10",
"US4"
],
"correct": false,
"model": "aiproxy/deepseek-reasoner",
"model_output": "\nOkay, let's tackle this task. The user wants to set their GitLab profile homepage URL to https://egg.tart.com. First, I need to figure out the steps involved. \n\nStarting with navigation. The user probably needs to go to their profile settings. On GitLab, that's usually under the user's avatar or account menu. So the first step would be navigating to the profile section. That aligns with US1 (Navigate To Page/Section).\n\nNext, they need to edit their profile. There's likely an \"Edit Profile\" button or section where they can update their details. That's modifying an existing item, so US10 (Update/Modify Item) applies here.\n\nIn the edit form, they'll have to change the homepage URL field. They need to input the new URL and save the changes. Saving is an action, which is US4 (Execute Action/Process). \n\nWait, the steps would be: navigate to profile, edit profile, input the URL, save. So the strategies would be Navigate to Profile Settings, Update the Homepage URL field, and Save the changes. The corresponding universal strategies are US1, US10, and US4. That makes sense. Let me check if I missed anything. Maybe verifying after saving, but the task is just to set it, not verify. So the three strategies should cover it.\n\n\n```json\n{\n \"task_id\": 448,\n \"strategies\": [\n \"Navigate to Profile Settings\",\n \"Update Homepage URL field with https://egg.tart.com\",\n \"Save profile changes\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategies\": [\n \"Navigate To Page/Section\",\n \"Update/Modify Item\",\n \"Execute Action/Process\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategy_ids\": [\"US1\", \"US10\", \"US4\"]\n}\n```",
"model_reasoning": null
},
{
"task_id": 454,
"task_intent": "Disable Ryker Tee Crew Neck from the site, they are facing some quality issues.",
"expected_ids": [
"US1",
"US2",
"US1",
"US10"
],
"actual_ids": [
"US1",
"US2",
"US5",
"US10",
"US4"
],
"correct": false,
"model": "aiproxy/deepseek-reasoner",
"model_output": "\nOkay, let's tackle this task. The user wants to disable the Ryker Tee Crew Neck product from the site because of quality issues. First, I need to figure out the steps a GUI agent would take.\n\nStarting with navigation. The admin site probably has a section for managing products. So the first step is to go to the product management page. That aligns with US1 (Navigate To Page/Section).\n\nNext, the agent needs to find the specific product. Since there might be many products, searching or filtering would be necessary. Using the product name \"Ryker Tee Crew Neck\" in a search bar or filter fits US2 (Search/Filter/Sort Data).\n\nOnce the product is located, the agent needs to view its details to ensure it's the correct one. That's US5 (View/Inspect Item Details).\n\nAfter confirming, the agent would modify the product's status to disable it. Updating the item's status is covered by US10 (Update/Modify Item).\n\nFinally, saving the changes. This action is an execution step, so US4 (Execute Action/Process) applies here.\n\nPutting it all together: navigate to products, search for the item, view details, update status to disabled, and save. The universal strategies used are US1, US2, US5, US10, and US4.\n\n\n```json\n{\n \"task_id\": 454,\n \"strategies\": [\n \"Navigate to the product management section\",\n \"Search for 'Ryker Tee Crew Neck' in product listings\",\n \"View product details of the Ryker Tee Crew Neck\",\n \"Update product status to 'Disabled'\",\n \"Confirm and save changes to disable the product\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategies\": [\n \"Navigate To Page/Section\",\n \"Search/Filter/Sort Data\",\n \"View/Inspect Item Details\",\n \"Update/Modify Item\",\n \"Execute Action/Process\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategy_ids\": [\"US1\", \"US2\", \"US5\", \"US10\", \"US4\"]\n}\n```",
"model_reasoning": null
},
{
"task_id": 458,
"task_intent": "Reduce the price of this product by $5",
"expected_ids": [
"US10"
],
"actual_ids": [
"US1",
"US10",
"US4"
],
"correct": false,
"model": "aiproxy/deepseek-reasoner",
"model_output": "\nOkay, let's tackle this task. The user wants to reduce the price of a product by $5 in the shopping admin site. First, I need to figure out the steps involved. \n\nHmm, the first thing would be to navigate to the product's page. That makes sense because you can't edit a product without accessing it. So that's probably US1 (Navigate To Page/Section). \n\nOnce on the product page, the user needs to edit the price. Modifying an existing item's details falls under US10 (Update/Modify Item). They'll have to locate the price field, change it by subtracting $5, and then save the changes. \n\nAfter updating, saving the changes is crucial. That action would be US4 (Execute Action/Process), like clicking a \"Save\" button. \n\nWait, let me check the universal strategies again. US10 is about updating an item, which includes modifying attributes. So yes, editing the price is US10. Then saving the changes is executing the action, which is US4.\n\nSo the strategies would be: Navigate to the product's edit page, update the price by reducing $5, and save the changes. The corresponding universal strategies are US1, US10, US4.\n\n\n```json\n{\n \"task_id\": 458,\n \"strategies\": [\n \"Navigate to the product's edit page\",\n \"Update the product price by reducing $5\",\n \"Save the updated product details\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategies\": [\n \"Navigate To Page/Section\",\n \"Update/Modify Item\",\n \"Execute Action/Process\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategy_ids\": [\"US1\", \"US10\", \"US4\"]\n}\n```",
"model_reasoning": null
},
{
"task_id": 46,
"task_intent": "Check out the most recent open issues",
"expected_ids": [
"US1",
"US2"
],
"actual_ids": [
"US1",
"US2",
"US2"
],
"correct": true,
"model": "aiproxy/deepseek-reasoner",
"model_output": "\nOkay, let's tackle this task. The user wants to check the most recent open issues on GitLab. First, I need to figure out the steps a GUI agent would take.\n\nStarting with navigation. GitLab has different sections, so the agent needs to go to the issues page. That's probably under a project or a global issues section. So the first step would be navigating to the right page, which aligns with US1 (Navigate To Page/Section).\n\nNext, the user wants the most recent open issues. By default, issues might be sorted by creation date, but maybe not. The agent might need to sort the issues by the latest first. That's filtering or sorting data, so US2 (Search/Filter/Sort Data) applies here. The agent could use a dropdown to sort by \"Newest\" or similar.\n\nThen, the agent needs to view the list of issues. But since the task is to check the most recent, maybe there's a step to ensure they're open. So applying a filter for open issues. That's another US2. Wait, but the user specified \"open issues,\" so maybe the default view is already open issues. If not, the agent would need to set the filter for status: open. So maybe two US2 steps: one to filter open issues and another to sort by recent.\n\nAlternatively, maybe GitLab's interface has a combined way to do both. But to be thorough, the agent should ensure both filters are applied. So first navigate to the issues page (US1), then filter to show only open issues (US2), then sort by creation date descending (US2 again). Then maybe execute the action to apply these filters, but maybe it's automatic. Or perhaps the sorting and filtering are part of configuring parameters, but according to the universal strategies, US2 covers search, filter, sort. So the strategies would be:\n\n1. Navigate to the issues section (US1)\n2. Filter issues to show only open ones (US2)\n3. Sort issues by most recent (US2)\n4. View the list of issues (maybe US5 or US6, but viewing is part of the result after filtering and sorting. The actual action here is just displaying, which might not need a separate step unless the agent needs to scroll or paginate. But the task is to check the most recent, which are likely on the first page. So maybe the main steps are the first three. But the output example for a similar task had three steps. Let me check the example again.\n\nIn the example, generating a report involved navigate, configure, execute. Here, after navigating and applying filters/sorts, maybe the agent just needs to execute the filter/sort, but in web interfaces, filtering and sorting often happen automatically when you select the options. So the steps would be navigate, apply filter, apply sort. Then the data is displayed. So the strategies would be:\n\n- Navigate To Page/Section (US1)\n- Filter to show open issues (US2)\n- Sort by most recent (US2)\n\nBut the user's intent is to \"check out\" the most recent, which implies viewing them. However, once sorted and filtered, the list is visible. So maybe the steps are as above. The universal strategies don't have a separate \"view\" step unless you need to open details. Since the task is to list the most recent open issues, not view each one's details, the main steps are navigation, filtering, and sorting. So the strategies would be:\n\n1. Navigate to the Open Issues section (US1)\n2. Sort the list by most recently created (US2)\n3. Review the top entries in the sorted list (US7 for analysis, but maybe not. Alternatively, US6 if extracting info, but the task is just to check, so maybe US7 to verify they are the most recent.)\n\nWait, the universal strategies: US7 is Analyze/Evaluate/Verify Data. So after sorting, the agent would need to ensure that the top entries are indeed the most recent. But maybe the step is just generating the sorted list, and the user's check is implicit. However, the example given in the output example for a similar task included \"Generate and Review Bestsellers Report\" which uses US4 (Execute) and US7 (Analyze). So perhaps here, after sorting, the agent needs to execute the sort (maybe US4?), but in web interfaces, selecting a sort option automatically applies it. So maybe the steps are:\n\n- Navigate to Issues Page (US1)\n- Apply filter for Open status (US2)\n- Sort by Creation Date descending (US2)\n- Review the list (US7)\n\nBut the example didn't include US7. Alternatively, maybe the execution is part of the sorting step. Let me check the universal strategies again. US2 includes using search/filter/sort controls. So applying the sort is part of US2. So the strategies would be:\n\n1. Navigate to the Issues section (US1)\n2. Filter the issues to show only open ones (US2)\n3. Sort the issues by most recent creation date (US2)\n\nBut the user's intent is to check the most recent open. So after these steps, the list is displayed. The agent might need to view the top entries, but that's part of the result of the previous steps. So maybe the strategies are the three steps above. The universal strategies would be US1, US2, US2. But in the output example, they have three steps with US1, US3, US4. So here, maybe the third step is to apply the sort, which is part of US2. So the answer would be:\n\nStrategies:\n- Navigate to the Open Issues section\n- Sort the issues by most recent creation date\n- Review the most recent open issues\n\nBut the exact wording needs to match the universal strategies. So the first step is US1, the second is US2 (sort), and the third could be US7 (analyze/evaluate) to verify. Alternatively, maybe the third step is not needed if the sorting and filtering are sufficient. But the example included \"Generate and Review\" which is US4 and US7. So perhaps here, after sorting, the agent needs to review (US7). So the strategies would be:\n\n1. Navigate to the Issues page (US1)\n2. Filter and sort to display most recent open issues (US2)\n3. Review the list to identify top entries (US7)\n\nBut the example might combine filter and sort into one step. Let me see. In the example given, the bestsellers report had configure parameters (US3) which includes setting the date range, then execute (US4). Here, filtering and sorting are both US2. So perhaps two US2 steps: one for open issues, another for sorting. Then the third step is US7 to analyze. So the strategies would be:\n\nStrategies:\n- Navigate to the Issues section (US1)\n- Filter issues to show only open status (US2)\n- Sort issues by creation date in descending order (US2)\n- Analyze the list to identify the most recent open issues (US7)\n\nBut the user's intent is to \"check out\" which is to view them, so maybe the last step is redundant. Alternatively, maybe the first three steps are sufficient. However, the example included a \"Review\" step as US4 and US7. Hmm. Let's look at the example again:\n\nIn the example, the strategies were:\n\n1. Navigate to Bestsellers Report (US1)\n2. Configure Report Parameters for January 2023 (US3)\n3. Generate and Review Bestsellers Report (US4 and US7?)\n\nBut in the output example, the universal strategies were US1, US3, US4. The third step was \"Generate and Review\", which maps to US4 (Execute) and perhaps US7 (Analyze), but in the example, they only listed US4. Wait, the \"Review\" part might be part of the execution, but the universal strategies for US4 is Execute Action/Process. So generating the report is US4, and reviewing is part of that step. So in that case, maybe in our current task, after sorting and filtering, the list is automatically displayed, so the steps are:\n\n1. Navigate to Issues (US1)\n2. Filter to open issues (US2)\n3. Sort by most recent (US2)\n\nBut the user needs to check them, which is viewing, but that's part of the result. However, the example included a Generate step (US4) which is executing the action. So perhaps in this case, after setting the filters and sort, there's an action to apply them, but in web interfaces, changing a filter or sort option automatically updates the list. So maybe no execute step is needed. Therefore, the strategies are:\n\n- Navigate to the Issues section (US1)\n- Apply filter to show open issues (US2)\n- Sort the issues by most recent creation date (US2)\n\nBut the user's intent is to check the most recent open issues. So maybe after applying the filters and sort, the agent needs to view the list, which could be US5 (View/Inspect Item Details), but that's for individual items. Alternatively, US6 (Extract/Retrieve Information) if they need to get the list. But the task is just to check, not extract data. So perhaps the steps are the three above. But the example had three steps. Let's see.\n\nAlternatively, maybe the steps are:\n\n1. Navigate to the Issues page (US1)\n2. Configure filters to show open and sort by recent (US3) - but US3 is Configure Parameters/Settings. Wait, US3 is for configuring parameters before executing an action, like generating a report. In this case, filtering and sorting are part of US2. So the correct universal strategies are US1 and two US2 steps. But the example in the user's input had three steps. Let me check the example again.\n\nIn the example, the task was to find top-3 products in Jan 2023. The strategies were navigate, configure (date range), generate. So US1, US3, US4. Here, the task is similar but involves filtering and sorting instead of configuring parameters. So the steps are:\n\n1. Navigate to the Issues section (US1)\n2. Filter to open and sort by recent (US2)\n3. Execute the filter/sort (if needed) (US4) but in web interfaces, changing the filter or sort is immediate. So maybe no US4 needed. So the answer would be:\n\nStrategies:\n- Navigate to the Open Issues section (US1)\n- Sort the issues by most recent creation date (US2)\n- Review the list of recent open issues (US7)\n\nBut why US7? Because reviewing involves analyzing the data to confirm they are the most recent. So the third step is US7. Alternatively, if the user just needs to view the list, maybe US5 or US6, but those are for individual items. So perhaps the three steps are:\n\n1. Navigate to Issues (US1)\n2. Apply Open filter and Recent sort (US2)\n3. Analyze the list (US7)\n\nBut the example didn't use US7. Hmm. Maybe the correct answer is:\n\nStrategies:\n1. Navigate to the Issues page (US1)\n2. Filter and sort to display most recent open issues (US2)\n3. View the list of issues (US5 or US6?)\n\nBut US5 is for viewing item details. The list is already visible after filtering and sorting. So maybe the third step isn't needed. But the example, the third step was \"Generate and Review\", which combined US4 and perhaps US7. So in this case, maybe the steps are:\n\n1. Navigate to Issues (US1)\n2. Filter and sort (US2)\n3. Execute the action to apply (if needed) (US4) but in this case, maybe not needed.\n\nAlternatively, maybe the steps are:\n\n1. Navigate to the Issues section (US1)\n2. Configure filters and sorting (US3) but US3 is for parameters before executing an action. If applying filters and sorting is part of configuring parameters for viewing the list, then US3. But according to the universal strategies, US2 is for search/filter/sort. So US2 is correct.\n\nSo the final answer would be:\n\nStrategies:\n- Navigate to the Issues section (US1)\n- Filter issues to show only open status (US2)\n- Sort issues by most recent creation date (US2)\n\nBut the user's intent is to check the most recent open issues. So after these steps, the list is displayed. The agent might need to verify that the list is correct, which is US7. So the third step is US7.\n\nBut the example didn't include US7. Let me check the example again. The example's third step was \"Generate and Review Bestsellers Report\" which was US4 (execute) and perhaps US7. But in the output example, the universal strategies were US1, US3, US4. So the \"Review\" part wasn't a separate step. So maybe in this case, after applying the filters and sort, the agent just needs to execute the action, but in this context, the filter and sort are applied automatically, so no execute step. So the answer would be:\n\nStrategies:\n1. Navigate to the Issues page (US1)\n2. Filter and sort to display most recent open issues (US2)\n3. [No third step?]\n\nBut the example had three steps. Maybe the third step is \"View the list of open issues\" which is US5 or US6, but US5 is for individual items. Alternatively, maybe the task is complete after applying the filters and sort. So the user's intent is to check, which is achieved by those steps. So the answer would have two US2 steps. But the example had three steps. Hmm.\n\nAlternatively, maybe the steps are:\n\n1. Navigate to the Issues section (US1)\n2. Apply filter for open issues (US2)\n3. Sort by creation date descending (US2)\n\nBut that's two US2 steps. The output example had three steps. So perhaps the answer is:\n\nStrategies:\n- Navigate to the Issues section (US1)\n- Filter issues to show only open status (US2)\n- Sort the issues by most recent creation date (US2)\n- Review the list to identify the most recent entries (US7)\n\nBut that's four steps. The example had three. Maybe combining the filter and sort into one step. Like \"Filter and sort issues to show most recent open ones\" which is US2. So:\n\nStrategies:\n1. Navigate to Issues (US1)\n2. Filter and sort to display most recent open issues (US2)\n3. Review the list (US7)\n\nBut the example had three steps. So this would align with that. So the universal strategies would be US1, US2, US7.\n\nBut in the example, the third step was US4 (Execute). So perhaps here, after filtering and sorting, the agent needs to execute the action to apply, but in web interfaces, changing the filter or sort is immediate. So maybe no execute step. Therefore, the answer is:\n\n{\n \"task_id\": 46,\n \"strategies\": [\n \"Navigate to the Issues section\",\n \"Filter issues to show only open status\",\n \"Sort issues by most recent creation date\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategies\": [\n \"Navigate To Page/Section\",\n \"Search/Filter/Sort Data\",\n \"Search/Filter/Sort Data\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategy_ids\": [\"US1\", \"US2\", \"US2\"]\n}\n\nBut having two US2 steps. However, maybe the agent can combine the filter and sort into a single step. For example, \"Apply filters and sorting to display most recent open issues\" as one step. Then the strategies would be:\n\nStrategies:\n1. Navigate to Issues (US1)\n2. Configure filters and sorting for open and recent issues (US2)\n3. Execute the action to apply (US4)\n\nBut in web interfaces, applying a filter or sort doesn't require a separate execute step. So maybe not. So the correct answer is three steps with two US2 steps. But the example had three steps with different US. Alternatively, maybe the third step is to view the list, which is US5 or US6. But US5 is for individual items. So perhaps the answer is as above with two US2 steps. But the user's example had three steps. Let me check the example:\n\nExample input was to find top-3 in Jan 2023. The strategies were navigate, configure parameters (date range), generate and review. So US1, US3, US4. So in this case, the steps are navigate, configure (US3), execute (US4). But in our current task, the steps are filter and sort, which are US2. So the answer would have US1, US2, US2. But the example output had three steps. So perhaps the answer should have three steps. Maybe the filter and sort are two separate steps. So the answer is:\n\n{\n \"task_id\": 46,\n \"strategies\": [\n \"Navigate to the Issues section\",\n \"Filter issues to show only open status\",\n \"Sort issues by most recent creation date\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategies\": [\n \"Navigate To Page/Section\",\n \"Search/Filter/Sort Data\",\n \"Search/Filter/Sort Data\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategy_ids\": [\"US1\", \"US2\", \"US2\"]\n}\n\nBut the user's example had three steps with different US. However, in this case, two US2 steps are needed. Alternatively, maybe the third step is to view the list, which is US5. But US5 is for viewing item details. Since the task is to check the list, not individual items, maybe US5 isn't applicable. So the answer is as above.\n\n\n```json\n{\n \"task_id\": 46,\n \"strategies\": [\n \"Navigate to the Issues section\",\n \"Filter issues to show only open status\",\n \"Sort issues by most recent creation date\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategies\": [\n \"Navigate To Page/Section\",\n \"Search/Filter/Sort Data\",\n \"Search/Filter/Sort Data\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategy_ids\": [\"US1\", \"US2\", \"US2\"]\n}\n```",
"model_reasoning": null
},
{
"task_id": 464,
"task_intent": "Update the product description of Antonia Racer Tank to highlight the real user positive reviews by quoting the comments",
"expected_ids": [
"US1",
"US6",
"US10"
],
"actual_ids": [
"US1",
"US2",
"US5",
"US1",
"US2",
"US6",
"US10",
"US4"
],
"correct": false,
"model": "aiproxy/deepseek-reasoner",
"model_output": "\nOkay, let's tackle this task. The user wants to update the product description of the Antonia Racer Tank to highlight positive user reviews by quoting comments. First, I need to figure out the steps involved.\n\nStarting with navigation. The admin site probably has a section where products are managed. So the first step would be to navigate to the product management page or the specific product's page. That's US1: Navigate To Page/Section.\n\nNext, I need to search for the specific product. Since there might be many products, using a search or filter function makes sense. That's US2: Search/Filter/Sort Data. The agent would enter the product name here.\n\nOnce the product is found, the next step is to view its details to access the current description. That's US5: View/Inspect Item Details. Clicking on the product to open its details page.\n\nNow, modifying the description. The agent needs to edit the existing description, adding quotes from positive reviews. This involves updating an existing entry, so US10: Update/Modify Item applies here. They would edit the text, insert the quotes, maybe format them.\n\nAfter making the changes, saving the updated description is crucial. That's an action execution, so US4: Execute Action/Process. Clicking the save or update button.\n\nBut wait, maybe before saving, the agent should check the reviews to find the positive comments. So another step: viewing the reviews. That would be US5 again, inspecting the reviews section. Then extracting the specific comments (US6: Extract/Retrieve Information) to quote them in the description.\n\nHmm, the original answer didn't include extracting the reviews. Let me adjust. The steps would be: navigate to product, search for it, view details, go to reviews, extract positive comments, then edit the description with those quotes, and confirm the update.\n\nBut the user's intent is to update the description by quoting, so the agent needs to first get the reviews. So maybe:\n\n1. Navigate to product management (US1)\n2. Search for Antonia Racer Tank (US2)\n3. View product details (US5)\n4. Navigate to reviews section (US1 again)\n5. Filter reviews to show positive ones (US2)\n6. Extract positive comments (US6)\n7. Update product description with quotes (US10)\n8. Save changes (US4)\n\nBut the original answer might have simplified it. Let me check the universal strategies again. The key steps are navigating to the product, editing its description, and saving. The extraction of reviews might be part of the process but not separate steps if the agent already knows which quotes to use. Maybe the user expects the agent to find the reviews as part of the task. So including steps to access and extract reviews is necessary. But the answer example given earlier didn't include those steps. Maybe the agent is supposed to assume that the positive reviews are already known, but the task says \"by quoting the comments,\" implying that the agent needs to retrieve them first.\n\n Therefore, the correct strategy should include steps to access the reviews, extract the comments, then update the description. So the strategies would be:\n\n- Navigate to the product management section (US1)\n- Search for the specific product (US2)\n- View the product details (US5)\n- Navigate to the product reviews section (US1)\n- Filter or sort reviews to find positive ones (US2)\n- Extract the positive comments (US6)\n- Update the product description with the selected quotes (US10)\n- Save the updated description (US4)\n\nBut maybe the shopping admin has all the reviews accessible from the product details page, so combining some steps. Alternatively, the agent might need to analyze the reviews to pick the best ones (US7: Analyze/Evaluate/Verify Data). But the user's intent is to highlight real user positive reviews, so the agent needs to verify they are positive and select appropriate quotes.\n\nSo the strategies would be:\n\n1. Navigate to the product management page. (US1)\n2. Search for \"Antonia Racer Tank\" to locate the product. (US2)\n3. Access the product's details page. (US5)\n4. Navigate to the product reviews section. (US1)\n5. Filter reviews to show only positive ratings. (US2)\n6. Analyze the reviews to select the most relevant positive comments. (US7)\n7. Extract the chosen comments for inclusion. (US6)\n8. Return to the product description editing section. (US1)\n9. Modify the description to include quotes from the selected reviews. (US10)\n10. Save the updated product description. (US4)\n\nBut this might be too detailed. The original example for a similar task had fewer steps. Let me check the output example again. The example had three steps, but each step might encompass multiple actions. For instance, \"Configure Report Parameters\" might involve multiple settings. So perhaps the answer here can be condensed into key steps, each referencing a universal strategy.\n\nThe main steps would be:\n\n- Navigate to the product's edit section. (US1)\n- Update the description with quotes from positive reviews. (US10)\n- Save the changes. (US4)\n\nBut where do the quotes come from? The agent needs to get them, which implies accessing reviews. So maybe:\n\n1. Navigate to the product's page. (US1)\n2. Search/filter the product reviews to find positive ones. (US2)\n3. Extract the positive comments. (US6)\n4. Navigate to edit product description. (US1)\n5. Update the description with the extracted quotes. (US10)\n6. Save the changes. (US4)\n\nBut the universal strategies don't have a separate \"extract\" step unless it's part of another step. US6 is Extract/Retrieve Information. So including that as a step. So the strategies would be:\n\nStrategies:\n- Navigate to the product management section.\n- Search for the Antonia Racer Tank product.\n- View the product reviews.\n- Filter reviews to display positive comments.\n- Extract relevant positive user reviews.\n- Update the product description with the selected quotes.\n- Save the updated product description.\n\nUniversal strategies: US1, US2, US5, US2, US6, US10, US4.\n\nBut the US5 is for viewing item details. If viewing reviews is part of the product details, then maybe US5 is used when accessing the product details, and then navigating to reviews within that might be another US1. Alternatively, the reviews are a separate section, so navigating to them is US1.\n\nBut perhaps the correct way is:\n\n1. Navigate to product management (US1)\n2. Search for product (US2)\n3. View product details (US5)\n4. Navigate to reviews section (US1)\n5. Filter positive reviews (US2)\n6. Extract comments (US6)\n7. Update description (US10)\n8. Save (US4)\n\nSo the strategies would be:\n\nStrategies:\n1. Navigate to the product management page.\n2. Search for the Antonia Racer Tank product.\n3. Access the product's details.\n4. Navigate to the product reviews section.\n5. Filter reviews to show positive feedback.\n6. Extract positive user comments.\n7. Update the product description with selected quotes.\n8. Save the changes.\n\nUniversal strategies: US1, US2, US5, US1, US2, US6, US10, US4.\n\nBut the user might not need to go through all these steps. Maybe the product's edit page already has a section for reviews, so the steps could be shorter. However, the task requires quoting real user reviews, so the agent must first retrieve them.\n\nTherefore, the final answer should include these steps, each mapped to the appropriate universal strategy.\n\n\n```json\n{\n \"task_id\": 464,\n \"strategies\": [\n \"Navigate to the product management section\",\n \"Search for the Antonia Racer Tank product\",\n \"Access the product's details page\",\n \"Navigate to the product reviews section\",\n \"Filter reviews to display positive comments\",\n \"Extract relevant positive user reviews\",\n \"Update the product description with selected quotes\",\n \"Save the updated product description\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategies\": [\n \"Navigate To Page/Section\",\n \"Search/Filter/Sort Data\",\n \"View/Inspect Item Details\",\n \"Navigate To Page/Section\",\n \"Search/Filter/Sort Data\",\n \"Extract/Retrieve Information\",\n \"Update/Modify Item\",\n \"Execute Action/Process\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategy_ids\": [\"US1\", \"US2\", \"US5\", \"US1\", \"US2\", \"US6\", \"US10\", \"US4\"]\n}\n```",
"model_reasoning": null
},
{
"task_id": 466,
"task_intent": "Add 2 Hawaiian Bamboo Orchid Roots #zc50 - by Discount Hawaiian Gifts to my wish list",
"expected_ids": [
"US2",
"US4"
],
"actual_ids": [
"US1",
"US3",
"US4"
],
"correct": false,
"model": "aiproxy/deepseek-reasoner",
"model_output": "\nOkay, let's tackle this task. The user wants to add 2 Hawaiian Bamboo Orchid Roots #zc50 from Discount Hawaiian Gifts to their wish list on a shopping site.\n\nFirst, I need to figure out the steps involved. The main action is adding an item to the wish list, but there's a quantity specified here. So, the first step would be to navigate to the product page. That makes sense because you can't add an item without finding it first. So, using US1 (Navigate To Page/Section) to get to the product's page.\n\nNext, once on the product page, the user needs to adjust the quantity to 2. That's a configuration step, so US3 (Configure Parameters/Settings) applies here. They might use a quantity selector input or a dropdown to set it to 2.\n\nAfter setting the quantity, the user would then execute the action of adding it to the wish list. That's an action, so US4 (Execute Action/Process) is appropriate. They'd click the \"Add to Wish List\" button or similar.\n\nI should check if there are any other steps. Maybe searching for the product first, but the task mentions the specific product ID, so perhaps the product page is directly accessible. If not, a search step might be needed, but the example given in the problem doesn't include a search step. The example for the bestsellers report used US1, US3, US4, so maybe similar here.\n\nSo the strategies would be: Navigate to the product page, configure quantity to 2, then add to wish list. The universal strategies are US1, US3, US4.\n\n\n```json\n{\n \"task_id\": 466,\n \"strategies\": [\n \"Navigate to the product page for Hawaiian Bamboo Orchid Roots #zc50\",\n \"Configure quantity to 2 in product details\",\n \"Execute 'Add to Wish List' action\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategies\": [\n \"Navigate To Page/Section\",\n \"Configure Parameters/Settings\",\n \"Execute Action/Process\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategy_ids\": [\"US1\", \"US3\", \"US4\"]\n}\n```",
"model_reasoning": null
},
{
"task_id": 471,
"task_intent": "Cancel order 307",
"expected_ids": [
"US1",
"US4"
],
"actual_ids": [
"US1",
"US2",
"US5",
"US4"
],
"correct": false,
"model": "aiproxy/deepseek-reasoner",
"model_output": "\nOkay, let's tackle this task. The user wants to cancel order 307. First, I need to figure out the steps a GUI agent would take in the shopping admin site.\n\nStarting with navigation. The order details page is where you can manage specific orders. So the first step is probably navigating to that order. That's US1: Navigate To Page/Section.\n\nOnce on the order details, there should be an option to cancel. But maybe you need to view the details first to confirm it's the right order. Wait, maybe viewing the details is part of the process. But the main action here is canceling. So after navigating to the order, the agent would execute the cancel action. But sometimes, there's a button to cancel, which would be US4: Execute Action/Process.\n\nWait, but before executing, maybe you need to check if the order is eligible for cancellation. But the task is straightforward: cancel order 307. So the steps would be: navigate to the order, then cancel it. But how do you get to the specific order? Maybe you need to search for order 307 first. So perhaps:\n\n1. Use search to find order 307 (US2: Search/Filter/Sort Data)\n2. Open the order (US5: View/Inspect Item Details)\n3. Execute the cancel action (US4: Execute Action/Process)\n\nAlternatively, if there's a direct way to input the order number and cancel, but typically in admin interfaces, you search for the order, open it, then cancel. So the strategies would be:\n\n- Search for order 307 using the order ID filter (US2)\n- Open the order details (US5)\n- Click the cancel button (US4)\n\nBut maybe the steps are: navigate to the orders section, search for the order, then cancel. Let me check the universal strategies. US1 is navigate to the page, US2 is search, US5 is view details, US4 is execute action. So the strategies would be:\n\n1. Navigate to the Orders section (US1)\n2. Search for order 307 (US2)\n3. Open order 307 details (US5)\n4. Execute cancellation (US4)\n\nBut maybe the first step is navigating to the order management page. Then search. Then cancel. So the strategies would be:\n\n[\"Navigate to Order Management page\", \"Search for order 307\", \"Cancel order 307\"]\n\nBut the universal strategies would be US1, US2, US4. Alternatively, opening the order details (US5) might be necessary before canceling. So the steps would be:\n\n1. Navigate to Orders (US1)\n2. Search for order 307 (US2)\n3. View order details (US5)\n4. Execute cancel (US4)\n\nBut maybe the cancellation is done directly from the list after searching, without viewing details. But usually, you have to go into the order to cancel. So including US5 makes sense. So the strategies would be:\n\n- Navigate to Orders Section (US1)\n- Search/Filter for Order 307 (US2)\n- Access Order 307 Details (US5)\n- Initiate Cancel Action (US4)\n\nSo the universal strategies are US1, US2, US5, US4. But the example output for a similar task might have fewer steps. Let me check the example given. In the example, the task was to generate a report, and the steps were navigate, configure, execute. So for canceling an order, perhaps:\n\nStrategies:\n\n1. Navigate to the order details page for order 307 (US1)\n2. Execute the cancellation (US4)\n\nBut how do you get to the order details? Maybe you need to search first. So the steps would be:\n\n1. Navigate to the Orders page (US1)\n2. Search for order 307 (US2)\n3. Open order 307 details (US5)\n4. Cancel the order (US4)\n\nSo the universal strategies would be US1, US2, US5, US4. But maybe the search and opening details can be combined. Alternatively, if there's a direct way to input the order number in the URL or a quick search, but assuming standard GUI steps, the four steps make sense. However, the user might have a \"Cancel\" button in the list view after filtering, but that's less common. Usually, you have to go into the details to cancel. So the strategies would be:\n\n[\"Navigate to Orders Management\", \"Search for Order 307\", \"View Order 307 Details\", \"Cancel Order 307\"]\n\nAnd the universal strategies would be US1, US2, US5, US4. But the output example for task 4 had three steps. Maybe in this case, the steps can be simplified. Let me think again. The user's intent is to cancel order 307. The steps required are:\n\n- Go to the orders section (US1)\n- Find the specific order (US2: search/filter)\n- Open it (US5)\n- Click cancel (US4)\n\nSo four steps. But maybe the search and view can be considered part of the same step? No, they are separate actions. So the strategies would be:\n\n1. Navigate to Orders Section (US1)\n2. Search for Order 307 (US2)\n3. Open Order 307 Details (US5)\n4. Execute Cancel Action (US4)\n\nBut the output example had three steps. Maybe combining steps. For example, \"Search and access Order 307 details\" but that's two US strategies. Alternatively, perhaps the steps are:\n\n1. Navigate to Order Management (US1)\n2. Access Order 307's details (which might involve searching, but if you can directly input the order number, maybe not. But in most GUIs, you have to search or filter to find the order. So US2 is needed.\n\nAlternatively, maybe the steps are:\n\n- Navigate to the specific order's details page (if there's a direct URL, but the agent would need to construct it, which might not be possible. So more likely, the agent has to search.\n\nSo the final answer would be:\n\nStrategies: [\"Navigate to Orders Page\", \"Search for Order 307\", \"Open Order 307 Details\", \"Cancel Order 307\"]\n\nUniversal strategies: US1, US2, US5, US4\n\nBut the output example for task 4 had three steps. Maybe in this case, the agent can combine steps. For example, \"Navigate to Order 307's details\" which would require knowing the direct path, but that's not typical. So the correct approach is to include all four steps. However, perhaps the \"search\" and \"view details\" can be considered part of the same step. But according to the universal strategies, each is a separate US. So the answer should include all four steps with their respective US.\n\n\n```json\n{\n \"task_id\": 471,\n \"strategies\": [\n \"Navigate to Orders Management Section\",\n \"Search/Filter for Order 307\",\n \"Open Order 307 Details\",\n \"Execute Order Cancellation\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategies\": [\n \"Navigate To Page/Section\",\n \"Search/Filter/Sort Data\",\n \"View/Inspect Item Details\",\n \"Execute Action/Process\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategy_ids\": [\"US1\", \"US2\", \"US5\", \"US4\"]\n}\n```",
"model_reasoning": null
},
{
"task_id": 476,
"task_intent": "Set up a new, empty repository with the name awesome_llm_reading?",
"expected_ids": [
"US4",
"US3",
"US9"
],
"actual_ids": [
"US1",
"US3",
"US4"
],
"correct": false,
"model": "aiproxy/deepseek-reasoner",
"model_output": "\nOkay, let's tackle this task. The user wants to set up a new, empty repository named \"awesome_llm_reading\" on GitLab. First, I need to figure out the steps involved in creating a repository here.\n\nStarting with navigation. On GitLab, creating a new project is done from the dashboard or a menu. So the first step would be navigating to the page where you can create a new project. That aligns with US1 (Navigate To Page/Section).\n\nNext, when creating the repository, there are settings to configure. The user wants it empty, so they probably don't want a README initialized. In GitLab, when creating a project, there's an option to skip initializing files. So configuring these parameters would be US3 (Configure Parameters/Settings).\n\nFinally, executing the action by clicking the create button. That's US4 (Execute Action/Process). \n\nSo the strategies would be: navigate to the new project page, configure the name and settings (like making it empty), then create it. The universal strategies used are US1, US3, US4.\n\n\n```json\n{\n \"task_id\": 476,\n \"strategies\": [\n \"Navigate to the 'New Project' creation page\",\n \"Configure repository name as 'awesome_llm_reading' and ensure empty initialization\",\n \"Create the repository with specified settings\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategies\": [\n \"Navigate To Page/Section\",\n \"Configure Parameters/Settings\",\n \"Execute Action/Process\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategy_ids\": [\"US1\", \"US3\", \"US4\"]\n}\n```",
"model_reasoning": null
},
{
"task_id": 48,
"task_intent": "Today is 6/12/2023. Tell me how many fulfilled orders I have over the past three days, and the total amount of money I spent.",
"expected_ids": [
"US1",
"US8",
"US7"
],
"actual_ids": [
"US1",
"US3",
"US2",
"US4",
"US6"
],
"correct": false,
"model": "aiproxy/deepseek-reasoner",
"model_output": "\nOkay, let's tackle this task. The user wants to know the number of fulfilled orders over the past three days and the total amount spent. Today is June 12, 2023, so the past three days would be June 9, 10, and 11. \n\nFirst, I need to figure out where to get this information. Since the site is \"shopping,\" probably the admin or order management section. The user would need to navigate to the order history or a report section where they can filter orders by status and date.\n\nNext, they need to set the date range to the past three days. That's configuring parameters. Then, apply a filter for fulfilled orders. After that, generate the report. Once the data is displayed, they have to extract the count of orders and the total amount. Maybe there's a summary section that shows totals. \n\nWait, the steps would be: go to the orders page, set the date from June 9 to June 11, filter by fulfilled status, maybe run the report, then read the numbers. So the strategies would involve navigating, configuring dates and status, executing the report, and then extracting the info. Also, verifying the data is correct. Let me check the universal strategies. \n\nUS1 for navigating to the right page. US3 for setting the date and status filters. US4 to generate the report. Then US6 to extract the numbers. Maybe US7 to verify, but the example didn't include that. The output example for task 4 used US1, US3, US4. So here, similar steps. Let me structure that.\n\n\n```json\n{\n \"task_id\": 48,\n \"strategies\": [\n \"Navigate to Order History/Report Section\",\n \"Configure date filter for the past three days (6/9/2023 - 6/11/2023)\",\n \"Filter orders by 'Fulfilled' status\",\n \"Generate the filtered order report\",\n \"Extract the number of fulfilled orders and total spent amount from the report\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategies\": [\n \"Navigate To Page/Section\",\n \"Configure Parameters/Settings\",\n \"Search/Filter/Sort Data\",\n \"Execute Action/Process\",\n \"Extract/Retrieve Information\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategy_ids\": [\"US1\", \"US3\", \"US2\", \"US4\", \"US6\"]\n}\n```",
"model_reasoning": null
},
{
"task_id": 485,
"task_intent": "Vinta wants to check my dotfile configurations. Please invite him to the repo as a guest.",
"expected_ids": [
"US1",
"US1",
"US4"
],
"actual_ids": [
"US1",
"US1",
"US1",
"US3",
"US4"
],
"correct": false,
"model": "aiproxy/deepseek-reasoner",
"model_output": "\nOkay, let's tackle this task. The user wants to invite Vinta to their GitLab repo as a guest. First, I need to figure out the steps involved in doing that on GitLab.\n\nSo, the first thing is to navigate to the correct repository. That's probably under the \"Projects\" section, so the user would go to their projects and select the specific repo. That aligns with US1 (Navigate To Page/Section).\n\nNext, once in the repo, they need to access the settings where members can be managed. GitLab usually has a settings option in the left sidebar. So navigating to the project settings would be another US1 step.\n\nWithin the settings, there's a section for managing members. The user would go to the \"Members\" section here, which is again US1.\n\nThen, they need to invite Vinta. This involves entering his username or email, selecting the guest role, and sending the invitation. Configuring these parameters falls under US3 (Configure Parameters/Settings).\n\nFinally, executing the action by clicking the invite button would be US4 (Execute Action/Process).\n\nI should check if all steps are covered. Navigating to the repo, settings, members, then configuring and inviting. Yes, that makes sense. No need for other strategies like searching or deleting here. The main actions are navigation, configuration, and execution.\n\n\n```json\n{\n \"task_id\": 485,\n \"strategies\": [\n \"Navigate to the target repository in GitLab\",\n \"Access repository settings\",\n \"Go to the Members management section\",\n \"Configure Vinta's username/email and set role to Guest\",\n \"Send invitation to Vinta\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategies\": [\n \"Navigate To Page/Section\",\n \"Navigate To Page/Section\",\n \"Navigate To Page/Section\",\n \"Configure Parameters/Settings\",\n \"Execute Action/Process\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategy_ids\": [\"US1\", \"US1\", \"US1\", \"US3\", \"US4\"]\n}\n```",
"model_reasoning": null
},
{
"task_id": 488,
"task_intent": "Change the page title of \"Home Page\" page on my site to \"This is the home page!! Leave here!!\".",
"expected_ids": [
"US1",
"US10"
],
"actual_ids": [
"US1",
"US2",
"US5",
"US10",
"US4"
],
"correct": false,
"model": "aiproxy/deepseek-reasoner",
"model_output": "\nOkay, let's tackle this task. The user wants to change the page title of the \"Home Page\" to a new one. First, I need to figure out the steps involved.\n\nStarting with navigation. The user is on the shopping site's admin panel. They probably need to go to the section where pages are managed. So, the first step would be navigating to the Pages or Site Pages section. That's US1: Navigate To Page/Section.\n\nNext, they need to find the specific \"Home Page\" to edit. Maybe there's a list of pages, so they might search or filter to locate it quickly. But the example given in the strategies includes searching, so maybe US2: Search/Filter/Sort Data applies here. They could search for \"Home Page\" to find it faster.\n\nOnce they find the Home Page, they need to view or edit its details. That would be US5: View/Inspect Item Details. Clicking on the page to open its details.\n\nThen, modifying the title. That's an existing item, so updating it falls under US10: Update/Modify Item. They change the title field to the new text.\n\nAfter editing, they have to save the changes. Saving is an action, so US4: Execute Action/Process. Clicking the save or update button.\n\nSo the strategies would be: Navigate to Pages section, search for Home Page, open its details, edit the title, save changes. The corresponding universal strategies are US1, US2, US5, US10, US4.\n\n\n```json\n{\n \"task_id\": 488,\n \"strategies\": [\n \"Navigate to the Pages/Site Pages section\",\n \"Search for the \\\"Home Page\\\" in the pages list\",\n \"Open the \\\"Home Page\\\" details for editing\",\n \"Modify the page title field to \\\"This is the home page!! Leave here!!\\\"\",\n \"Save/Update the page changes\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategies\": [\n \"Navigate To Page/Section\",\n \"Search/Filter/Sort Data\",\n \"View/Inspect Item Details\",\n \"Update/Modify Item\",\n \"Execute Action/Process\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategy_ids\": [\"US1\", \"US2\", \"US5\", \"US10\", \"US4\"]\n}\n```",
"model_reasoning": null
},
{
"task_id": 497,
"task_intent": "Update order #307 with the DHL tracking number 24353446464",
"expected_ids": [
"US1",
"US10"
],
"actual_ids": [
"US1",
"US10",
"US4"
],
"correct": false,
"model": "aiproxy/deepseek-reasoner",
"model_output": "\nOkay, let's tackle this task. The user wants to update order #307 with a DHL tracking number. First, I need to figure out the steps involved.\n\nStarting with the shopping admin site, the first step is probably navigating to the specific order. That would be US1, Navigate To Page/Section. Then, once on the order details, they need to modify the tracking info. Updating an existing item is US10. Finally, saving the changes would be executing an action, which is US4. So the strategies would be: navigate to the order, update the tracking number, and save. The corresponding universal strategies are US1, US10, US4.\n\n\n```json\n{\n \"task_id\": 497,\n \"strategies\": [\n \"Navigate to Order #307 Details Page\",\n \"Update Tracking Number Field with DHL 24353446464\",\n \"Save Changes to Order\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategies\": [\n \"Navigate To Page/Section\",\n \"Update/Modify Item\",\n \"Execute Action/Process\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategy_ids\": [\"US1\", \"US10\", \"US4\"]\n}\n```",
"model_reasoning": null
},
{
"task_id": 505,
"task_intent": "Make all Aeno capri as out of stock",
"expected_ids": [
"US1",
"US2",
"US10"
],
"actual_ids": [
"US1",
"US2",
"US10",
"US4"
],
"correct": false,
"model": "aiproxy/deepseek-reasoner",
"model_output": "\nOkay, let's tackle this task. The user wants to set all Aeno capri products as out of stock in the shopping admin site. First, I need to figure out the steps involved.\n\nStarting with navigation. The admin probably has a section where products are listed. So the first step would be to go to the product management page. That's US1, Navigate To Page/Section.\n\nNext, they need to find all Aeno capri products. Using a search or filter function makes sense here. Maybe there's a search bar where you can input the product name or a filter for product type. That's US2, Search/Filter/Sort Data.\n\nOnce the products are displayed, the user needs to modify each of them. Since they all need to be set to out of stock, maybe there's a bulk edit option. If not, each product would have to be edited individually. But the task says \"all,\" so bulk action is more efficient. Updating the stock status falls under US10, Update/Modify Item.\n\nAfter changing the stock status, saving the changes is crucial. That's executing the action, which is US4, Execute Action/Process.\n\nWait, but bulk editing might involve selecting all products first. Do I need a step for that? Or does the filter automatically apply to all shown items? If the filter shows all Aeno capri products, then selecting all and applying the change would be part of the update step. So the strategies would be: navigate to products, filter for Aeno capri, select all, update stock status to out of stock, save. But the universal strategies might be US1, US2, US10, US4.\n\nAlternatively, if there's a bulk edit feature, configuring the parameters (like setting stock to out of stock) would be US3, but I think US10 is more about modifying the item's attributes. Hmm. Let me check the universal strategies again. US10 is Update/Modify Item, which includes changing attributes. So modifying the stock status is US10. Then executing the save is US4.\n\nSo the steps are: navigate to products page (US1), filter to show Aeno capri (US2), update stock status to out of stock (US10), execute save (US4). That makes sense. The user might have to configure the filter parameters, which is part of US2. Then modify each item's stock, but if it's a bulk edit, it's still US10. So the strategies would be those four steps with the corresponding US IDs.\n\n\n```json\n{\n \"task_id\": 505,\n \"strategies\": [\n \"Navigate to Product Management page\",\n \"Filter products by name 'Aeno capri'\",\n \"Update stock status of filtered products to 'Out of Stock'\",\n \"Save changes to apply updates\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategies\": [\n \"Navigate To Page/Section\",\n \"Search/Filter/Sort Data\",\n \"Update/Modify Item\",\n \"Execute Action/Process\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategy_ids\": [\"US1\", \"US2\", \"US10\", \"US4\"]\n}\n```",
"model_reasoning": null
},
{
"task_id": 506,
"task_intent": "Buy the highest rated product from the meat substitute category within a budget between 100 and 200.",
"expected_ids": [
"US1",
"US2",
"US4",
"US4",
"US4"
],
"actual_ids": [
"US1",
"US2",
"US5",
"US9",
"US4"
],
"correct": false,
"model": "aiproxy/deepseek-reasoner",
"model_output": "\nOkay, let's tackle this task. The user wants to buy the highest-rated product in the meat substitute category with a budget between 100 and 200. First, I need to figure out the steps they'd take on a shopping site.\n\nStarting with navigation: they probably need to go to the meat substitute category. That's US1, Navigate To Page/Section. Then, they might use filters to set the price range between 100 and 200, which is US2. Also, sorting by rating (highest first) would be part of US2 as well. Once the products are filtered and sorted, they need to view the top product's details (US5) to check if it's the best. Then, they add it to the cart (US9, Create Item) and proceed to checkout (US4, Execute Action). \n\nWait, adding to cart is creating an item? Hmm, maybe. Alternatively, adding to cart could be considered an action. But according to the universal strategies, US9 is Create Item, which involves adding a new entity. Adding to cart is creating a cart item, so that fits. Checkout would be executing the purchase process, which is US4. So the strategies would be navigate, filter/sort, view details, add to cart, checkout. The corresponding US IDs are 1, 2, 5, 9, 4. Let me check the examples. For example, US9's example is creating a project, but adding to cart is similar in that it's creating a new item in the cart. Yes, that makes sense. So the final strategies would be those steps.\n\n\n```json\n{\n \"task_id\": 506,\n \"strategies\": [\n \"Navigate to the meat substitute category page\",\n \"Apply price filter (100-200) and sort products by highest rating\",\n \"View details of the top-rated product\",\n \"Add the product to the cart\",\n \"Proceed to checkout and complete purchase\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategies\": [\n \"Navigate To Page/Section\",\n \"Search/Filter/Sort Data\",\n \"View/Inspect Item Details\",\n \"Create Item\",\n \"Execute Action/Process\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategy_ids\": [\"US1\", \"US2\", \"US5\", \"US9\", \"US4\"]\n}\n```",
"model_reasoning": null
},
{
"task_id": 509,
"task_intent": "Buy the best rating product from \"Men's shoe\" category with at least 5 reviews and the product is least expensive",
"expected_ids": [
"US1",
"US2",
"US2",
"US4",
"US4"
],
"actual_ids": [
"US1",
"US2",
"US2",
"US5",
"US4"
],
"correct": false,
"model": "aiproxy/deepseek-reasoner",
"model_output": "\nOkay, let's tackle this task. The user wants to buy the best-rated product in the Men's shoe category that has at least 5 reviews and is the least expensive. Hmm, first, I need to figure out the steps a GUI agent would take on a shopping site.\n\nStarting with navigation. The user needs to get to the Men's shoe category. So, navigating to that section makes sense. That's US1: Navigate To Page/Section.\n\nNext, once in the category, the agent should filter or sort the products. They need to set filters for rating (probably 4 stars or higher) and minimum reviews (5). Also, sort by price low to high. That's US2: Search/Filter/Sort Data. Applying these filters would narrow down the options.\n\nAfter filtering, the agent needs to look at the sorted list. The top item here would be the least expensive with the best rating and enough reviews. Then, select that product to view details, which is US5: View/Inspect Item Details. Maybe check the reviews count and rating again to confirm.\n\nFinally, execute the purchase. That's US4: Execute Action/Process, like clicking the \"Buy Now\" button.\n\nWait, are there any other steps? Maybe verifying the product meets all criteria before purchasing. But the filtering should handle that. So the main strategies are navigate, filter/sort, view details, and buy. Let me check the universal strategies again. Yes, US1, US2, US5, US4. That covers all the necessary actions.\n\n\n```json\n{\n \"task_id\": 509,\n \"strategies\": [\n \"Navigate to the 'Men's Shoe' category page\",\n \"Filter products by minimum 5 reviews and sort by highest rating\",\n \"Sort remaining results by price (low to high)\",\n \"View details of the top-listed product to verify criteria\",\n \"Purchase the selected product\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategies\": [\n \"Navigate To Page/Section\",\n \"Search/Filter/Sort Data\",\n \"Search/Filter/Sort Data\",\n \"View/Inspect Item Details\",\n \"Execute Action/Process\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategy_ids\": [\"US1\", \"US2\", \"US2\", \"US5\", \"US4\"]\n}\n```",
"model_reasoning": null
},
{
"task_id": 514,
"task_intent": "Add a white desk to my wish list.",
"expected_ids": [
"US2",
"US4"
],
"actual_ids": [
"US2",
"US5",
"US9"
],
"correct": false,
"model": "aiproxy/deepseek-reasoner",
"model_output": "\nOkay, let's tackle this task. The user wants to add a white desk to their wish list on a shopping site. First, I need to figure out the steps involved.\n\nSo, starting with navigation. The user probably needs to go to the section where desks are listed. Maybe they can search for \"white desk\" using the search bar. That would be using the Search/Filter/Sort Data strategy (US2). Once they find the desk, they need to view its details to make sure it's the right one. That's View/Inspect Item Details (US5). Then, on the product page, there should be an option to add it to the wish list. Adding to the wish list is creating a new item in their list, so that's Create Item (US9). \n\nWait, but sometimes adding to a wish list might be considered an update if the wish list already exists. But in most cases, adding an item to a list is creating a new entry. So US9 makes sense here. Let me check the universal strategies again. Yes, US9 is for creating a new entity like adding an item to a list. \n\nSo the steps would be: search for the product, view its details, then add it to the wish list. The corresponding strategies are US2, US5, and US9. That should cover the process.\n\n\n```json\n{\n \"task_id\": 514,\n \"strategies\": [\n \"Search for 'white desk' in the product catalog\",\n \"View the details of the selected white desk product\",\n \"Add the product to the wish list\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategies\": [\n \"Search/Filter/Sort Data\",\n \"View/Inspect Item Details\",\n \"Create Item\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategy_ids\": [\"US2\", \"US5\", \"US9\"]\n}\n```",
"model_reasoning": null
},
{
"task_id": 516,
"task_intent": "Add this product to my wishlist",
"expected_ids": [
"US1",
"US1",
"US4"
],
"actual_ids": [
"US1",
"US4",
"US7"
],
"correct": false,
"model": "aiproxy/deepseek-reasoner",
"model_output": "\nOkay, let's tackle this task. The user wants to add a product to their wishlist on a shopping site. First, I need to figure out the steps involved.\n\nSo, the main action here is adding a product to the wishlist. On most shopping sites, when you're viewing a product, there's usually a button like \"Add to Wishlist\" somewhere on the page. So the first step would be to navigate to the specific product's page. That makes sense because you can't add it to the wishlist unless you're on that product's detail page.\n\nOnce on the product page, the next step is to find and click the \"Add to Wishlist\" button. That's a direct action, so executing that click would be the second step. But wait, sometimes after clicking, there might be a confirmation or a message that it's been added. The user might need to check if the action was successful. So maybe a third step is to verify that the product is now in the wishlist.\n\nLooking at the universal strategies, navigating to the product page would be US1 (Navigate To Page/Section). Clicking the button is US4 (Execute Action/Process). Then verifying the addition could be US7 (Analyze/Evaluate/Verify Data) to check if it's in the wishlist. Alternatively, maybe US6 (Extract/Retrieve Information) if we need to confirm by looking at the wishlist. But since the task is just to add it, maybe verification is part of the process. Hmm, but the example given in the output example for a similar task included generating a report and then reviewing it, which used US4 and then US7. So maybe here, after executing the action, verifying it's added would be US7.\n\nSo the strategies would be: Navigate to the product page, click add to wishlist, confirm it's added. The universal strategies would be US1, US4, US7. Let me check the universal strategies again. US7 is about analyzing or verifying data, which fits checking if the product is in the wishlist. So that makes sense.\n\n\n```json\n{\n \"task_id\": 516,\n \"strategies\": [\n \"Navigate to the product details page\",\n \"Click the 'Add to Wishlist' button\",\n \"Verify the product is added to the wishlist\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategies\": [\n \"Navigate To Page/Section\",\n \"Execute Action/Process\",\n \"Analyze/Evaluate/Verify Data\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategy_ids\": [\"US1\", \"US4\", \"US7\"]\n}\n```",
"model_reasoning": null
},
{
"task_id": 521,
"task_intent": "Subscribe to the newsletter of OneStopMarket",
"expected_ids": [
"US1",
"US10"
],
"actual_ids": [
"US1",
"US3",
"US4"
],
"correct": false,
"model": "aiproxy/deepseek-reasoner",
"model_output": "\nOkay, let's tackle this task. The user wants to subscribe to the newsletter of OneStopMarket on a shopping site. First, I need to figure out the steps involved.\n\nHmm, the first thing would be to navigate to the section where newsletter subscription is available. That's probably a newsletter signup page or a section on the homepage. So that's US1: Navigate To Page/Section.\n\nNext, the user might need to enter their email address. That's configuring parameters, like filling out a form. So US3: Configure Parameters/Settings.\n\nThen, they have to submit the form, which is executing an action. That's US4: Execute Action/Process.\n\nWait, maybe there's a confirmation step? But the task just says subscribe, so maybe after submitting, it's done. Let me check the universal strategies again. The main steps are navigating, entering details, and submitting. So the strategies would be: Navigate to Newsletter Section, Enter Email Address, Submit Subscription. The corresponding US IDs are US1, US3, US4. That should cover it.\n\n\n```json\n{\n \"task_id\": 521,\n \"strategies\": [\n \"Navigate to Newsletter Subscription Section\",\n \"Enter Email Address for Subscription\",\n \"Submit Newsletter Subscription\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategies\": [\n \"Navigate To Page/Section\",\n \"Configure Parameters/Settings\",\n \"Execute Action/Process\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategy_ids\": [\"US1\", \"US3\", \"US4\"]\n}\n```",
"model_reasoning": null
},
{
"task_id": 524,
"task_intent": "Star the top eight most stared repos in Gitlab",
"expected_ids": [
"US1",
"US4"
],
"actual_ids": [
"US1",
"US2",
"US8",
"US4"
],
"correct": false,
"model": "aiproxy/deepseek-reasoner",
"model_output": "\nOkay, let's tackle this task. The user wants to star the top eight most starred repos in Gitlab. First, I need to figure out the steps a GUI agent would take.\n\nStarting with navigation. The user probably needs to go to a section where all repositories are listed, maybe sorted by stars. So the first step would be navigating to the Explore or Repositories page. That's US1: Navigate To Page/Section.\n\nNext, they need to sort the repos by the number of stars. Gitlab might have a sort dropdown, so selecting \"Most Stars\" would make sense. That's US2: Search/Filter/Sort Data.\n\nThen, the agent has to go through the list. Since they need the top eight, maybe the first page has enough, but if not, pagination might be needed. So navigating through pages using pagination controls. That's US8: Navigate Within Data/Results.\n\nAfter locating each repo, the agent needs to star them. For each of the top eight, clicking the star button. Since this is an action, it's US4: Execute Action/Process. But since it's done eight times, maybe the strategy mentions selecting and starring each of the top eight.\n\nPutting it all together: navigate to the right page, sort by stars, maybe paginate if needed, then star each of the top eight. The universal strategies involved are US1, US2, US8, and US4.\n\n\n```json\n{\n \"task_id\": 524,\n \"strategies\": [\n \"Navigate to the Explore/Repositories section\",\n \"Sort repositories by 'Most Stars'\",\n \"Navigate through paginated results if required\",\n \"Star the first eight repositories in the sorted list\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategies\": [\n \"Navigate To Page/Section\",\n \"Search/Filter/Sort Data\",\n \"Navigate Within Data/Results\",\n \"Execute Action/Process\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategy_ids\": [\"US1\", \"US2\", \"US8\", \"US4\"]\n}\n```",
"model_reasoning": null
},
{
"task_id": 528,
"task_intent": "Draft a refund message via their \"contact us\" form for the phone screen protector I bought March 2023. It broke after three days of use. The shop requires the order id, the reason and the amount to refund in the message. Don't submit yet",
"expected_ids": [
"US5",
"US1",
"US4"
],
"actual_ids": [
"US1",
"US3",
"US7"
],
"correct": false,
"model": "aiproxy/deepseek-reasoner",
"model_output": "\nOkay, let's tackle this task. The user needs to draft a refund message through the \"contact us\" form for a phone screen protector bought in March 2023 that broke after three days. The shop requires the order ID, reason, and refund amount. They don't want to submit it yet.\n\nFirst, I need to figure out the steps. The user is on a shopping site, so they probably need to navigate to the contact us section. That's US1: Navigate To Page/Section. Then, they have to locate the specific form for refunds, which might involve selecting a category or type from a dropdown. That could be part of US2: Search/Filter/Sort Data if there's a need to filter options, or maybe just part of navigating. \n\nNext, they need to input the required information: order ID, reason (broken after three days), and refund amount. Since this involves filling out form fields, that's US3: Configure Parameters/Settings. They also need to draft the message with those details, which is part of the same step. \n\nThe user doesn't want to submit, so the final step is just drafting without hitting submit. So no execution action like US4. Instead, maybe just verifying the info, but the main action is entering data. So the strategies would be navigate to contact form, fill in the required details, and draft the message without submitting. \n\nChecking the universal strategies, US1 for navigating, US3 for configuring the form, and maybe US9 if creating a new message, but since it's a form, US3 makes more sense. So the strategies would be:\n\n1. Navigate to the \"Contact Us\" form section (US1)\n2. Input order ID, reason, and refund amount in the form (US3)\n3. Draft the refund message without submitting (maybe US3 again or US9? Wait, US9 is Create Item, which could apply here as drafting a message is creating a new item. But the example for US9 is creating a project, so maybe this is similar. Alternatively, since it's filling a form, US3 is more about configuring settings. Hmm. The task is to draft a message via a form, so the form fields are part of configuring the parameters. So maybe US3 is correct here. The third step is just not submitting, which is part of the process but doesn't require a separate strategy. So the strategies would be navigate, configure the form with the required info, and then stop before submitting. So the strategies are:\n\n- Navigate to the \"Contact Us\" form (US1)\n- Input the required refund details (order ID, reason, amount) (US3)\n- Draft the refund message without submission (this is part of the same form, so maybe US3 covers it. Or maybe US9 if creating a message is considered creating an item. But since the user is drafting via a form, it's part of the configuration. So maybe the strategies are US1, US3. But the output example for a similar task used US1, US3, US4 but didn't submit. Wait, the example had \"Generate and Review\" but didn't submit. Here, the user is drafting but not submitting. So maybe the third strategy is just part of US3, or perhaps US9. Alternatively, maybe the third step is part of US3. Let me check the universal strategies again.\n\nUS9 is Create Item, which involves filling out a form and submitting. But here, the user is not submitting. So maybe the act of filling the form is part of US9, but since they aren't submitting, it's just configuring. Hmm. The example given for US3 is configuring a date range, which is part of setting parameters. So inputting the order ID, reason, and amount into the form fields would be US3. Then drafting the message itself would also be part of US3. So the strategies would be:\n\n1. Navigate to Contact Us form (US1)\n2. Configure the form with order ID, reason, refund amount (US3)\n3. Draft the message (still part of US3, as it's text input)\nBut maybe the message drafting is part of the same step. So the strategies are:\n\n- Navigate to the \"Contact Us\" page (US1)\n- Fill in the required refund details (order ID, reason, amount) in the contact form (US3)\n- Compose the refund message without submitting (US3 again? Or US9?)\n\nAlternatively, maybe the entire process of filling the form is US9: Create Item, but since they aren't submitting, it's just drafting. But US9 typically involves submitting. Since the user is drafting but not submitting, perhaps it's part of US3. So the strategies would be US1 and US3. But the output example had three steps. Let me see the example again.\n\nIn the example, the task was to generate a report, and the strategies were navigate, configure, execute. Here, the user isn't executing, so maybe the steps are navigate, configure (input data), and then perhaps a step to verify or draft, but since they aren't submitting, maybe the third step is just part of the configuration. Alternatively, maybe the third step is to draft the message, which is part of the form. So perhaps the strategies are:\n\n1. Navigate to the \"Contact Us\" form section (US1)\n2. Input the order ID, reason for refund, and requested amount into the form fields (US3)\n3. Draft the refund message with the provided details without submitting (US3 again, as it's part of configuring the form)\n\nBut the output example had three steps with three US strategies. So maybe in this case, the three steps are:\n\n- Navigate to Contact Us (US1)\n- Locate and access the refund request form (maybe US1 again, but perhaps US2 if they need to filter or select a category)\nWait, the user might need to select a refund option from a dropdown in the contact form. For example, the contact form might have a subject dropdown where they choose \"Refund Request\". So that could be US2: Search/Filter/Sort Data if they have to select from options. Alternatively, it's part of navigating. Hmm.\n\nAlternatively, the steps could be:\n\n1. Navigate to the \"Contact Us\" page (US1)\n2. Select the refund request option from the contact form (US2 if it's a filter, or US3 if it's a parameter)\n3. Input the required details (order ID, reason, amount) (US3)\n4. Draft the message without submitting (US3)\n\nBut the user's intent is to draft the message via the contact form. So maybe the steps are:\n\n- Navigate to the contact us form (US1)\n- Select the refund request category (if needed) (US2 or US3)\n- Fill in the order ID, reason, and amount (US3)\n- Compose the message (US3)\n- Do not submit (no action needed)\n\nBut how to structure this into strategies. The example had three steps. Let's see. The user needs to go to contact us, input the required info, and draft the message. So maybe three steps:\n\n1. Navigate to the \"Contact Us\" form section (US1)\n2. Configure the refund request parameters (order ID, reason, amount) (US3)\n3. Draft the refund message without submission (US3)\n\nBut maybe the third step is part of the same configuration. Alternatively, if the message is a text field, then it's part of the form configuration. So all three data points (order ID, reason, amount) plus the message are part of the same US3 step. But the problem is the message needs to include those details. So the user has to input the order ID, reason, and amount into the form fields, and then draft a message that includes those details. Wait, the shop requires the order ID, reason, and amount in the message. So maybe the form has specific fields for order ID, reason, and amount, and the message is a separate field. Or perhaps the message is the body where they need to include those details. \n\nIf the form has separate fields for order ID, refund amount, and reason, then filling those is US3. Then the message body would be part of the same form. So the user would input the order ID in its field, the reason in a dropdown or text field, the amount in a number field, and then the message body would explain the situation. But the task says the shop requires the order ID, reason, and amount in the message. So maybe the message body must include those, even if there are separate fields. Or perhaps the form has only a message field where all details must be included. \n\nAssuming the form has a message field where the user needs to write the refund request including order ID, reason, and amount, then the steps would be:\n\n1. Navigate to Contact Us form (US1)\n2. Compose the refund message including order ID, reason, and amount (US3)\n3. Do not submit (no action)\n\nBut the example output for a similar task had three steps. Let's think again. The user needs to draft a message via the contact form. The steps would be:\n\n- Go to the contact us page (US1)\n- Locate the refund request section or form (maybe US1 again, but if it's a separate section, perhaps another navigation)\n- Fill in the required details (order ID, reason, amount) in the appropriate fields (US3)\n- Write the message body explaining the issue (US3)\n- Ensure not to submit (but that's an instruction, not a step)\n\nAlternatively, if the contact form has a subject line and a message body, the user might need to select \"Refund Request\" as the subject (US2 or US3), input order ID, reason, amount in the message body (US3). \n\nSo the strategies could be:\n\n1. Navigate to the \"Contact Us\" page (US1)\n2. Select \"Refund Request\" as the inquiry type (US3)\n3. Input order ID, reason, and refund amount in the message (US3)\n\nBut maybe selecting the inquiry type is part of US3 (configuring parameters). So the three steps would be US1, US3, US3. But the output example used three steps with US1, US3, US4. However, in this case, there's no execution (US4) because the user doesn't submit. So the strategies would be:\n\n1. Navigate to the \"Contact Us\" form (US1)\n2. Configure the refund request with order ID, reason, and amount (US3)\n3. Draft the refund message without submitting (US3)\n\nBut maybe the third step is redundant. Alternatively, the steps could be:\n\n1. Navigate to the contact form (US1)\n2. Fill in the required details (order ID, reason, amount) in the form fields (US3)\n3. Compose the refund message in the provided text area (US3)\n\nBut since the message needs to include the order ID, reason, and amount, perhaps the user has to write them into the message body. So if the form doesn't have separate fields for those, the user has to include them in the message. Then the steps would be:\n\n1. Navigate to the contact form (US1)\n2. Input the order ID, reason (broken after three days), and refund amount into the message body (US3)\n3. Review the drafted message without submission (US7: Analyze/Evaluate/Verify Data)\n\nBut US7 is about analyzing data. Alternatively, reviewing is part of the process but not a separate strategy. So maybe:\n\n1. Navigate to the contact form (US1)\n2. Draft the refund message including order ID, reason, and amount (US3)\n\nBut the example output had three steps, so perhaps breaking it down more. Let's see. The user's task is to draft the message via the contact form. The steps would be:\n\n- Go to the contact us page (US1)\n- Locate the message input field (maybe part of US1)\n- Compose the message with the required details (US3)\n- Ensure not to submit (no action)\n\nBut how to structure this into strategies. The key steps are navigating to the form and inputting the data. So the strategies would be:\n\n1. Navigate to the \"Contact Us\" form section (US1)\n2. Input the required refund details (order ID, reason, amount) into the message (US3)\n3. Verify the drafted message content (US7)\n\nBut the user might not need to verify, but the instruction says \"draft a refund message\". So maybe verification is part of the process. Alternatively, the third step is part of US3. \n\nAlternatively, the strategies could be:\n\n1. Navigate to the \"Contact Us\" form (US1)\n2. Configure the message with order ID, reason, and refund amount (US3)\n3. Ensure the message is drafted without submission (US7: Verify)\n\nBut US7 is about analyzing or verifying. Since the user is instructed not to submit, maybe the third step is just part of the process. \n\nIn the example given earlier, the task was to generate a report, and the strategies were navigate, configure, execute. Here, since there's no execution, the user stops at configuring. So the strategies would be:\n\n1. Navigate to the contact form (US1)\n2. Configure the refund message with order ID, reason, and amount (US3)\n\nBut the example output had three steps, so maybe splitting into three. For example:\n\n1. Navigate to the \"Contact Us\" page (US1)\n2. Access the refund request form section (US1 again, but maybe not necessary)\n3. Input order ID, reason, and refund amount into the message (US3)\n\nBut accessing a section might be part of the same navigation. Alternatively, if the contact us form has multiple options, selecting the refund option is part of US3. \n\nAlternatively, the steps could be:\n\n1. Navigate to the \"Contact Us\" page (US1)\n2. Select the refund request option from the contact form (US3)\n3. Input the order ID, reason, and refund amount into the message (US3)\n\nBut selecting an option is part of configuring parameters (US3). So the strategies would be US1, US3, US3. But the output example used three different US strategies. However, in this case, maybe two US3 steps can be combined. \n\nAlternatively, the entire process is:\n\n- Navigate to contact us (US1)\n- Fill in the form (US3)\n\nBut the user needs to include specific details. So the strategies would be:\n\n1. Navigate to the \"Contact Us\" form (US1)\n2. Draft the refund message including order ID, reason, and refund amount (US3)\n\nBut the output example had three steps. Maybe the answer should have two strategies. However, the user's output example had three steps. Let me check the example again. The example had:\n\nStrategies: [\"Navigate to Bestsellers Report\", \"Configure Report Parameters...\", \"Generate and Review...\"]\n\nUniversal strategies: US1, US3, US4.\n\nIn this case, the third step was \"Generate and Review\", which is US4 (execute) and US7 (review). But in the example, they combined them into one step. So perhaps for the current task, the steps are:\n\n1. Navigate to the contact us form (US1)\n2. Configure the refund message with order ID, reason, and amount (US3)\n3. Review the drafted message without submitting (US7)\n\nBut the user's instruction says \"Don't submit yet\", so the review is implied but not necessarily a separate step. However, including US7 might be appropriate if the agent needs to verify the details are included. \n\nAlternatively, the third step could be part of US3. But to match the example's structure, perhaps three steps are better. \n\nSo the final answer would be:\n\nStrategies:\n1. Navigate to the \"Contact Us\" form section (US1)\n2. Input the order ID, reason for refund, and requested amount into the message (US3)\n3. Review the drafted refund message without submission (US7)\n\nBut US7 is Analyze/Evaluate/Verify Data. That makes sense for reviewing. So the universal strategies would be US1, US3, US7. \n\nBut the original task is to draft the message, not necessarily to analyze it. However, the instruction says \"draft a refund message\", so maybe the third step is part of the process, but the agent needs to ensure the message includes all required details. So including a review step (US7) is valid. \n\nSo the JSON output would be:\n\n{\n \"task_id\": 528,\n \"strategies\": [\n \"Navigate to the \\\"Contact Us\\\" form section\",\n \"Input the order ID, reason, and refund amount into the refund request\",\n \"Draft and review the refund message without submitting\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategies\": [\n \"Navigate To Page/Section\",\n \"Configure Parameters/Settings\",\n \"Analyze/Evaluate/Verify Data\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategy_ids\": [\"US1\", \"US3\", \"US7\"]\n}\n\nBut wait, the third strategy is \"Draft and review\", which combines US3 and US7. Or is drafting part of US3 and reviewing part of US7. Alternatively, the third step is just reviewing, but drafting is part of US3. \n\nAlternatively, the steps could be:\n\n1. Navigate to Contact Us form (US1)\n2. Configure the refund message with required details (US3)\n3. Verify the message content before submission (US7)\n\nBut since the user isn't submitting, the verification is just part of drafting. So maybe the third step is part of US3. \n\nAlternatively, the three steps are:\n\n1. Navigate to the contact form (US1)\n2. Input order ID, reason, amount into the message (US3)\n3. Ensure all required details are included (US7)\n\nBut the third step is verifying, which is US7. \n\nSo the final answer would include US1, US3, US7.\n\n\n```json\n{\n \"task_id\": 528,\n \"strategies\": [\n \"Navigate to the \\\"Contact Us\\\" form section\",\n \"Input the order ID, reason for refund, and requested refund amount into the form fields\",\n \"Draft the refund message with the provided details and verify compliance with shop requirements\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategies\": [\n \"Navigate To Page/Section\",\n \"Configure Parameters/Settings\",\n \"Analyze/Evaluate/Verify Data\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategy_ids\": [\"US1\", \"US3\", \"US7\"]\n}\n```",
"model_reasoning": null
},
{
"task_id": 534,
"task_intent": "Follow ['Jakub Klinkovský', 'Koushik', 'Vinta Chen'] on Gitlab",
"expected_ids": [
"US4",
"US4"
],
"actual_ids": [
"US2",
"US4"
],
"correct": false,
"model": "aiproxy/deepseek-reasoner",
"model_output": "\nOkay, let's tackle this task. The user wants to follow three specific users on GitLab: Jakub Klinkovský, Koushik, and Vinta Chen. First, I need to figure out the steps a GUI agent would take. \n\nStarting with navigation. The user probably needs to go to each user's profile page. On GitLab, you can search for users, so maybe the first step is to search for each name. That would fall under US2 (Search/Filter/Sort Data). Once on their profile, there should be a \"Follow\" button. Clicking that is an action, so US4 (Execute Action/Process). \n\nBut since there are three users, the agent has to repeat these steps for each. So the strategies would involve searching for each user and then following them. Let me check the universal strategies again. Searching is US2, executing the follow action is US4. So each user requires a search and then a follow.\n\nWait, but maybe navigating to the user's profile is part of the process. So first, search for the user (US2), then navigate to their profile (US1?), but maybe the search results directly lead to their profile. Alternatively, maybe the search is part of navigating. Hmm. The initial step would be to use the search function to find each user, which is US2. Then, on the user's profile page, click the follow button, which is US4. So for each user, two steps: search and execute follow. \n\nSo the strategies would be: For each user, \"Search for [username]\" (US2) and \"Follow [username]\" (US4). Since there are three users, the strategies list would have these steps repeated for each. But the output example groups steps more generally. For example, in the input example, they didn't list each product but generalized. So maybe here, the strategies can be generalized as \"Search for each user profile\" and \"Follow each user\". But the universal strategies would be US2 and US4 for each action. \n\nAlternatively, maybe the steps are: Navigate to the search function (US1?), but I think the search itself is US2. So the strategies would be:\n\n1. Search for 'Jakub Klinkovský' in GitLab users.\n2. Follow 'Jakub Klinkovský'.\n3. Search for 'Koushik' in GitLab users.\n4. Follow 'Koushik'.\n5. Search for 'Vinta Chen' in GitLab users.\n6. Follow 'Vinta Chen'.\n\nBut the output example uses more generalized steps. For instance, in the example, they have \"Navigate to Bestsellers Report\", \"Configure Parameters\", \"Generate Report\". So maybe here, the strategies can be more concise. Like \"Search for each user's profile\" and \"Follow each user\". But how to represent that in the strategies array. Since there are three users, but the steps are similar for each, perhaps the strategies can be written as two steps, but applied three times. However, the output example shows three strategies for a single task. So perhaps the strategies are:\n\n1. Search for each user profile (US2)\n2. Follow each user (US4)\n\nBut the problem is that each user requires a search and follow. So maybe the strategies array would have two steps, but each step is repeated for each user. However, the output example groups similar actions. For example, in the example, they have \"Configure Report Parameters for January 2023\" which is a single step. So perhaps here, the strategies are:\n\n- \"Search for each user's profile\" (US2)\n- \"Follow each user\" (US4)\n\nBut the user has to do this for each of the three users. So the strategies would be two steps, each applied three times. But the output example's strategies are in order. So maybe the answer would list each step for each user. But the example given in the problem's output example has three strategies, each corresponding to a different US. So perhaps here, the strategies would be:\n\n1. Search for 'Jakub Klinkovský' in GitLab users.\n2. Follow 'Jakub Klinkovský'.\n3. Search for 'Koushik' in GitLab users.\n4. Follow 'Koushik'.\n5. Search for 'Vinta Chen' in GitLab users.\n6. Follow 'Vinta Chen'.\n\nBut that's six strategies. However, the output example uses three strategies for a task that involves three steps. So maybe the answer should group the steps per user. But the problem is that the user has to follow three different users. So each user requires a search and a follow. Therefore, the strategies would be:\n\nFor each user:\n- Search for [username] (US2)\n- Follow [username] (US4)\n\nBut how to represent that in the strategies array. The output example uses three strategies for a task that involved three steps. So perhaps here, the strategies would be:\n\n1. Search for each user's profile (US2)\n2. Follow each user (US4)\n\nBut that's two steps. However, the user has to perform these two steps three times. But the output example's strategies are in a sequence. So maybe the answer should list each step for each user. But the output example's strategies are more generalized. For example, \"Generate and Review Bestsellers Report\" is a single step. So perhaps here, the strategies can be:\n\n1. Search for each user's profile using their name (US2)\n2. Follow each of the located user profiles (US4)\n\nBut then, the universal strategies would be US2 and US4. However, the user has to perform these steps three times. But the strategies array in the output example is a list of steps. So perhaps the answer is:\n\nStrategies: [\n \"Search for each user profile by name\",\n \"Follow each user\"\n]\n\nUniversal strategies: [\"Search/Filter/Sort Data\", \"Execute Action/Process\"]\nUniversal strategy IDs: [\"US2\", \"US4\"]\n\nBut the user has three users. But the strategies are written as two steps. That seems to fit the example. Let me check the output example again. The example's task was to find top-3 products in Jan 2023. The strategies were: navigate to report, configure parameters, generate. So three steps. Each step corresponds to a different US. Here, the task is to follow three users, which requires two steps per user. But the answer would need to capture that in the strategies. However, the output example's strategies are not per item but per action. So perhaps here, the answer would have two strategies: search for each user and follow each. So the strategies array would have two entries, each using US2 and US4. That's probably the correct approach.\n\n\n```json\n{\n \"task_id\": 534,\n \"strategies\": [\n \"Search for each user profile by name\",\n \"Follow each located user profile\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategies\": [\n \"Search/Filter/Sort Data\",\n \"Execute Action/Process\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategy_ids\": [\"US2\", \"US4\"]\n}\n```",
"model_reasoning": null
},
{
"task_id": 538,
"task_intent": "Modify the address of order #299 to 456 Oak Avenue, Apartment 5B, New York, NY, 10001",
"expected_ids": [
"US1",
"US10",
"US10"
],
"actual_ids": [
"US1",
"US10",
"US4"
],
"correct": false,
"model": "aiproxy/deepseek-reasoner",
"model_output": "\nOkay, let's tackle this task. The user wants to modify the address of order #299 to a new one. First, I need to figure out the steps required in a shopping admin interface.\n\nStarting with navigation. The order details page is where you can view and edit order information. So the first step would be navigating to that specific order. That's US1: Navigate To Page/Section.\n\nOnce on the order details page, the next step is to locate the address section and make the necessary changes. Modifying an existing item's details falls under US10: Update/Modify Item.\n\nAfter updating the address, saving the changes is crucial. Clicking the save or update button would execute the action, which is US4: Execute Action/Process.\n\nI need to check if these steps align with the universal strategies. Yes, navigating to the order, modifying the address, and saving. The strategies should be clear and sequential. Also, ensure that the strategies mention the specific order number and new address for clarity.\n\n\n```json\n{\n \"task_id\": 538,\n \"strategies\": [\n \"Navigate to Order #299 details page\",\n \"Update the shipping/billing address to 456 Oak Avenue, Apartment 5B, New York, NY, 10001\",\n \"Save the modified address changes\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategies\": [\n \"Navigate To Page/Section\",\n \"Update/Modify Item\",\n \"Execute Action/Process\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategy_ids\": [\"US1\", \"US10\", \"US4\"]\n}\n```",
"model_reasoning": null
},
{
"task_id": 548,
"task_intent": "Add a new color blue to size S and M of Frankie Sweatshirt",
"expected_ids": [
"US1",
"US10",
"US10"
],
"actual_ids": [
"US1",
"US2",
"US10",
"US3",
"US4"
],
"correct": false,
"model": "aiproxy/deepseek-reasoner",
"model_output": "\nOkay, let's tackle this task. The user wants to add the color blue to sizes S and M of the Frankie Sweatshirt in the shopping admin site.\n\nFirst, I need to figure out where to go. The product management section is where you edit products, so navigating there makes sense. That's US1: Navigate To Page/Section.\n\nNext, I have to find the specific product. Using the product name in a search or filter would help locate it quickly. That's US2: Search/Filter/Sort Data.\n\nOnce on the product page, I need to edit its details. So selecting the edit option is US10: Update/Modify Item.\n\nThen, adding the new color blue to the sizes S and M involves configuring the product's attributes. That's US3: Configure Parameters/Settings.\n\nFinally, saving the changes is executing the action, which is US4: Execute Action/Process.\n\nPutting it all together, the steps should be: navigate to product management, search for the sweatshirt, edit it, add the color to the sizes, and save. The corresponding strategies are US1, US2, US10, US3, US4.\n\n\n```json\n{\n \"task_id\": 548,\n \"strategies\": [\n \"Navigate to Product Management section\",\n \"Search for 'Frankie Sweatshirt' in product list\",\n \"Open product edit interface for Frankie Sweatshirt\",\n \"Add 'blue' color option to size S and M variants\",\n \"Save and confirm product updates\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategies\": [\n \"Navigate To Page/Section\",\n \"Search/Filter/Sort Data\",\n \"Update/Modify Item\",\n \"Configure Parameters/Settings\",\n \"Execute Action/Process\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategy_ids\": [\"US1\", \"US2\", \"US10\", \"US3\", \"US4\"]\n}\n```",
"model_reasoning": null
},
{
"task_id": 56,
"task_intent": "How long does it take to walk from Carnegie Museum of Art to a library at CMU?",
"expected_ids": [
"US1",
"US1",
"US2",
"US4"
],
"actual_ids": [
"US1",
"US2",
"US2",
"US3",
"US4",
"US6"
],
"correct": false,
"model": "aiproxy/deepseek-reasoner",
"model_output": "\nOkay, let's tackle this task. The user wants to know the walking time from Carnegie Museum of Art to a library at CMU. First, I need to figure out the steps a GUI agent would take on a map site.\n\nStarting with navigation. The agent would probably open the map application or website. Then, they need to input the starting point and destination. So, entering the museum's address and the library's address. Maybe search for both locations. Once both points are set, the map would show the route. The agent would select the walking option to get the duration. Then, they need to retrieve the time displayed. \n\nLooking at the universal strategies, the first step is navigating to the map section (US1). Then, searching for both locations (US2). Configuring the route parameters to walking (US3). Executing the route calculation (US4). Finally, extracting the time information (US6). \n\nWait, maybe the steps are: Navigate to the map, search for the starting point, search for the destination, set travel mode to walking, execute the route calculation, and then retrieve the time. So the strategies would be US1, US2, US3, US4, US6. But how to phrase each step? Let me check the examples. \n\nFor instance, \"Navigate To Page/Section\" is like going to the map. Then \"Search/Filter/Sort Data\" could be entering the locations. Then \"Configure Parameters/Settings\" for setting walking mode. \"Execute Action/Process\" to get the route. Then \"Extract/Retrieve Information\" to get the time. That makes sense. So the strategies would be:\n\n1. Navigate to the map interface.\n2. Search for Carnegie Museum of Art as the starting point.\n3. Search for CMU library as the destination.\n4. Configure travel mode to walking.\n5. Execute the route calculation.\n6. Retrieve the estimated walking time.\n\nEach of these steps corresponds to the universal strategies. So the universal strategy IDs would be US1, US2, US2, US3, US4, US6. But wait, searching for both points might be two separate US2 steps. Or maybe combined into one? Hmm, the example for US2\" is \"Filter issues by label 'Bug'\". So each search action could be a separate step. So the strategies would list each search as a separate step. Then the configuration of walking mode is US3. Execution is US4. Retrieval is US6. \n\nSo the final answer would have strategies with US1, US2, US2, US3, US4, US6. But the output example groups similar steps. For instance, in the example, \"Configure Report Parameters for January 2023\" is one step under US3. So maybe combining the two searches into one step? Or maybe not. The user's intent requires two locations, so each search is a separate action. Therefore, two US2 steps. \n\nBut the output example for task 4 has three strategies, each with a different US. So perhaps the agent needs to break down each action. Let me check the output example again. The example has three strategies\" that correspond to three US steps. But in reality, the actual steps might be more. However, the example simplifies. Maybe the answer should group similar steps. For instance, \"Search for both locations\" as one step. But according to the universal strategies, each search is a separate use of US2. Hmm. \n\nAlternatively, maybe the steps are: Navigate to map (US1), search for start and end points (US2), configure walking (US3), execute (US4), retrieve time (US6). So that's five steps. But the strategies array would have five entries. But the output example has three. Maybe the answer combines some steps. For example, \"Search for both locations\" as one strategy step, but that might not fit the US2 definition. \n\nAlternatively, perhaps the agent first navigates to the map (US1), then uses the route planner feature (US1 again?), then enters both locations (US2), sets mode to walking (US3), executes (US4), and retrieves (US6). But the exact steps need to be mapped correctly. \n\nI think the correct approach is:\n\n1. Navigate to the route planning section of the map (US1).\n2. Search for Carnegie Museum of Art as the starting point (US2).\n3. Search for CMU library as the destination (US2).\n4. Configure the travel mode to walking (US3).\n5. Execute the route calculation (US4).\n6. Retrieve the estimated walking time from the results (US6).\n\nSo the universal strategies would be US1, US2, US2, US3, US4, US6. But the output example for task 4 uses three strategies. However, the user's output should list each strategy step as per the breakdown, even if it's multiple instances of the same US. \n\nTherefore, the JSON would have strategies array with six entries, but perhaps some can be combined. Wait, the first step is navigating to the route planner, which is part of US1. Then entering start and destination could be considered as part of configuring parameters (US3) if it's a form. But in the universal strategies, US2 is search/filter/sort. So entering the start and end points in the route planner's fields would be US2. Then setting the mode to walking is US3. Then execute US4. Then retrieve US6. \n\nSo the strategies would be:\n\n- Navigate to the route planning page (US1)\n- Search for Carnegie Museum of Art as the starting point (US2)\n- Search for CMU library as the destination (US2)\n- Configure travel mode to walking (US3)\n- Execute route calculation (US4)\n- Retrieve estimated walking time (US6)\n\nThus, the universal strategies are US1, US2, US2, US3, US4, US6. But the output example groups similar steps. However, the output example for task 4 has three steps, each with a different US. So perhaps the answer should combine the two searches into one step. For example, \"Search for both start and destination points\" as a single US2. But according to the US2 explanation, it's about using search/filter/sort to locate data. So each location entry is a search. So two US2 steps. \n\nBut the output example may not have multiple instances of the same US. Let me check the output example again. In the example, the user's task is to find top products. The strategies are navigate, configure, execute. So three steps. But in reality, there might be more steps. But the answer groups them. \n\nIn this case, perhaps the answer can combine the two searches into one step. For example, \"Enter start and destination locations\" as a single US2. But the universal strategy allows for that. For example, \"Search/Filter/Sort Data\" can involve multiple inputs. So maybe the answer can have:\n\nStrategies:\n1. Navigate to the route planner section (US1)\n2. Enter start and destination locations (US2)\n3. Set travel mode to walking (US3)\n4. Calculate route and retrieve time (US4 and US6?)\n\nWait, but US4 is execute action, like clicking calculate. Then US6 is extracting the time. So two steps. \n\nSo the strategies would be:\n\n1. Navigate to the route planner (US1)\n2. Search for start and destination locations (US2)\n3. Configure travel mode to walking (US3)\n4. Execute route calculation (US4)\n5. Retrieve estimated walking time (US6)\n\nThus, the universal strategies are US1, US2, US3, US4, US6. That's five steps, each with a unique US except US2 once. But the two searches (start and end) are part of a single US2 step. Is that acceptable? According to the example, \"Filter issues by label 'Bug'\" is a single US2. So entering two locations in the route planner's start and end fields could be considered two separate US2 actions. But maybe in practice, the agent would input both as part of configuring the route, which might be under US3. Hmm, this is a bit ambiguous. \n\nAlternatively, entering the start and destination could be part of configuring parameters (US3), but according to the US3 explanation, it's about setting parameters before executing an action, like a form. So if the route planner has a form with start, end, and mode, then entering those would be part of US3. But US2 is about search/filter/sort. \n\nWait, maybe the route planner's start and end fields are part of a form, so entering them is part of US3 (configure parameters). But if the user is using the search function to find the locations, that's US2. \n\nThis is a bit tricky. Let me think. If the agent needs to search for the museum and the library by name, that's using the search box, which is US2. Then selecting them as start and end points. But if the route planner has fields for start and end where you can type or search, then each of those would be a US2 action. \n\nAlternatively, if the agent first navigates to the map, then uses the search bar to find the museum, then sets it as the start point, then searches again for the library and sets it as the end point. Each search is a US2. \n\nIn that case, the steps would be:\n\n1. Navigate to the map interface (US1)\n2. Search for Carnegie Museum of Art and set as start (US2)\n3. Search for CMU library and set as destination (US2)\n4. Configure travel mode to walking (US3)\n5. Execute route calculation (US4)\n6. Retrieve walking time (US6)\n\nSo the universal strategies would be US1, US2, US2, US3, US4, US6. But the output example may not list multiple instances of the same US. However, the output example for task 4 uses three steps with three different US. But the user's answer should list all steps, even if they repeat US IDs. \n\nTherefore, the correct answer would include each step with their respective US, even if US2 is used twice. \n\nSo the final answer would be:\n\nStrategies: [\n \"Navigate to the map interface\",\n \"Search for Carnegie Museum of Art as the starting point\",\n \"Search for CMU library as the destination\",\n \"Configure travel mode to walking\",\n \"Execute the route calculation\",\n \"Retrieve the estimated walking time from the results\"\n],\nuniversal_strategies: [\n \"Navigate To Page/Section\",\n \"Search/Filter/Sort Data\",\n \"Search/Filter/Sort Data\",\n \"Configure Parameters/Settings\",\n \"Execute Action/Process\",\n \"Extract/Retrieve Information\"\n],\nuniversal_strategy_ids: [\"US1\", \"US2\", \"US2\", \"US3\", \"US4\", \"US6\"]\n\nBut the output example groups steps. For example, in the example, \"Configure the date range\" is one step under US3. So perhaps entering start and destination is part of configuring parameters (US3), but that depends on the interface. If the route planner has a form where you set start and end, then it's US3. But if you have to search for each location, then it's US2. \n\nThis is a bit ambiguous. To resolve, perhaps the correct approach is to consider that entering start and destination in a route planner form is part of US3 (configure parameters), while searching for a location in a general search bar is US2. \n\nBut in most map interfaces, the route planner has fields for start and end, where you can type or search. So entering each location would involve searching within those fields, which is part of configuring the route parameters. So maybe US3. \n\nAlternatively, if the agent first uses the search bar to find the museum, then clicks 'set as start', that's US2 for the search, then US3 for setting it as start. But this complicates. \n\nGiven the ambiguity, perhaps the safest way is to consider that entering the start and destination in the route planner's form is part of US3 (configure parameters). So the steps would be:\n\n1. Navigate to route planner (US1)\n2. Configure start and destination parameters (US3)\n3. Configure travel mode to walking (US3)\n4. Execute calculation (US4)\n5. Retrieve time (US6)\n\nBut then, how to get the start and destination? If they are input fields where you type the names, then it's part of US3. But if you have to search for each location, then it's US2. \n\nHmm. This is a bit challenging. To align with the universal strategies, perhaps the start and destination inputs are part of US3 (configure parameters) because they are parameters for the route. So the steps would be:\n\nStrategies:\n1. Navigate to the route planning section (US1)\n2. Configure start location as Carnegie Museum of Art (US3)\n3. Configure destination as CMU library (US3)\n4. Set travel mode to walking (US3)\n5. Execute route calculation (US4)\n6. Retrieve estimated walking time (US6)\n\nBut then, three US3 steps. But the universal strategy US3 is about configuring parameters/settings. So each of these is a parameter. \n\nAlternatively, all three (start, end, mode) are part of a single configuration step. But in practice, each is a separate action. \n\nThe example given in US3 is \"Configure the date range for the report from 2023‑01‑01 to 2023‑01‑31.\" So that's a single step where two date inputs are set. Similarly, configuring start, end, and mode could be considered a single step of configuring parameters. \n\nBut in reality, the agent would have to input each parameter separately. So perhaps the answer should group them into one strategy: \"Configure route parameters with start, destination, and walking mode\" (US3). Then execute (US4), retrieve (US6). \n\nBut the user's task requires that the start and destination are specific. So the agent must input those. \n\nAlternatively, the answer could be:\n\nStrategies:\n1. Navigate to the route planner (US1)\n2. Configure start and destination parameters (US3)\n3. Set travel mode to walking (US3)\n4. Execute calculation (US4)\n5. Retrieve time (US6)\n\nBut this groups start and destination into one step, which might not be accurate. \n\nGiven the confusion, perhaps the best approach is to follow the example's structure. The example for task 4 has three steps: navigate, configure, execute. But in reality, generating a report might involve more steps, but they are grouped. \n\nSo for this task, perhaps the strategies are:\n\n1. Navigate to the route planner section (US1)\n2. Configure start, destination, and walking mode (US3)\n3. Execute route calculation and retrieve time (US4 and US6)\n\nBut the example separates execute and retrieve. So maybe:\n\n1. Navigate to route planner (US1)\n2. Configure start and destination (US3)\n3. Set travel mode to walking (US3)\n4. Execute calculation (US4)\n5. Retrieve time (US6)\n\nBut this would have US3 twice. However, the universal strategies allow multiple uses. \n\nAlternatively, combine steps 2 and 3 into a single \"Configure route parameters\" step. \n\nBut the user's output example for task 4 has three steps, each with a different US. So perhaps the answer, the strategies are:\n\n1. Navigate to the route planner (US1)\n2. Configure start, destination, and walking mode (US3)\n3. Execute calculation and retrieve time (US4 and US6)\n\nBut US6 is separate. So maybe:\n\nStrategies:\n1. Navigate to route planner (US1)\n2. Configure parameters (start, destination, walking) (US3)\n3. Execute calculation (US4)\n4. Retrieve time (US6)\n\nBut that's four steps. The example has three. \n\nHmm. Given the ambiguity, I think the correct approach is to list each necessary action with their respective US, even if it results in multiple steps. \n\nSo the final answer would be:\n\n{\n \"task_id\": 56,\n \"strategies\": [\n \"Navigate to the route planning section of the map\",\n \"Search for Carnegie Museum of Art as the starting point\",\n \"Search for CMU library as the destination\",\n \"Configure travel mode to walking\",\n \"Execute the route calculation\",\n \"Retrieve the estimated walking time from the results\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategies\": [\n \"Navigate To Page/Section\",\n \"Search/Filter/Sort Data\",\n \"Search/Filter/Sort Data\",\n \"Configure Parameters/Settings\",\n \"Execute Action/Process\",\n \"Extract/Retrieve Information\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategy_ids\": [\"US1\", \"US2\", \"US2\", \"US3\", \"US4\", \"US6\"]\n}\n\n\n```json\n{\n \"task_id\": 56,\n \"strategies\": [\n \"Navigate to the route planning section of the map\",\n \"Search for Carnegie Museum of Art as the starting point\",\n \"Search for CMU library as the destination\",\n \"Configure travel mode to walking\",\n \"Execute the route calculation\",\n \"Retrieve the estimated walking time from the results\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategies\": [\n \"Navigate To Page/Section\",\n \"Search/Filter/Sort Data\",\n \"Search/Filter/Sort Data\",\n \"Configure Parameters/Settings\",\n \"Execute Action/Process\",\n \"Extract/Retrieve Information\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategy_ids\": [\"US1\", \"US2\", \"US2\", \"US3\", \"US4\", \"US6\"]\n}\n```",
"model_reasoning": null
},
{
"task_id": 566,
"task_intent": "create a repository named Do it myself that includes a README file with the links to the most active 8 DIY ideas on DIY subreddit?",
"expected_ids": [
"US9",
"US6",
"US10"
],
"actual_ids": [
"US1",
"US2",
"US6",
"US1",
"US9",
"US10",
"US4"
],
"correct": false,
"model": "aiproxy/deepseek-reasoner",
"model_output": "\nOkay, let's tackle this task. The user wants to create a GitLab repository named \"Do it myself\" with a README that includes links to the top 8 most active DIY ideas from the DIY subreddit. \n\nFirst, I need to break down the steps. On GitLab, creating a repo usually starts by navigating to the new repository page. Then, they'll need to input the name, maybe check the option to include a README. But the README needs specific content. So after creating the repo, they have to edit the README file.\n\nBut where do the Reddit links come in? The user has to go to Reddit's DIY subreddit, find the most active posts. How? They can sort the posts by activity, maybe by top or hot, then extract the top 8 links. Then, compile those links into the README.\n\nSo the steps would involve both GitLab and Reddit. Let's outline:\n\n1. Navigate to Reddit's DIY subreddit.\n2. Sort the list by most active (maybe using filters like Top or Hot).\n3. Collect the top 8 posts' URLs.\n4. On GitLab, go to create a new repository.\n5. Fill in the name, check README option.\n6. After creation, edit the README to add the links.\n7. Commit the changes.\n\nNow mapping these to the universal strategies. \n\nFor Reddit part: Navigating to the subreddit (US1), filtering/sorting (US2), extracting info (US6). \n\nFor GitLab: Navigate to create repo (US1), create the item (US9), then update the README (US10). \n\nWait, creating the repo with README is US9 (Create Item). Then editing the README is modifying an existing item, so US10. \n\nSo the strategies would be:\n\n- Navigate to DIY subreddit (US1)\n- Sort posts by most active (US2)\n- Extract top 8 links (US6)\n- Navigate to GitLab's new repo page (US1)\n- Create repo with README (US9)\n- Edit README to add links (US10)\n- Commit changes (US4, since executing the save action)\n\nBut the user's intent is to create the repo including the README with those links. So the steps need to be in order, combining both sites. The final answer should list the strategies in the correct sequence, referencing the appropriate US IDs.\n\n\n```json\n{\n \"task_id\": 566,\n \"strategies\": [\n \"Navigate to Reddit's DIY subreddit\",\n \"Sort/filter posts by 'Most Active' criteria\",\n \"Extract URLs of top 8 active DIY idea posts\",\n \"Navigate to GitLab's New Repository creation page\",\n \"Create repository named 'Do it myself' with README option\",\n \"Edit README file to include extracted Reddit URLs\",\n \"Commit changes to finalize repository setup\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategies\": [\n \"Navigate To Page/Section\",\n \"Search/Filter/Sort Data\",\n \"Extract/Retrieve Information\",\n \"Navigate To Page/Section\",\n \"Create Item\",\n \"Update/Modify Item\",\n \"Execute Action/Process\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategy_ids\": [\"US1\", \"US2\", \"US6\", \"US1\", \"US9\", \"US10\", \"US4\"]\n}\n```",
"model_reasoning": null
},
{
"task_id": 574,
"task_intent": "I recently moved, my address is 111 Magnolia Path, Atlanta, GA, 30303, update my information on OneStopShopping accordingly",
"expected_ids": [
"US1",
"US10",
"US10",
"US10"
],
"actual_ids": [
"US1",
"US10",
"US4"
],
"correct": false,
"model": "aiproxy/deepseek-reasoner",
"model_output": "\nOkay, let's tackle this task. The user wants to update their address on OneStopShopping after moving. First, I need to figure out the steps involved. \n\nStarting with navigation. The user probably needs to go to their account settings or profile page where personal information is stored. That's US1: Navigate To Page/Section.\n\nNext, they need to modify their address. Updating an existing item falls under US10: Update/Modify Item. So they'll enter the new address details here.\n\nAfter entering the new address, they have to save the changes. That's executing an action, which is US4: Execute Action/Process. Maybe clicking a \"Save\" or \"Update\" button.\n\nWait, should there be a step to view the current details first? Like checking if the address is correct before saving. But the main task is to update, so maybe not necessary unless verification is part of the process. The user's intent is straightforward: update the address. So the main steps are navigate, update, save.\n\nSo the strategies would be: Navigate to the profile or account settings page, update the address fields with the new info, and save the changes. The corresponding universal strategies are US1, US10, US4.\n\n\n```json\n{\n \"task_id\": 574,\n \"strategies\": [\n \"Navigate to User Profile/Account Settings\",\n \"Update Address Information to 111 Magnolia Path, Atlanta, GA, 30303\",\n \"Save/Confirm the Updated Address\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategies\": [\n \"Navigate To Page/Section\",\n \"Update/Modify Item\",\n \"Execute Action/Process\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategy_ids\": [\"US1\", \"US10\", \"US4\"]\n}\n```",
"model_reasoning": null
},
{
"task_id": 577,
"task_intent": "Add the following users to my GitHub timeline item management extension as maintainer: ['abisubramanya27', 'lahwaacz']",
"expected_ids": [
"US1",
"US4"
],
"actual_ids": [
"US1",
"US9",
"US9"
],
"correct": false,
"model": "aiproxy/deepseek-reasoner",
"model_output": "\nOkay, let's tackle this task. The user wants to add two users, 'abisubramanya27' and 'lahwaacz', as maintainers to their GitHub timeline item management extension on GitLab. \n\nFirst, I need to figure out the steps involved. Since it's GitLab, adding maintainers typically involves accessing the project settings. So the first step would be navigating to the project page. That's probably US1 (Navigate To Page/Section).\n\nOnce on the project page, the user needs to go to the section where members can be managed. In GitLab, that's usually under Settings > Members. So that's another US1 for navigating to the Members section.\n\nNext, they need to add each user. This would involve entering the username, selecting the role (maintainer), and adding them. Adding a member is creating a new item, so US9 (Create Item) applies here. But since they're modifying the project's members, maybe US10 (Update/Modify Item) could also be considered. However, adding a new member is more like creating a new association, so US9 makes sense.\n\nThey have to do this for both users, so the step would be repeated for each. But in the strategy, it's better to generalize as adding both users. \n\nFinally, after adding, they might need to confirm that the users are listed as maintainers. That would involve viewing the members list, which is US5 (View/Inspect Item Details) or US6 (Extract/Retrieve Information). But since the task is to add them, maybe verification is part of the process, but the user's intent is just to add, not necessarily verify. So maybe the last step is executing the addition, which is US4 (Execute Action/Process).\n\nWait, when adding a member, you fill in the username, select the role, and click add. So the configuration (selecting role) is part of the form, which is US3 (Configure Parameters/Settings), and then executing the action with a button click is US4. But the universal strategies might combine these into a single step. Alternatively, the main action is creating the member entry, which is US9. Hmm, the example given in US9 is creating a new project, which is a form submission. Similarly, adding a member would be filling a form and submitting, so US9 applies here. But the configuration (selecting role) is part of the form, so maybe US3 is part of the step. But the strategy templates might not split that into separate steps. Let me check the examples. For example, in the example for US3, configuring date range is a step before generating a report. So in this case, setting the role to maintainer would be part of configuring parameters. Then executing the action (click add) is US4. But in the universal strategies, creating an item (US9) might encompass filling the form and submitting. Let me check the US9 example: \"Create a new project named...\" which involves filling a form and submitting. So adding a member would be US9. Therefore, the steps would be: navigate to members section, add each user as maintainer (US9). But the actual steps might involve configuring the role (US3) as part of the form. However, the strategy is higher-level, so maybe it's just \"Add user as maintainer\" under US9. \n\nSo putting it all together:\n\n1. Navigate to the project's Members settings page (US1).\n2. Add each user with the maintainer role (US9).\n3. Execute the addition (US4). Wait, but when you fill the form and click add, that's part of the create item step. So maybe US9 covers both filling the form submission. So the strategies would be:\n\nStrategies:\n- Navigate to Project Members settings\n- Add 'abisubramanya27' as a maintainer\n- Add 'lahwaacz' as a maintainer\n\nBut since the task is to add both, maybe the strategy into a single step for both users. However, the universal strategies might require each as separate steps. But the user might combine them into one step. Alternatively, the strategy could be \"Add users as maintainers\" as a single step. \n\nAlternatively, the steps could be:\n\n1. Navigate to Members section (US1)\n2. Configure user and role (US3)\n3. Execute add action (US4) for each user.\n\nBut the example given in the output example for a similar task (adding users) might have used US9. Let me check the example in the problem statement. The example given for the task_id 4 uses US1, US3, US4. But in that case, generating a report involved navigating, configuring parameters, and executing. So for adding users, perhaps:\n\n- Navigate to Members (US1)\n- For each user, configure their username and role (US3)\n- Execute adding each (US4)\n\nBut that might be splitting into too many steps. Alternatively, adding a member is a create item (US9), which includes filling the form (username, role) and submitting. So the strategies would be:\n\nStrategies:\n1. Navigate to Project Members settings (US1)\n2. Add 'abisubramanya27' as a maintainer (US9)\n3. Add 'lahwaacz' as a maintainer (US9)\n\nBut the user might have to do this twice. Alternatively, the strategy could be \"Add users as maintainers\" as a single step, but the universal strategies would be US9 for each addition. However, the task is to add both, so maybe the strategy is a single step, but the universal strategy is US9 once. But the example in the problem statement's output example uses three steps for generating a report: navigate, configure, execute. So for adding two users, perhaps each addition is a separate step. But the user might have to add them one by one. So the strategies would be:\n\nStrategies:\n1. Navigate to the project's Members management page (US1)\n2. Add 'abisubramanya27' as a maintainer (US9)\n3. Add 'lahwaacz' as a maintainer (US9)\n\nBut the universal strategies would be US1, US9, US9. However, the output example for task 4 uses three steps with US1, US3, US4. So maybe in this case, adding a member involves configuring parameters (selecting user and role) and executing. So:\n\n1. Navigate to Members section (US1)\n2. Configure user 'abisubramanya27' with maintainer role (US3)\n3. Execute adding the user (US4)\n4. Configure user 'lahwaacz' with maintainer role (US3)\n5. Execute adding the user (US4)\n\nBut that's more steps. However, the user might not need to split into configure and execute for each user. The example in the problem statement's output combines configure and execute into one step. For example, \"Configure the date range...\" (US3) and \"Generate and submit...\" (US4). So in this case, adding a user would involve configuring (selecting user and role) and then executing (click add). But the problem is that each user addition is a separate action. So the strategies would be:\n\n1. Navigate to Members settings (US1)\n2. For each user:\n a. Configure parameters (username and role) (US3)\n b. Execute add action (US4)\n\nBut since there are two users, this would result in four steps. However, the strategies are supposed to be high-level. The user's intent is to add both, so maybe the strategies are:\n\n1. Navigate to Project Members settings (US1)\n2. Add users 'abisubramanya27' and 'lahwaacz' as maintainers (US9)\n\nBut US9 is for creating an item. Each user addition is a separate item creation. So perhaps the strategies are:\n\nStrategies:\n- Navigate to the project's Members settings page\n- Add 'abisubramanya27' as a maintainer\n- Add 'lahwaacz' as a maintainer\n\nUniversal strategies: US1, US9, US9\n\nBut the output example uses three steps with three US IDs. However, the user might have to repeat the add step for each user. So the answer would be:\n\nstrategies: [\n \"Navigate to the project's Members settings\",\n \"Add 'abisubramanya27' as a maintainer\",\n \"Add 'lahwaacz' as a maintainer\"\n],\nuniversal_strategies: [\"Navigate To Page/Section\", \"Create Item\", \"Create Item\"],\nuniversal_strategy_ids: [\"US1\", \"US9\", \"US9\"]\n\nBut the problem is that the universal strategy IDs are supposed to be a list corresponding to each strategy step. So each \"Add\" step is US9. Alternatively, maybe the adding both users is a single step, but that's unlikely as each requires separate form submissions. \n\nAlternatively, maybe the process is:\n\n1. Navigate to Members (US1)\n2. Configure parameters (usernames and role) (US3)\n3. Execute adding both users (US4)\n\nBut in reality, you can't add multiple users at once in GitLab's interface unless there's a bulk add feature, which I don't think exists. So each user has to be added individually. Therefore, the correct approach is to have two separate Create Item steps. \n\nThus, the final answer would be as follows.\n\n\n```json\n{\n \"task_id\": 577,\n \"strategies\": [\n \"Navigate to the project's Members settings page\",\n \"Add 'abisubramanya27' as a maintainer\",\n \"Add 'lahwaacz' as a maintainer\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategies\": [\n \"Navigate To Page/Section\",\n \"Create Item\",\n \"Create Item\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategy_ids\": [\"US1\", \"US9\", \"US9\"]\n}\n```",
"model_reasoning": null
},
{
"task_id": 58,
"task_intent": "Tell me the closest cafe(s) to CMU Hunt library",
"expected_ids": [
"US1",
"US2",
"US4",
"US5"
],
"actual_ids": [
"US1",
"US2",
"US2",
"US5",
"US7",
"US6"
],
"correct": false,
"model": "aiproxy/deepseek-reasoner",
"model_output": "\nOkay, let's tackle this task. The user wants to find the closest cafes to CMU Hunt Library using a map site. First, I need to figure out the steps a user would take.\n\nStarting with navigation. The user probably needs to go to the map's search or location feature. That's like US1, navigating to a section. Then, they need to input the library's address or name. Maybe search for \"CMU Hunt Library\" to locate it on the map. That's US2, searching or filtering data.\n\nOnce the library is located, the next step is to look for nearby cafes. The user might use a \"nearby\" search or filter for cafes. That's another US2, applying a filter. Then, the map would display the results. The user might need to check the list or map markers, which involves viewing details (US5) and maybe analyzing the distances (US7). Finally, extracting the top 3 closest ones (US6). \n\nWait, the strategies need to be in order. So first navigate to the map, search for the library, then search nearby cafes, maybe adjust filters if needed, then view the results, analyze the distances, and extract the top 3. Let me check the universal strategies again. \n\nYes, US1 for navigating to the map, US2 for searching the library and filtering cafes, US5 to view the results, US7 to analyze proximity, and US6 to extract the info. So the strategies would be: Navigate to the map site, search for CMU Hunt Library, search nearby cafes, view the results, analyze proximity, extract top 3. The corresponding US IDs would be US1, US2, US2, US5, US7, US6. But maybe some steps can be combined. Let me structure it concisely.\n\n\n```json\n{\n \"task_id\": 58,\n \"strategies\": [\n \"Navigate to map interface\",\n \"Search for 'CMU Hunt Library' location\",\n \"Filter/search for 'cafes' near the pinned location\",\n \"View list/markers of nearby cafes\",\n \"Analyze proximity/distance metrics\",\n \"Extract top 3 closest cafe names and addresses\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategies\": [\n \"Navigate To Page/Section\",\n \"Search/Filter/Sort Data\",\n \"Search/Filter/Sort Data\",\n \"View/Inspect Item Details\",\n \"Analyze/Evaluate/Verify Data\",\n \"Extract/Retrieve Information\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategy_ids\": [\"US1\", \"US2\", \"US2\", \"US5\", \"US7\", \"US6\"]\n}\n```",
"model_reasoning": null
},
{
"task_id": 582,
"task_intent": "Create a new forum named Cyberpunk, with a description of Welcome to the future, and include ['Games', 'Books', 'Movies', 'Future'] in the sidebar?",
"expected_ids": [
"US1",
"US3",
"US3",
"US9"
],
"actual_ids": [
"US1",
"US3",
"US4",
"US1",
"US3",
"US4"
],
"correct": false,
"model": "aiproxy/deepseek-reasoner",
"model_output": "\nOkay, let's tackle this task. The user wants to create a new forum on Reddit called Cyberpunk with a specific description and sidebar categories. First, I need to figure out the steps involved in creating a forum on Reddit.\n\nReddit has a process for creating subreddits. The first step would be navigating to the page where you create a new subreddit. That's probably under the user's profile or a specific \"Create Community\" section. So that's US1: Navigate To Page/Section.\n\nNext, when creating the subreddit, there's a form to fill out. The user needs to input the name \"Cyberpunk\" and the description \"Welcome to the future.\" That's part of configuring the settings, so US3: Configure Parameters/Settings.\n\nThen, the sidebar usually has sections where you can add widgets or text. Including the list ['Games', 'Books', 'Movies', 'Future'] in the sidebar would involve modifying the sidebar settings. That's another configuration step, so again US3.\n\nAfter filling out the form and configuring the sidebar, the user would need to submit or save the changes. That's executing an action, so US4: Execute Action/Process.\n\nWait, but creating the subreddit might be a single form where you set name, description, and sidebar content. Or maybe the sidebar is edited after creation. If the sidebar is part of the initial setup, then it's all in one step. If not, after creating the subreddit, you go to the settings to edit the sidebar. Let me check.\n\nIn Reddit, when you create a subreddit, you set the name and some basic info first. Then, after creation, you can customize the sidebar via the moderation tools. So the steps would be: navigate to create page, fill in name and description (US3), create the subreddit (US4), then navigate to sidebar settings (US1 again), configure the sidebar with the categories (US3), and save those changes (US4). But the user's intent is to include those in the sidebar as part of the creation. However, the initial creation might not include sidebar configuration. So the process would involve creating the subreddit first, then editing the sidebar.\n\nBut the user's task is to create the forum with those elements included. So the agent would need to perform both steps. Let me structure the strategies accordingly.\n\nSo the strategies would be:\n\n1. Navigate to the Create Subreddit page (US1)\n2. Configure the subreddit name and description (US3)\n3. Create the new Cyberpunk subreddit (US4)\n4. Navigate to the sidebar settings (US1)\n5. Configure the sidebar with the specified list (US3)\n6. Save the sidebar changes (US4)\n\nBut the original task mentions including the list in the sidebar as part of the creation. So the strategies need to cover both the creation and the sidebar configuration. Therefore, the universal strategies would be US1, US3, US4, US1, US3, US4. But maybe the agent can combine some steps. For example, after creating the subreddit, the agent might automatically go to the settings. But in terms of strategies, each action is a step.\n\nBut the output example groups similar steps. For instance, in the example, \"Configure Report Parameters\" is one step under US3. So here, configuring name and description is one step (US3), then creating (US4), then configuring sidebar (another US3), then saving (US4). But maybe the strategies can be written as:\n\n- Navigate to the Subreddit Creation Page\n- Configure Subreddit Name and Description\n- Create the New Subreddit\n- Access Sidebar Configuration Settings\n- Add Categories to the Sidebar\n- Save Sidebar Changes\n\nBut the user's intent is to create the forum with the sidebar included. So the strategies should reflect that. The universal strategies involved would be US1 (navigate to create page), US3 (configure name/desc), US4 (execute create), then US1 again (navigate to sidebar settings), US3 (configure sidebar), US4 (save sidebar). So the strategies array would list these steps, and the universal strategies would list US1, US3, US4, US1, US3, US4. But the output example for task 4 had three steps with US1, US3, US4. However, in this case, there are more steps. But maybe the agent can combine some steps. For example, \"Configure Subreddit Name, Description, and Sidebar Categories\" but that might not be possible if the sidebar is configured after creation. So the correct approach is to break it into the necessary actions. Therefore, the strategies would be:\n\n1. Navigate to the Create New Subreddit page (US1)\n2. Configure the subreddit name as \"Cyberpunk\" and description (US3)\n3. Execute the creation of the subreddit (US4)\n4. Navigate to the sidebar settings/moderation tools (US1)\n5. Configure the sidebar to include the specified categories (US3)\n6. Save the sidebar configuration (US4)\n\nThus, the universal strategies are US1, US3, US4, US1, US3, US4. But the output example for task 4 had three steps. However, the user's task requires multiple steps. So the answer should include all necessary steps. Therefore, the JSON would have strategies as the six steps, but perhaps some can be merged. For example, steps 4 and 5 could be \"Configure sidebar with the specified categories\" which would be US3. But navigating to the sidebar settings is US1. So each navigation and configuration is separate.\n\nAlternatively, maybe the sidebar configuration is part of the initial setup, but in reality, on Reddit, you create the subreddit first, then edit the sidebar. So the steps are separate. Therefore, the strategies are as above. The universal strategies would be US1, US3, US4, US1, US3, US4. But the output example groups similar steps. However, the output example for task 4 had three steps. So perhaps the agent can group steps where possible. For example, steps 1-3 are creating the subreddit, steps 4-6 are configuring the sidebar. So the strategies could be:\n\n1. Navigate to the Subreddit Creation Page (US1)\n2. Configure Subreddit Name and Description (US3)\n3. Create the New Subreddit (US4)\n4. Access Sidebar Configuration Settings (US1)\n5. Add Categories to the Sidebar (US3)\n6. Save Sidebar Changes (US4)\n\nBut the user's intent is to include the categories in the sidebar as part of the creation. So the strategies must include these steps. Therefore, the universal strategies are US1, US3, US4, US1, US3, US4. But the output example may have fewer steps. However, the correct approach is to list all necessary steps. So the answer would include all six steps with the corresponding US IDs.\n\n\n```json\n{\n \"task_id\": 582,\n \"strategies\": [\n \"Navigate to the Subreddit Creation Page\",\n \"Configure Subreddit Name and Description\",\n \"Create the New Cyberpunk Subreddit\",\n \"Access Sidebar Configuration Settings\",\n \"Add Specified Categories to the Sidebar\",\n \"Save Sidebar Configuration\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategies\": [\n \"Navigate To Page/Section\",\n \"Configure Parameters/Settings\",\n \"Execute Action/Process\",\n \"Navigate To Page/Section\",\n \"Configure Parameters/Settings\",\n \"Execute Action/Process\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategy_ids\": [\"US1\", \"US3\", \"US4\", \"US1\", \"US3\", \"US4\"]\n}\n```",
"model_reasoning": null
},
{
"task_id": 593,
"task_intent": "Create a milestone for the upcoming task of merging all branches to main starting on March 15, 2044 and ending on March 30, 2044",
"expected_ids": [
"US1",
"US4",
"US3",
"US9"
],
"actual_ids": [
"US1",
"US9"
],
"correct": false,
"model": "aiproxy/deepseek-reasoner",
"model_output": "\nOkay, let's tackle this task. The user wants to create a milestone in GitLab for merging all branches to main, with start and end dates in March 2044.\n\nFirst, I need to figure out the steps. Creating a milestone usually involves navigating to the right section in GitLab. So the first step would be to go to the Milestones page. That's US1: Navigate To Page/Section.\n\nNext, there's a \"New Milestone\" button. Clicking that would start the creation process, which is part of US9: Create Item. But before submitting, the user needs to set the title, dates, and maybe a description. Configuring these parameters falls under US3: Configure Parameters/Settings.\n\nAfter filling in the details, the user would save or create the milestone. That action is US4: Execute Action/Process, like clicking a \"Create\" button.\n\nSo the strategies are: navigate to milestones, configure the details, then execute the creation. The corresponding universal strategies are US1, US3, US9, and US4. Wait, but creating the item (US9) includes filling the form and submitting. Maybe the configuration is part of US9? Hmm, the example for US9 includes filling out a form and submitting. So maybe the steps are: navigate (US1), create item (US9) which involves configuring parameters as part of the form. But the example given in the output example for a similar task uses US3 (configure) and US4 (execute). Let me check the universal strategies again.\n\nUS9's example is \"Create a new project named...\" which involves filling a form and submitting. So the steps would be: navigate to the page (US1), create the item (US9). But in the output example, when creating a project, they used US9. However, in the user's task, the dates need to be set, which is part of configuring parameters. Wait, maybe the creation process includes configuring and executing. But according to the universal strategies, US9 is the entire process of creating, which would involve filling the form (which is part of US9) and submitting (US4). But the example given in the output example for task 4, they used US3 (configure parameters) and US4 (execute). Hmm, perhaps in this case, creating the milestone involves navigating to the page (US1), then creating the milestone (US9) which includes filling the form (which would be part of US9, but maybe the configuration step is US3). Wait, the breakdown might be:\n\n1. Navigate to Milestones section (US1)\n2. Click New Milestone (part of US9)\n3. Configure the parameters (title, dates) (US3)\n4. Execute the creation (US4)\n\nBut according to the universal strategies, US9 is \"Create Item\" which typically involves filling a form and submitting. So maybe the steps are:\n\n- Navigate to the page (US1)\n- Create the milestone by filling the form (US9), which includes setting the dates (part of US9)\n- Then execute (US4). Wait, maybe US9 includes the execution step. Because in the example, \"Create a new project...\" would involve filling the form and submitting, which is US9. So perhaps the steps are:\n\n1. Navigate to the Milestones page (US1)\n2. Create a new milestone, entering title, start and end dates (US9)\n3. Submit/Create the milestone (US4). But wait, the US9 example includes submitting. So maybe US9 covers both filling the form and submitting. But in the output example, when creating a project, they used US9. Let me check the output example again.\n\nIn the output example, the task was to create a project, and the strategies were \"Create a new project named...\", and the universal strategies included US9. So in that case, the entire process of creating (including form filling and submitting) is US9. But in the example given in the universal strategies table, US3 is used when configuring parameters before executing an action. So perhaps when creating an item, the configuration is part of US9, but if there's a separate configuration step before executing, then US3 is used. Hmm, this is a bit confusing.\n\nAlternatively, maybe the breakdown is:\n\n- Navigate to the Milestones page (US1)\n- Initiate the creation (click New Milestone) which opens a form (part of US9)\n- Configure the parameters (title, dates) in the form (US3)\n- Execute the creation (US4)\n\nBut according to the universal strategies, US9 is the entire process of creating, which would include filling the form and submitting. So perhaps the correct approach is:\n\nStrategies:\n1. Navigate to the Milestones section (US1)\n2. Create a new milestone with the specified title and dates (US9)\n3. Save the milestone (US4)\n\nWait, but saving would be part of US9. Maybe the steps are:\n\n1. Navigate to the Milestones page (US1)\n2. Create the milestone by entering details and saving (US9)\n\nBut the user's task requires setting start and end dates, which are parameters. So maybe the steps are:\n\n1. Navigate to Milestones (US1)\n2. Configure the new milestone's parameters (title, start and end dates) (US3)\n3. Execute the creation (US4)\n\nBut that would split the creation into configuration and execution. However, according to the universal strategies, US9 is for creating an item, which would involve both steps. So perhaps the correct universal strategies are US1, US9. But the example given in the output example for creating a project used US9. Let me check the output example again.\n\nIn the output example, the task was to create a project, and the strategies were \"Create a new project named...\", and the universal strategies included US9. So in that case, the entire process of creating the project (filling the form and submitting) is US9. Therefore, for this task, creating the milestone would be US9. So the steps would be:\n\n1. Navigate to the Milestones page (US1)\n2. Create a new milestone with the specified details (US9)\n\nBut the user's intent includes specific dates, so the strategy should mention configuring those dates. So perhaps the strategies are:\n\n1. Navigate to the Milestones section (US1)\n2. Configure the new milestone's parameters (title, start and end dates) (US3)\n3. Create the milestone (US4)\n\nBut that might not fit. Alternatively, the creation process (US9) includes configuring the details, so the strategies would be:\n\n1. Navigate to Milestones (US1)\n2. Create a new milestone with title, start and end dates (US9)\n\nBut how to represent that in the strategies. The output example for creating a project had \"Create a new project named...\" as the strategy, which maps to US9. So in this case, the strategy would be \"Create a new milestone with the specified dates\" under US9. Therefore, the universal strategies would be US1 and US9. But the user's task requires setting dates, which is part of the configuration. So maybe the steps are:\n\nStrategies:\n- Navigate to the Milestones page (US1)\n- Create a new milestone (US9) [which includes filling the form]\nBut the form filling is part of US9. Alternatively, the creation process involves configuring parameters (US3) and then executing (US4). But according to the universal strategies, US9 is the entire process. Hmm, perhaps the correct approach is to use US1, US9, and US4. Wait, the example for US9 is \"Create a new project named...\" which would involve filling the form and submitting. So the submission is part of US9. Therefore, the steps would be:\n\n1. Navigate to Milestones (US1)\n2. Create the milestone with the specified and dates (US9)\n\nBut the user's task includes configuring the dates, which is part of the creation process. So the strategies would be:\n\nStrategies:\n1. Navigate to the Milestones section in GitLab (US1)\n2. Create a new milestone with the title, start date, and end date configured (US9)\n\nBut the universal strategies for US9 include filling the form and submitting. So the strategies would be:\n\n\"Navigate to Milestones Section\", \"Create New Milestone with Configured Dates\", which would map to US1 and US9. But the user's answer example for a similar task (creating a project) used US9. So perhaps the correct universal strategies are US1 and US9. However, in the output example given earlier, when generating a report, they used US1, US3, US4. So for a task that requires configuring parameters (like dates) and then executing, they split into US3 and US4. But for creating an item, it's US9. So in this case, creating the milestone is US9, which includes setting the dates. Therefore, the strategies are:\n\nStrategies:\n1. Navigate to the Milestones page (US1)\n2. Create a new milestone with the specified parameters (US9)\n\nBut the user's answer example for creating a project used US9. So the answer should be:\n\n{\n \"task_id\": 593,\n \"strategies\": [\n \"Navigate to the Milestones section\",\n \"Create a new milestone with the title, start date (March 15, 2044), and end date (March 30, 2044)\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategies\": [\n \"Navigate To Page/Section\",\n \"Create Item\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategy_ids\": [\"US1\", \"US9\"]\n}\n\nBut wait, the creation process might involve filling a form (which is part of US9) and then submitting (US4). But according to the universal strategies, US9 includes the submission. For example, the example for US9 is \"Create a new project named 'My Research Project'\", which would involve filling the form and clicking create. So the entire process is US9. Therefore, the correct universal strategies are US1 and US9. So the answer should have two strategies: navigate and create. Therefore, the final answer is as above.\n\n\n```json\n{\n \"task_id\": 593,\n \"strategies\": [\n \"Navigate to the Milestones section in GitLab\",\n \"Create a new milestone with the task title, start date (March 15, 2044), and end date (March 30, 2044)\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategies\": [\n \"Navigate To Page/Section\",\n \"Create Item\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategy_ids\": [\"US1\", \"US9\"]\n}\n```",
"model_reasoning": null
},
{
"task_id": 599,
"task_intent": "Open the thread of a trending post on the forum \"machine learning\" and subscribe.",
"expected_ids": [
"US1",
"US2",
"US4"
],
"actual_ids": [
"US1",
"US2",
"US5",
"US4"
],
"correct": false,
"model": "aiproxy/deepseek-reasoner",
"model_output": "\nOkay, let's tackle this task. The user wants to open a trending post on the \"machine learning\" subreddit and subscribe to the thread. First, I need to break down the steps.\n\nStarting with navigation: The user needs to get to the machine learning forum. That's probably the subreddit page. So, navigating to that specific subreddit would be the first step. That aligns with US1 (Navigate To Page/Section).\n\nNext, they need to find a trending post. Reddit has sections like \"Hot,\" \"New,\" \"Top,\" etc. So maybe filtering or sorting the posts to find the trending ones. That sounds like US2 (Search/Filter/Sort Data) because they're sorting or filtering to locate the trending post.\n\nOnce they find the post, they need to open its thread. That's viewing the details of the post, which is US5 (View/Inspect Item Details).\n\nAfter opening the thread, subscribing to it. On Reddit, subscribing to a thread usually means clicking the \"Subscribe\" button, which is an action. So that's US4 (Execute Action/Process).\n\nPutting it all together: Navigate to the subreddit, filter to find the trending post, open the thread, then subscribe. The universal strategies would be US1, US2, US5, and US4.\n\n\n```json\n{\n \"task_id\": 599,\n \"strategies\": [\n \"Navigate to the \\\"machine learning\\\" subreddit page\",\n \"Filter/sort posts to identify a trending thread\",\n \"Open the selected trending thread\",\n \"Click the subscribe button for the thread\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategies\": [\n \"Navigate To Page/Section\",\n \"Search/Filter/Sort Data\",\n \"View/Inspect Item Details\",\n \"Execute Action/Process\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategy_ids\": [\"US1\", \"US2\", \"US5\", \"US4\"]\n}\n```",
"model_reasoning": null
},
{
"task_id": 605,
"task_intent": "Find a subreddit focused on topics related to gaming consoles, and post my question, \"what is the recommended console to buy these days\" there",
"expected_ids": [
"US1",
"US9"
],
"actual_ids": [
"US2",
"US1",
"US9"
],
"correct": false,
"model": "aiproxy/deepseek-reasoner",
"model_output": "\nOkay, let's tackle this task. The user wants to post a question about recommended gaming consoles on a relevant subreddit. First, I need to figure out the steps involved.\n\nStarting with Reddit, the user needs to find the right subreddit. So, the first step would be searching for gaming console-related subreddits. That's probably using the search function, which aligns with US2 (Search/Filter/Sort Data). Once they find the right subreddit, they need to navigate to it, which is US1 (Navigate To Page/Section).\n\nNext, creating a post. That involves going to the subreddit's page and clicking the \"Create Post\" button. Creating a new post is US9 (Create Item). Then, they need to input their question and submit it, which would be part of the creation process but might involve configuring the post details (title, text), so maybe US3 (Configure Parameters/Settings) here. Finally, submitting the post is US4 (Execute Action/Process).\n\nWait, when creating the post, filling in the title and text is part of the form submission. So US9 covers filling out the form and submitting. But maybe breaking it down into steps: configuring the post details (title and body) as US3, then executing the submission as US4. But according to the universal strategies, US9 is about creating an item, which typically involves filling a form and submitting. So maybe US9 already includes both steps. Let me check the examples. For example, US9's example is \"Create a new project named...\" which involves filling a form and submitting. So perhaps the strategy here is \"Create a new post with the question...\" which would be US9. So maybe the steps are: navigate to subreddit, create post, configure parameters (title and text), then execute. Hmm, but the universal strategies might consider the entire form submission as US9. Let me check the definitions.\n\nUS9: Create Item - Complete the process of adding a new entity... typically by filling out a form and submitting it. So the entire process of filling the form and submitting is US9. So in that case, the steps would be: search for subreddit, navigate to it, create post (which includes filling and submitting). But maybe the user needs to first click the create post button, which is part of US9. Alternatively, maybe the steps are: navigate to subreddit, then create the post (US9). But the actual steps would involve configuring the post's title and body, which is part of US9. So perhaps the strategies are:\n\n1. Search for gaming console subreddits (US2)\n2. Navigate to the chosen subreddit (US1)\n3. Create a new post with the question (US9)\n4. Submit the post (US4)\n\nWait, but US9 includes submitting. So maybe step 3 is \"Create a new post...\" which involves filling and submitting. But in practice, creating a post might require filling the form (title, text) and then clicking submit. So maybe the steps are:\n\n- Navigate to subreddit (US1)\n- Initiate post creation (part of US9)\n- Configure post parameters (title and body) (US3)\n- Execute the post submission (US4)\n\nBut according to the universal strategies, US9 is the entire process. So perhaps the strategies are:\n\n1. Use search to find relevant subreddits (US2)\n2. Navigate to the selected subreddit (US1)\n3. Create a new post with the question (US9)\n4. Submit the post (US4)\n\nWait, but US9 includes submitting. So maybe step 3 and 4 are combined under US9. But the example given in US9 is \"Create a new project named...\" which would involve filling the form and submitting. So perhaps the strategies are:\n\n1. Search for gaming console subreddits (US2)\n2. Navigate to the chosen subreddit (US1)\n3. Create a new post with the question (US9)\n\nBut the user's intent is to post the question, so creating the post would be the main action. However, the actual steps might involve configuring the post's title and body, which is part of US3 (Configure Parameters/Settings). Wait, US3 is about setting parameters before executing an action. So creating the post would involve configuring the title and body (US3) and then executing the submission (US4). But according to the universal strategies, US9 covers the entire creation process. So maybe the correct approach is:\n\nStrategies:\n- Search for relevant subreddits (US2)\n- Navigate to the subreddit (US1)\n- Create a new post (US9), which includes filling in the details and submitting.\n\nBut the example for US9 is \"Create a new project named...\" which implies that the entire process is US9. Therefore, the strategies would be:\n\n1. Search for subreddits related to gaming consoles (US2)\n2. Navigate to the selected subreddit (US1)\n3. Create a new post with the question (US9)\n\nBut maybe the creation involves configuring the post's parameters (title, text) which is part of US3. Hmm, this is a bit confusing. Let me check the US3 example: \"Configure the date range for the report...\" which is setting parameters before generating. So in the case of creating a post, filling the form fields (title, text) would be part of US3 (since it's configuring parameters before executing the action of submitting). Then, executing the action (submitting) is US4. But according to US9, creating an item involves filling the form and submitting. So perhaps US9 encompasses both US3 and US4. Therefore, the correct strategy would be to use US9 for creating the post, which includes configuring the parameters (title, text) and submitting. Therefore, the strategies would be:\n\nStrategies:\n1. Search for gaming console subreddits (US2)\n2. Navigate to the chosen subreddit (US1)\n3. Create a new post with the question (US9)\n\nBut the user's intent is to post the question, so the steps would be: find the subreddit, go there, create the post. So the universal strategies would be US2, US1, US9.\n\nBut maybe the actual steps are:\n\n- Search for subreddits (US2)\n- Navigate to the subreddit (US1)\n- Click \"Create Post\" (part of US9)\n- Fill in title and text (US3)\n- Click submit (US4)\n\nBut according to the universal strategies, US9 is the entire process. So perhaps the correct way is to list US9 as the strategy for the post creation. Therefore, the strategies would be:\n\nStrategies:\n1. Search for subreddits focused on gaming consoles (US2)\n2. Navigate to the selected subreddit (US1)\n3. Create a new post with the question (US9)\n\nThus, the universal strategies are US2, US1, US9.\n\nBut let me check the example given in the output example. For the task of generating a report, the strategies were navigate, configure parameters, execute. The corresponding US were US1, US3, US4. So in that case, creating a report involved navigating, configuring (US3), then executing (US4). But creating an item (US9) is a different scenario. So perhaps in this case, creating the post is US9, which includes filling the form and submitting. Therefore, the strategies would be:\n\nStrategies:\n- Search for subreddits (US2)\n- Navigate to subreddit (US1)\n- Create post (US9)\n\nSo the universal strategies are US2, US1, US9.\n\nBut maybe the actual steps require configuring the post's title and body, which would be US3. But according to the universal strategies, US9 covers the entire creation process. So the answer should be:\n\nstrategies: [\n \"Search for subreddits related to gaming consoles\",\n \"Navigate to the chosen subreddit\",\n \"Create a new post with the question\"\n],\nuniversal_strategies: [\"Search/Filter/Sort Data\", \"Navigate To Page/Section\", \"Create Item\"],\nuniversal_strategy_ids: [\"US2\", \"US1\", \"US9\"]\n\n\n```json\n{\n \"task_id\": 605,\n \"strategies\": [\n \"Search for subreddits related to gaming consoles\",\n \"Navigate to the chosen subreddit\",\n \"Create a new post with the question \\\"what is the recommended console to buy these days\\\"\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategies\": [\n \"Search/Filter/Sort Data\",\n \"Navigate To Page/Section\",\n \"Create Item\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategy_ids\": [\"US2\", \"US1\", \"US9\"]\n}\n```",
"model_reasoning": null
},
{
"task_id": 612,
"task_intent": "Post a review of my recent reading \"big little lies\" in the r/books with my comment \"can't stop it\".",
"expected_ids": [
"US1",
"US4",
"US3",
"US9"
],
"actual_ids": [
"US1",
"US9"
],
"correct": false,
"model": "aiproxy/deepseek-reasoner",
"model_output": "\nOkay, let's tackle this task. The user wants to post a review of \"Big Little Lies\" on the r/books subreddit with the comment \"can't stop it.\" \n\nFirst, I need to figure out the steps involved. On Reddit, to post something, you usually start by navigating to the specific subreddit. So the first step would be going to r/books. That's US1: Navigate To Page/Section.\n\nNext, once on the subreddit, there's usually a button to create a new post. Clicking that would open the form to write the post. That's part of creating a new item, so US9: Create Item.\n\nThen, the user needs to fill in the title and the body of the post. The title should mention the book and maybe the review, and the body would include their comment \"can't stop it.\" Configuring these parameters falls under US3: Configure Parameters/Settings.\n\nAfter filling out the form, submitting the post is an action, which is US4: Execute Action/Process.\n\nWait, but creating the item (US9) might already involve filling out the form. Maybe the steps are: navigate to r/books, create a new post, set the title and body, then submit. So the strategies would be US1, US9, US3, US4? Or maybe US9 includes the form filling as part of the creation process. Let me check the examples. \n\nLooking at the example for US9: \"Create a new project named...\" which involves filling a form. So maybe the creation step includes configuring parameters. But in the universal strategies, US3 is specifically for configuring parameters before executing an action. So perhaps in this case, creating the post (US9) involves filling the form (US3) and then submitting (US4). Hmm, but the example for US9 in the table includes filling out a form and submitting. Wait, the US9 example is \"Create a new project named...\" which would involve entering the name in a form and submitting. So maybe US9 encompasses both filling the form and submitting. But in the output example, when creating an item, they used US9 and US4. Wait, no. Let me check the output example. \n\nIn the output example for task 4, the strategies were Navigate, Configure, Execute. So when generating a report, they navigated, configured parameters, then executed. So for creating an item, perhaps the steps would be Navigate to the creation page (US1), then Create Item (US9), which includes filling the form and submitting. But maybe the actual steps are: navigate to the subreddit, click create post (US1?), then fill in the form (US3), then submit (US4). Or maybe creating the post is US9, which involves filling the form and submitting. \n\nAlternatively, the breakdown could be: Navigate to r/books (US1), Create a new post (US9), which involves filling the title and body (part of US9), then submit (US4). But the universal strategies list US9 as \"Complete the process of adding a new entity... typically by filling out a form and submitting it.\" So US9 includes both filling the form and submitting. Therefore, maybe the steps are: Navigate to r/books (US1), Create a new post (US9). But the user's intent includes specific parameters: the title and comment. So perhaps the strategies need to include configuring those parameters. \n\nWait, the US3 is \"Configure Parameters/Settings\" which is setting options before executing an action. So when creating the post, you have to configure the title and body (parameters) before submitting. So the steps would be: Navigate to r/books (US1), Create new post (US9), Configure title and body (US3), then submit (US4). But maybe creating the post (US9) already includes filling the form, which would be part of US3. Hmm, this is a bit confusing. \n\nAlternatively, the process is: Navigate to the subreddit (US1), Initiate the creation of a new post (which might be part of US9), then configure the parameters (title and body) as part of US3, then execute the submission (US4). But in the universal strategies, US9 is the entire process of creating the item, which would include filling the form and submitting. So maybe the strategies are: Navigate to r/books (US1), Create a new post with title and comment (US9), and then maybe US4 is part of US9. But the example for US9 in the table includes submitting. \n\nWait, the example for US9 is \"Create a new project named...\" which would involve filling the name in a form and submitting. So US9 covers both filling the form and submitting. Therefore, in this case, the steps would be: Navigate to r/books (US1), Create the post (US9) which includes setting the title and body. So the strategies would be US1 and US9. But the user's specific parameters (title and comment) need to be mentioned. So maybe the strategy is broken down into: Navigate to the subreddit, create the post with the specified title and comment. Therefore, the strategies would be:\n\n1. Navigate to the r/books subreddit (US1)\n2. Create a new post with the title and comment (US9)\n\nBut perhaps the creation step involves configuring parameters (US3) as part of the process. Alternatively, maybe the steps are: Navigate to r/books, click \"Create Post\" (US1?), then fill in the title and body (US3), then submit (US4). But according to the universal strategies, US9 is the entire process of creating the item, which would include filling the form and submitting. So perhaps the correct approach is to use US1 and US9. But the example given in the output example for task 4 used US1, US3, US4. So maybe when creating an item, you have to navigate to the page (US1), configure the parameters (US3), then execute (US4). But in that case, US9 would not be used. Wait, the example for US9 is \"Create a new project named...\" which is a single step. So perhaps the strategy for creating an item is US9, which includes the entire process. But in the output example, when generating a report, they used US1, US3, US4. So maybe for creating an item, it's US9, but for generating a report, it's an action that requires configuration and execution. \n\nThis is a bit ambiguous. Let me check the universal strategies again. \n\nUS9: Create Item – Complete the process of adding a new entity... typically by filling out a form and submitting it. So the entire process of filling the form and submitting is US9. Therefore, in this case, the steps would be:\n\n1. Navigate to r/books (US1)\n2. Create a new post with the specified title and comment (US9)\n\nBut the user's intent includes specific parameters (the title and comment), so maybe the strategy should mention configuring those. However, according to the universal strategies, US9 includes filling the form. So perhaps the strategies are:\n\nStrategies:\n- Navigate to the r/books subreddit (US1)\n- Create a new post titled \"Review of Big Little Lies\" with the comment \"can't stop it\" (US9)\n\nBut the example in the output example for task 4 used US3 (configure parameters) when setting the date range. So maybe in this case, creating the post involves configuring the title and body (US3) and then executing (US4). But according to the universal strategies, US9 is the entire process. \n\nAlternatively, maybe the steps are:\n\n1. Navigate to r/books (US1)\n2. Initiate post creation (US9)\n3. Configure title and comment (US3)\n4. Submit the post (US4)\n\nBut that would split the creation into multiple steps, which might not align with the universal strategies. \n\nAlternatively, the correct approach is to use US1, US9, and US4. Because creating the item (US9) involves filling the form (which is part of US9) and then submitting (US4). But according to the example for US9, submitting is part of the create process. \n\nHmm, this is a bit confusing. Let me look at the example given in the universal strategies. For US9, the example is \"Create a new project named 'My Research Project.'\" So the entire action of creating the project, including naming it, is part of US9. Therefore, in this case, creating the post with the specific title and comment would be part of US9. So the strategies would be:\n\n1. Navigate to the r/books subreddit (US1)\n2. Create a new post with the title \"Review of Big Little Lies\" and comment \"can't stop it\" (US9)\n\nBut the user's comment is the body of the post. So the strategy would involve creating the post with those details. Therefore, the universal strategies used would be US1 and US9. \n\nBut wait, the example output for task 4 used US1, US3, US4. So generating a report involved navigating, configuring parameters, then executing. So perhaps creating an item is a single step (US9), but generating a report involves configuration and execution. \n\nTherefore, for this task, the correct strategies are:\n\n- Navigate to r/books (US1)\n- Create a new post with the specified title and comment (US9)\n\nBut maybe the creation involves configuring parameters (US3) as part of the process. However, according to the universal strategies, US9 includes filling out the form. So perhaps US9 is sufficient. \n\nAlternatively, maybe the steps are:\n\n1. Navigate to r/books (US1)\n2. Access the post creation form (US1 again? Or part of US9)\n3. Configure the post's title and body (US3)\n4. Submit the post (US4)\n\nBut according to the universal strategies, US9 is the entire process. So perhaps the correct answer is:\n\nStrategies:\n1. Navigate to the r/books subreddit (US1)\n2. Create a new post titled \"Review of Big Little Lies\" with the body \"can't stop it\" (US9)\n\nBut the universal strategy for US9 is \"Create Item\". So the strategies would be US1 and US9. \n\nAlternatively, maybe the creation involves multiple steps. For example, navigating to the subreddit, then creating the post (which includes filling the form and submitting). So the strategies would be:\n\nStrategies:\n- Navigate to the r/books subreddit (US1)\n- Create a new post with the specified title and comment (US9)\n\nThus, the universal strategies are US1 and US9. \n\nBut the user's intent requires specific content in the post. So the strategy should mention configuring those parameters. But according to the universal strategies, US3 is for configuring parameters. So perhaps the steps are:\n\n1. Navigate to r/books (US1)\n2. Start creating a new post (US9)\n3. Set the title and body (US3)\n4. Submit the post (US4)\n\nBut then the universal strategies would be US1, US9, US3, US4. But that might not be correct because US9 is supposed to cover the entire creation process. \n\nAlternatively, maybe the correct approach is to use US1, US9, and US4. Because creating the post (US9) involves filling the form (which is part of US9), and then submitting (US4). But according to the example for US9, submitting is part of the create process. \n\nThis is a bit conflicting. To resolve this, perhaps the correct answer is:\n\nStrategies:\n1. Navigate to the r/books subreddit (US1)\n2. Create a new post with the title and comment (US9)\n3. Submit the post (US4)\n\nBut that would split the creation into two steps, which might not be accurate. \n\nAlternatively, the creation of the post (US9) includes submitting it. So the strategies are:\n\n1. Navigate to r/books (US1)\n2. Create and submit the post with the specified details (US9 and US4?)\n\nBut according to the universal strategies, US9 includes submitting. So perhaps the correct answer is:\n\nStrategies:\n- Navigate to the r/books subreddit (US1)\n- Create a new post titled \"Review of Big Little Lies\" with the body \"can't stop it\" (US9)\n\nThus, the universal strategies are US1 and US9. \n\nBut the example given in the output example for task 4 used US1, US3, US4. So generating a report involved navigating, configuring parameters, then executing. So perhaps creating an item is a single step (US9), but generating a report is a process that requires configuration and execution. \n\nTherefore, for this task, the correct answer is:\n\nStrategies:\n1. Navigate to the r/books subreddit (US1)\n2. Create a new post with the title and comment (US9)\n\nUniversal strategies: US1, US9\n\nBut the user's comment is part of the post's body, which would be configured. So maybe US3 is involved. \n\nAlternatively, the steps are:\n\n1. Navigate to r/books (US1)\n2. Access the post creation form (part of US9)\n3. Configure the title and body (US3)\n4. Submit the post (US4)\n\nBut according to the universal strategies, US9 is the entire process. So perhaps the correct answer is:\n\nStrategies:\n- Navigate to r/books (US1)\n- Create a new post (US9), which includes setting the title and body (US3)\n- Submit the post (US4)\n\nBut that would require three steps. However, the example for US9 includes submitting. So maybe US9 covers both filling the form and submitting. Therefore, the strategies are US1 and US9. \n\nBut the user's specific parameters (title and comment) need to be mentioned. So the strategy steps would be:\n\n1. Navigate to the r/books subreddit (US1)\n2. Create a new post with the title \"Review of Big Little Lies\" and comment \"can't stop it\" (US9)\n\nThus, the strategies are US1 and US9. \n\nBut in the universal strategies, US3 is for configuring parameters. So creating the post would involve configuring the title and body (US3) as part of the creation process. But according to the example for US9, creating a project named \"My Research Project\" is a single step (US9). So perhaps the configuration is part of US9. \n\nTherefore, the correct answer is:\n\nStrategies:\n- Navigate to the r/books subreddit (US1)\n- Create a new post with the specified title and comment (US9)\n\nUniversal strategies: US1, US9\n\nBut I'm not entirely sure. Let me check the example again. In the example given in the output example, the task was to generate a report, and the strategies were navigate, configure, execute. So for generating a report, they used US1, US3, US4. But for creating an item, like a post, it's US9. So the answer should be US1 and US9. \n\nTherefore, the final answer should be:\n\nStrategies:\n1. Navigate to the r/books subreddit (US1)\n2. Create a new post titled \"Review of Big Little Lies\" with the comment \"can't stop it\" (US9)\n\nUniversal strategies: US1, US9\n\n\n```json\n{\n \"task_id\": 612,\n \"strategies\": [\n \"Navigate to the r/books subreddit\",\n \"Create a new post titled 'Review of Big Little Lies' with the comment 'can't stop it'\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategies\": [\n \"Navigate To Page/Section\",\n \"Create Item\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategy_ids\": [\"US1\", \"US9\"]\n}\n```",
"model_reasoning": null
},
{
"task_id": 619,
"task_intent": "Re-post the image of costume contest in this page to funny subreddit and note \"from /f/pics\"",
"expected_ids": [
"US1",
"US4",
"US3",
"US9"
],
"actual_ids": [
"US1",
"US3",
"US9"
],
"correct": false,
"model": "aiproxy/deepseek-reasoner",
"model_output": "\nOkay, let's tackle this task. The user wants to repost an image from a costume contest in the current page to the funny subreddit and add a note \"from /f/pics\". \n\nFirst, I need to figure out the steps. The user is on Reddit, so I should start by locating the image post they want to share. Once found, they'll need to access the option to crosspost it. Reddit has a crosspost feature, so that would be the way to go. \n\nNext, selecting the destination subreddit. The target here is the funny subreddit, so they need to choose that from the list. Then, they have to add the note \"from /f/pics\" in the title or as a comment. Wait, crossposting usually allows adding a title. So maybe the note goes into the title.\n\nAfter setting the title with the note, they submit the crosspost. So the steps would involve navigating to the crosspost function, selecting the destination, configuring the title, and submitting. \n\nLooking at the universal strategies: Navigate to the crosspost option (US1), then configure parameters by selecting the subreddit and adding the note (US3), then execute the crosspost (US4). Also, creating the item (crosspost) is part of US9. Hmm, maybe US9 is more accurate for creating the crosspost. Let me check the definitions. US9 is for creating a new item, which a crosspost would be. So the steps would be: find and navigate to crosspost (US1?), select the subreddit (US3?), create the crosspost with note (US9). Alternatively, maybe US1 for navigating to the crosspost page, US3 for setting the subreddit and note, US4 to execute. But US9 is specifically for creating items, which crossposting is. So maybe US9 is part of it. Let me structure it properly.\n\nSo the strategies would be:\n\n1. Navigate to the crosspost option for the image post. (US1)\n2. Configure the crosspost parameters to select the funny subreddit and add the note. (US3)\n3. Create the crosspost. (US9 or US4? Because creating is part of US9, but executing the action is US4. The crosspost submission is an action, so maybe US4. But US9 is about creating a new item. Hmm. The example for US9 is \"Create a new project named...\", which is similar to creating a crosspost. So maybe US9 applies here. But the actual submission would be US4. Wait, the crosspost involves filling a form (subreddit selection and title) which is configuration (US3), then executing the submit (US4). Alternatively, creating the crosspost as a new item (US9) would encompass the entire process. But according to the universal strategies, US9 is for creating a new entity by filling a form and submitting. So maybe the steps are:\n\n- Navigate to crosspost (US1)\n- Configure parameters (select subreddit, add note) (US3)\n- Execute action (submit crosspost) (US4)\n\nBut the creation of the crosspost is the result of these steps. Alternatively, maybe the creation is US9. Let me check the example for US9: \"Create a new project named...\" which involves filling a form and submitting. So the entire process of creating the crosspost would be US9, but the steps might involve navigating, configuring, and executing. However, according to the universal strategies, each step should be mapped to a US. So breaking it down:\n\n1. Navigate to the crosspost option (US1)\n2. Select the funny subreddit and add the note (US3)\n3. Submit the crosspost (US4)\n\nBut creating the crosspost is the result, which is US9. Wait, the US9 is a strategy that involves creating a new item, which would include filling the form and submitting. So maybe the strategies are:\n\n1. Navigate to crosspost page (US1)\n2. Configure crosspost parameters (US3)\n3. Create the crosspost (US9)\n\nBut the example for US9 includes filling a form and submitting. So perhaps the third step is US9. Alternatively, the submission is US4. Hmm. The example given for US9 is \"Generate and submit the sales report\" which is US4. Wait, no. The example for US4 is \"Generate and submit the sales report.\" So US4 is the execution. US9 is for creating a new item, which would involve filling a form and submitting. So in this case, creating the crosspost would be US9. But the steps would be: navigate to the crosspost page (US1), configure the parameters (US3), and create the crosspost (US9). But the actual submission is part of US9. So maybe the strategies are:\n\n1. Navigate to the crosspost option (US1)\n2. Configure the crosspost to funny subreddit and add note (US3)\n3. Create the crosspost (US9)\n\nAlternatively, the third step is executing the action (US4). But according to the US9 description, it's about creating a new entity by filling a form and submitting. So the entire process of creating the crosspost (after configuration) would be US9. So the steps would be:\n\n- Navigate to crosspost (US1)\n- Configure parameters (US3)\n- Create crosspost (US9)\n\nBut the example given in the output example uses US4 for generating and submitting. So maybe in this case, the submission is US4. But the user's task is to create a crosspost, which is a new item (the crosspost itself is a new post in the funny subreddit). Therefore, the creation would be US9. So the strategies would be:\n\nStrategies:\n- Navigate to the crosspost option for the image (US1)\n- Configure the crosspost parameters (select funny subreddit, add note) (US3)\n- Create the crosspost (US9)\n\nBut the example for US9 is \"Create a new project named...\", which involves filling a form and submitting. So creating the crosspost would be US9. Therefore, the third step is US9. So the universal strategies would be US1, US3, US9.\n\nBut I need to check the definitions again. US9: Create Item - adding a new entity by filling a form and submitting. So yes, crossposting is creating a new post (item) in the funny subreddit. Therefore, the steps are:\n\n1. Navigate to crosspost option (US1)\n2. Configure parameters (US3)\n3. Create the crosspost (US9)\n\nSo the strategies would be:\n\nStrategies: [\n \"Navigate to the crosspost option for the costume contest image\",\n \"Configure crosspost parameters to select the funny subreddit and add note \\\"from /f/pics\\\"\",\n \"Create the crosspost in the funny subreddit\"\n]\n\nUniversal strategies: US1, US3, US9\n\nYes, that makes sense. The final step is creating the item (crosspost), which is US9.\n\n\n```json\n{\n \"task_id\": 619,\n \"strategies\": [\n \"Navigate to the crosspost option for the costume contest image\",\n \"Configure crosspost parameters to select the funny subreddit and add note \\\"from /f/pics\\\"\",\n \"Create the crosspost in the funny subreddit\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategies\": [\n \"Navigate To Page/Section\",\n \"Configure Parameters/Settings\",\n \"Create Item\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategy_ids\": [\"US1\", \"US3\", \"US9\"]\n}\n```",
"model_reasoning": null
},
{
"task_id": 626,
"task_intent": "Create a discussion post about \"Iphone 14\" in a relevant subreddit and ask users for their opinions with the simple prompt, \"your opinion\"",
"expected_ids": [
"US1",
"US9"
],
"actual_ids": [
"US1",
"US9",
"US4"
],
"correct": false,
"model": "aiproxy/deepseek-reasoner",
"model_output": "\nOkay, let's tackle this task. The user wants to create a discussion post about the iPhone 14 in a relevant subreddit and ask for opinions with the prompt \"your opinion\". \n\nFirst, I need to figure out the steps involved. The main action here is creating a post on Reddit. So, the first step would be navigating to the correct subreddit. That's probably US1 (Navigate To Page/Section) because the agent needs to go to the specific subreddit where the post should be made.\n\nNext, creating the post involves filling out a form with the title and body. Since creating a new item is US9 (Create Item), that makes sense here. The agent would need to input the title, maybe something like \"Discussion: iPhone 14 - Your Opinion?\" and then in the body, elaborate a bit and include the prompt \"What's your opinion on the iPhone 14?\".\n\nAfter filling in the details, the agent has to submit the post. That's an action execution, which is US4 (Execute Action/Process). Clicking the submit button to post it.\n\nI should check if there are any other steps. Maybe searching for the right subreddit first, but the task says \"relevant subreddit,\" so perhaps the user assumes the agent knows where to go. If not, maybe a search step, but the example given in the strategies doesn't include that. The example output for the previous task used US1, US9, US4. So maybe the same applies here.\n\nSo the strategies would be: Navigate to the relevant subreddit (US1), create the discussion post with title and prompt (US9), and submit the post (US4). The universal strategies are US1, US9, US4.\n\n\n```json\n{\n \"task_id\": 626,\n \"strategies\": [\n \"Navigate to a relevant subreddit (e.g., r/iPhone or r/Apple)\",\n \"Create a new discussion post titled \\\"iPhone 14 Discussion\\\" with the body text \\\"What's your opinion on the iPhone 15?\\\"\",\n \"Submit the post to publish it in the subreddit\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategies\": [\n \"Navigate To Page/Section\",\n \"Create Item\",\n \"Execute Action/Process\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategy_ids\": [\"US1\", \"US9\", \"US4\"]\n}\n```",
"model_reasoning": null
},
{
"task_id": 641,
"task_intent": "Post a notice on a virtual meetup for Harry Potter enthusiasts on July 8th in the books subreddit",
"expected_ids": [
"US1",
"US1",
"US3",
"US9"
],
"actual_ids": [
"US1",
"US9",
"US3",
"US4"
],
"correct": false,
"model": "aiproxy/deepseek-reasoner",
"model_output": "\nOkay, let's tackle this task. The user wants to post a notice about a virtual meetup for Harry Potter fans on July 8th in the books subreddit. First, I need to figure out the steps involved. \n\nStarting with Reddit, the user probably needs to navigate to the specific subreddit, which is r/books here. So that's the first step: go to the books subreddit. That aligns with US1 (Navigate To Page/Section).\n\nNext, they need to create a new post. On Reddit, there's a \"Create Post\" button. Clicking that would be part of creating the item, so US9 (Create Item) applies here.\n\nThen, they have to fill in the details. The title should mention the meetup, date, and maybe Harry Potter theme. The body would have more info like time, platform, agenda. This is configuring the post's content, which falls under US3 (Configure Parameters/Settings).\n\nAfter filling everything out, they submit the post. That's executing the action, so US4 (Execute Action/Process) is needed here.\n\nWait, are there any other steps? Maybe verifying the post after submission? But the main steps are navigate, create, configure, and post. The example given in the output example for a similar task didn't include viewing details, so maybe it's not necessary here. The key steps are the four mentioned. So the strategies would be: Navigate to the subreddit, start creating the post, set up the details, and then post it. The universal strategies are US1, US9, US3, US4.\n\n\n```json\n{\n \"task_id\": 641,\n \"strategies\": [\n \"Navigate to the 'books' subreddit\",\n \"Initiate a new post creation\",\n \"Configure the post title and content with meetup details (date: July 8th, theme: Harry Potter, virtual platform info)\",\n \"Publish the meetup notice\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategies\": [\n \"Navigate To Page/Section\",\n \"Create Item\",\n \"Configure Parameters/Settings\",\n \"Execute Action/Process\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategy_ids\": [\"US1\", \"US9\", \"US3\", \"US4\"]\n}\n```",
"model_reasoning": null
},
{
"task_id": 645,
"task_intent": "Post in books subreddit about what could machine learning help the corresponding field.",
"expected_ids": [
"US1",
"US9"
],
"actual_ids": [
"US1",
"US9",
"US3",
"US4"
],
"correct": false,
"model": "aiproxy/deepseek-reasoner",
"model_output": "\nOkay, let's tackle this task. The user wants to post in the books subreddit about how machine learning could help the field. First, I need to figure out the steps involved in creating a post on Reddit.\n\nStarting with navigation. The user needs to go to the specific subreddit, which is r/books. So the first step would be navigating to that subreddit. That aligns with US1 (Navigate To Page/Section).\n\nNext, creating a new post. On Reddit, there's usually a \"Create Post\" button. Clicking that would open the form. That's part of US9 (Create Item) because it's adding a new post.\n\nThen, configuring the post details. The user needs to input the title and the body of the title would be something about machine learning's role in the books field, and the body would elaborate on possible applications. This step involves setting up the content, so US3 (Configure Parameters/Settings) fits here since they're setting the post's parameters.\n\nAfter filling in the details, submitting the post is the next step. That's an action, so US4 (Execute Action/Process) applies here as clicking the submit button.\n\nWait, but sometimes when you submit a post, there might be a confirmation step or checking for rules. But in the universal strategies, maybe that's part of the execution. So the main steps are navigate to subreddit, create post, configure title and content, then submit. So the strategies would be:\n\n1. Navigate to the r/books subreddit (US1)\n2. Initiate creating a new post (US9)\n3. Set the post title and content discussing ML applications (US3)\n4. Submit the post (US4)\n\nI think that covers the necessary steps. Let me check if any other strategies apply. Maybe verifying the post after submission, but the user's intent is just to post, so the main steps are those four. The strategies should be in order, and the universal IDs mapped correctly.\n\n\n```json\n{\n \"task_id\": 645,\n \"strategies\": [\n \"Navigate to the r/books subreddit\",\n \"Initiate creation of a new post\",\n \"Configure post title and content about machine learning applications in the books field\",\n \"Submit the post to the subreddit\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategies\": [\n \"Navigate To Page/Section\",\n \"Create Item\",\n \"Configure Parameters/Settings\",\n \"Execute Action/Process\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategy_ids\": [\"US1\", \"US9\", \"US3\", \"US4\"]\n}\n```",
"model_reasoning": null
},
{
"task_id": 65,
"task_intent": "Which customer has completed the fifth most number of orders in the entire history?",
"expected_ids": [
"US1",
"US2"
],
"actual_ids": [
"US1",
"US2",
"US7",
"US6"
],
"correct": false,
"model": "aiproxy/deepseek-reasoner",
"model_output": "\nOkay, let's tackle this task. The user wants to find out which customer has the fifth most orders in the entire history on the shopping admin site.\n\nFirst, I need to figure out where to get the order data. Probably, there's a section in the admin panel that lists customers and their order counts. So the first step would be navigating to that page. That's US1: Navigate To Page/Section. Maybe a \"Customers\" or \"Orders\" report section.\n\nNext, to get the fifth highest, the data might need to be sorted by the number of orders in descending order. So applying a sort on the order count column. That's US2: Search/Filter/Sort Data. The agent would sort the customers by their order count from highest to lowest.\n\nOnce sorted, the agent needs to locate the fifth entry in that sorted list. That's part of US7: Analyze/Evaluate/Verify Data, since it involves identifying the position in the sorted list. Then, extracting the customer's name from that entry would be US6: Extract/Retrieve Information.\n\nWait, but after sorting, do they need to navigate through pages if the list is paginated? If the list is long, maybe they have to go through multiple pages. But the task says \"entire history,\" so maybe all data is there. If not, US8 might be needed. But the example output for a similar task didn't include that. Let's assume the sort brings all data into view, so no need for US8 here.\n\nSo the strategies would be: navigate to the customer orders page, sort by order count descending, then identify the fifth customer and extract their info. The universal strategies would be US1, US2, US7, and US6. Wait, but the example for US7 includes analyzing data, like checking the order. So after sorting, verifying which is fifth is part of analysis (US7), then extracting the name (US6).\n\nSo the steps together:\n\n1. Navigate to the customer orders report/section (US1)\n2. Sort customers by total orders descending (US2)\n3. Identify the fifth customer in the sorted list (US7)\n4. Retrieve that customer's details (US6)\n\nBut maybe step 3 and 4 can be combined. Alternatively, maybe after sorting, the fifth entry is visible, so extracting the name directly. But the analysis step is needed to confirm the position. So the strategies would be:\n\n- Navigate to Customer Orders Report\n- Sort Customers by Total Orders in Descending Order\n- Identify the Fifth Customer in the Sorted List\n- Retrieve the Customer's Name\n\nAnd the universal strategies would be US1, US2, US7, US6.\n\nBut looking at the example given in the problem, sometimes steps can be combined. For instance, in the example, \"Generate and Review Bestsellers Report\" combines US4 (execute) and US7 (review). But in the output, they split into separate steps. Wait, the example output for task 4 had three steps, each mapped to a US. So each strategy step should correspond to a single US.\n\nSo in this case, the steps would be:\n\n1. Navigate to the Customer Orders Report (US1)\n2. Sort the customer list by total orders descending (US2)\n3. Analyze the sorted list to determine the fifth customer (US7)\n4. Extract the customer's name from the fifth position (US6)\n\nBut maybe step 3 and 4 can be merged. However, according to the universal strategies, US6 is about retrieving information, which is separate from analysis. So the steps would be:\n\nStrategies:\n\n1. Navigate to the Customer Orders Report (US1)\n2. Sort customers by total orders in descending order (US2)\n3. Analyze the sorted list to identify the fifth customer (US7)\n4. Retrieve the customer's name from the identified position (US6)\n\nBut the example given in the problem's output example had three steps, but three US. So maybe in this case, the steps can be:\n\n1. Navigate to the Customer Orders Report (US1)\n2. Sort the customer list by total orders descending (US2)\n3. Identify and retrieve the fifth customer's name (combining US7 and US6?)\n\nBut according to the universal strategies, each step should map to one US. So step 3 would be US7 (analyze to identify the fifth), then step 4 US6 (retrieve the name). But maybe the retrieval is part of the analysis. Alternatively, perhaps the step is \"View the fifth customer's details\" (US5) and then extract the name (US6). But that might complicate.\n\nAlternatively, after sorting, the list is displayed, and the fifth entry is visible. So the agent would need to the fifth entry, which might involve scrolling or paging (US8), but if it's all on one page, then no. Then, the agent would need to check the order (US7) and then extract the name (US6).\n\nSo the steps would be:\n\nStrategies:\n\n1. Navigate to the Customer Orders Report page. (US1)\n2. Sort the customer list by total orders in descending order. (US2)\n3. Analyze the sorted list to determine the fifth customer. (US7)\n4. Retrieve the customer's name from the list. (US6)\n\nBut maybe step 3 and 4 can be combined. However, the universal strategies are separate. So the answer would include these four steps. But looking at the example, sometimes steps are combined. For example, in the example, \"Generate and Review Bestsellers Report\" is one step, which maps to US4 (execute) and US7 (review). But in the example's output, they split into three steps, each with a US. Wait, the example's output has three steps:\n\n\"Navigate to Bestsellers Report\" (US1)\n\n\"Configure Report Parameters for January 2023\" (US3)\n\n\"Generate and Review Bestsellers Report\" (US4 and US7?)\n\nBut in the output, the universal_strategies are listed as US1, US3, US4. So the third step is considered US4 (execute action) only, and the \"review\" part is perhaps implied but not a separate step. So maybe the example's third step is just generating the report (US4), and the review is part of the next step, but in the example, it's not broken down. So perhaps in this case, the analysis (US7) is part of the same step as generating.\n\nBut in the current task, after sorting, the agent needs to analyze the list to find the fifth customer, which is US7, then retrieve the name (US6). So perhaps the steps are:\n\n1. Navigate to the appropriate report (US1)\n2. Sort the data (US2)\n3. Analyze to find the fifth (US7)\n4. Extract the name (US6)\n\nBut maybe the extraction is part of the analysis. Alternatively, the step could be \"View the fifth customer's details\" (US5) and then extract the name (US6). But that's if the details are in a separate page. If the list already shows the customer's name, then US6 is sufficient.\n\nSo the final answer would have four steps, each mapped to US1, US2, US7, US6. But looking at the example, sometimes steps are used. Let's check the example's output:\n\nOriginal task: \"What are the top-3 best-selling product in Jan 2023\"\n\nStrategies:\n\n1. Navigate to Bestsellers Report (US1)\n2. Configure Parameters for Jan 2023 (US3)\n3. Generate and Review (US4)\n\nSo the third step is US4 (execute action) and the review is part of that step, but the universal strategies only list US4. So perhaps the \"review\" is part of the same step but not a separate US. So maybe in our current task, after sorting, the agent can directly extract the fifth entry's name without a separate analysis step. But how?\n\nAlternatively, maybe the analysis is required to confirm that the fifth entry is indeed the fifth. So the steps would be:\n\n1. Navigate to the Orders or Customers report (US1)\n2. Sort customers by total orders descending (US2)\n3. Identify the fifth customer in the sorted list (US7)\n4. Retrieve the customer's name (US6)\n\nThus, the universal strategies would be US1, US2, US7, US6.\n\nBut the example for task 4 had three steps and three US. So maybe in this case, the steps are:\n\n1. Navigate to the Customer Orders Report (US1)\n2. Sort the list by total orders descending (US2)\n3. Identify and retrieve the fifth customer's name (combining US7 and US6). But according to the universal strategies, each step should correspond to one US. So perhaps the third step is US7 (analyze) and the fourth is US6 (retrieve). But maybe the retrieval is part of the analysis. Alternatively, the agent can retrieve the name once the position is known.\n\nBut according to the universal strategies, US6 is about extracting information, which is a separate action. So the steps would be:\n\nStrategies:\n\n1. Navigate to the Customer Orders Report page. (US1)\n2. Sort the customer list by total orders in descending order. (US2)\n3. Analyze the sorted list to determine the fifth customer. (US7)\n4. Retrieve the customer's name from the identified position. (US6)\n\nBut maybe the user interface shows the customer's name directly in the list, so after sorting, the fifth entry's name is visible, so step 3 and 4 can be merged. But according to the universal strategies, each step should be mapped to one US. So the third step is analysis (US7) and the fourth is extraction (US6). However, in practice, the agent might look at the fifth row and read the name, which combines analysis and extraction. But according to the universal strategies, these are separate steps.\n\nAlternatively, maybe the steps are:\n\n1. Navigate to the Customer Orders Report (US1)\n2. Sort customers by total orders descending (US2)\n3. View the fifth customer's details (US5)\n4. Retrieve the customer's name (US6)\n\nBut if the details are in a list, not requiring to open a details page, then US5 is not needed. So perhaps the correct steps are US1, US2, US7, US6.\n\nBut I need to check the universal strategies. US7 is \"Analyze/Evaluate/Verify Data\" which includes identifying patterns or positions. US6 is \"Extract/Retrieve Information\" which is reading the data.\n\nSo the steps would be:\n\nStrategies:\n\n1. Navigate to the Orders Report or Customer Report section where customer order counts are listed. (US1)\n2. Apply a sort to the customer list by total orders in descending order. (US2)\n3. Analyze the sorted list to identify the customer in the fifth position. (US7)\n4. Extract the customer's name from the identified position. (US6)\n\nThus, the universal strategies are US1, US2, US7, US6.\n\nBut the example given in the problem's output had three steps. Maybe in this case, the steps can be condensed. For example, after sorting, the fifth customer is visible, so the steps could be:\n\n1. Navigate to the Customer Orders Report (US1)\n2. Sort customers by total orders descending (US2)\n3. Retrieve the fifth customer's name from the sorted list (US6 and US7?)\n\nBut according to the universal strategies, each step must be mapped to one. So step 3 would involve both analysis (US7) and extraction (US6). But the example shows that sometimes steps can be phrased to combine actions but still map to one US. For example, \"Generate and Review\" maps to US4 (execute action). So perhaps in this case, the third step is phrased as \"Identify and retrieve the fifth customer's name\" but that would require two US. But according to the problem's output example, each strategy step is mapped to one US. So perhaps the third step is \"Identify the fifth customer in the sorted list\" (US7) and the fourth is \"Retrieve the customer's name\" (US6).\n\nBut the user's task is to find the customer, so the answer requires both steps. So the final answer would have four steps. But maybe the problem expects fewer steps. Let me think again.\n\nAlternatively, maybe after sorting, the agent can directly extract the fifth customer's name from the list, which would be US6. But how does the agent know it's the fifth? That requires analysis (US7). So perhaps the steps are:\n\n1. Navigate to the Customer Orders Report (US1)\n2. Sort the list by total orders descending (US2)\n3. Determine the fifth customer's name from the sorted list (US7 and US6)\n\nBut according to the universal strategies, each step must be one US. So perhaps the third step is US7 (analyze to determine the fifth) and the fourth is US6 (extract the name). But maybe the extraction is straightforward once the position is known, so the steps are:\n\n1. Navigate to the Customer Orders Report (US1)\n2. Sort customers by total orders descending (US2)\n3. Analyze the sorted list to identify the fifth customer (US7)\n4. Retrieve the customer's name (US6)\n\nThus, four steps. But the example had three steps. Maybe in this case, the steps are necessary. So the answer would be:\n\nStrategies:\n\n- Navigate to the Customer Orders Report\n- Sort Customers by Total Orders in Descending Order\n- Analyze the Sorted List to Identify the Fifth Customer\n- Retrieve the Customer's Name from the List\n\nUniversal strategies: US1, US2, US7, US6\n\nBut the problem's example had three steps. Maybe the agent can combine steps 3 and 4 into one, but according to the US definitions, they are separate. So the answer should include all four steps. However, maybe the retrieval is part of the analysis. For example, when the agent analyzes, they also extract the name. But according to the US definitions, US7 is about analysis, and US6 is about extraction. So they are separate.\n\nTherefore, the correct answer would include four steps with the corresponding US.\n\n\n```json\n{\n \"task_id\": 65,\n \"strategies\": [\n \"Navigate to the Customer Orders Report\",\n \"Sort Customers by Total Orders in Descending Order\",\n \"Analyze the Sorted List to Identify the Fifth Customer\",\n \"Retrieve the Customer's Name from the List\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategies\": [\n \"Navigate To Page/Section\",\n \"Search/Filter/Sort Data\",\n \"Analyze/Evaluate/Verify Data\",\n \"Extract/Retrieve Information\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategy_ids\": [\"US1\", \"US2\", \"US7\", \"US6\"]\n}\n```",
"model_reasoning": null
},
{
"task_id": 652,
"task_intent": "Reply to the post with my comment \"???\"",
"expected_ids": [
"US4",
"US3",
"US9"
],
"actual_ids": [
"US1",
"US9",
"US4"
],
"correct": false,
"model": "aiproxy/deepseek-reasoner",
"model_output": "\nOkay, let's tackle this task. The user wants to reply to a Reddit post with their comment \"???\". First, I need to figure out the steps involved.\n\nSo, the first thing is to navigate to the specific post. That makes sense because you can't reply unless you're on the post's detail page. That would be US1, Navigate To Page/Section. Once there, the user needs to locate the comment box. Maybe that's part of the next step. Then, they have to input their comment \"???\". That sounds like creating a new item, which is US9. Finally, submitting the comment would be executing an action, so US4. Let me check the universal strategies again to make sure. \n\nYes, US9 is Create Item, which involves filling out a form and submitting. But in Reddit, replying is more like creating a comment. So the steps would be: navigate to the post, input the comment, and submit. The strategies would be US1, US9, and US4. Wait, but US9 includes submitting as part of creating the item. Maybe the steps are: navigate to the post, create the comment (which includes writing and submitting). Hmm, maybe the submission is part of the create action. But in the universal strategies, US9 is \"Create Item\" which typically involves filling a form and submitting. So maybe the steps, it's Navigate to the post (US1), then Create the comment (US9). But the example given in the output example for generating a report had US3 (configure parameters) and US4 (execute action). So perhaps in this case, creating the comment involves both writing the text and submitting, which is part of US9. So the strategies would be US1 and US9. But the user's intent is to reply, which requires both writing and submitting. Alternatively, maybe breaking it down into three: navigate, input comment, submit. But according to the universal strategies, US9 covers the entire creation process. Let me check the example for US9: \"Create a new project named 'My Research Project.'\" That would involve filling the form and submitting. So in this case, replying would be US9. So the strategies would be: Navigate to the post (US1), Create a comment with the text \"???\" (US9). But maybe the user needs to click the reply button first. Wait, on Reddit, to reply to a post, you go to the post, type in the comment box, and click \"Reply.\" So maybe the steps are: 1. Navigate to the post (US1), 2. Enter the comment text into the comment box (part of US9), 3. Click the Reply button (US4). But according to the universal strategies, US9 is the entire process of creating an item, which includes filling the form and submitting. So maybe the strategies are US1 and US9. But the example given in the output example for generating a report had US1, US3, US4. So perhaps in this case, the steps are: Navigate to the post (US1), Configure the comment (US3), then Execute (US4). Wait, US3 is Configure Parameters/Settings, which is setting options before executing. But writing the comment text is part of creating the item. Hmm. Maybe the correct approach is US1 (navigate), US9 (create the comment). Because creating the comment involves both inputting the text and submitting. So the steps would be: Navigate to the post, Create the comment with the text \"???\". Therefore, the universal strategies would be US1 and US9. But the output example for creating a project used US9. Let me check the example again. The example for US9 is \"Create a new project named 'My Research Project.'\" So the strategy is \"Create a new project...\" which implies that the entire process of filling the form and submitting is US9. Therefore, in this case, replying to the post would be US9. So the strategies would be: Navigate to the post (US1), Create the comment (US9). But maybe the user needs to click the reply button first. Wait, on Reddit, the comment box is already present when you view the post. So you just type in the box and click reply. So the steps are: navigate to the post, input the comment, submit. So that's US1, US9 (create item), and US4 (execute action). Wait, but US9 includes the execution. The US9 example includes submitting. So perhaps the correct universal strategies are US1 and US9. Let me check the US9: \"Create Item: Complete the process of adding a new entity... typically by filling out a form and submitting it.\" So yes, submitting is part of US9. Therefore, the steps would be: 1. Navigate to the post (US1), 2. Create the comment (US9). Therefore, the strategies are US1 and US9. But the user's output example for generating a report had US1, US3, US4. So maybe in this case, the steps are: navigate to the post (US1), configure the comment (US3), execute (US4). But writing the comment is not configuring parameters, it's part of creating. So perhaps the correct answer is US1 and US9. Therefore, the strategies would be: \"Navigate to the post\", \"Create a new comment with the text '???'.\", and the universal strategies are US1 and US9. But the user's task is to reply to the post. So maybe the steps are: Navigate to the post (US1), Create the comment (US9). So the strategies would be those two steps. Therefore, the JSON output would have strategies: [\"Navigate to the target post\", \"Create a new comment with text \\\"???\\\"\"], and universal_strategies: [\"Navigate To Page/Section\", \"Create Item\"], with IDs US1 and US9. That seems correct.\n\n\n```json\n{\n \"task_id\": 652,\n \"strategies\": [\n \"Navigate to the target post\",\n \"Input the comment \\\"???\\\" into the reply box\",\n \"Submit the comment\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategies\": [\n \"Navigate To Page/Section\",\n \"Create Item\",\n \"Execute Action/Process\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategy_ids\": [\"US1\", \"US9\", \"US4\"]\n}\n```",
"model_reasoning": null
},
{
"task_id": 668,
"task_intent": "Submit a merge request for a11yproject.com/redesign branch to be merged into master branch, assign Justin Armstrong as the reviewer",
"expected_ids": [
"US1",
"US4",
"US3",
"US3",
"US9"
],
"actual_ids": [
"US1",
"US9",
"US3",
"US4"
],
"correct": true,
"model": "aiproxy/deepseek-reasoner",
"model_output": "\nOkay, let's tackle this task. The user wants to submit a merge request for the a11yproject.com/redesign branch into the master branch on GitLab and assign Justin Armstrong as the reviewer. \n\nFirst, I need to figure out the steps involved in creating a merge request on GitLab. The first thing would be navigating to the correct project page where the branches are located. That's probably US1, Navigate To Page/Section.\n\nNext, once on the project page, the user needs to go to the merge requests section and create a new one. Creating a new merge request would fall under US9, Create Item. \n\nThen, they have to configure the parameters: set the source branch as a11yproject.com/redesign and target as master. Also, assign Justin as the reviewer. Configuring these settings is US3, Configure Parameters/Settings.\n\nAfter setting everything up, they need to submit the merge request. That's executing an action, so US4, Execute Action/Process.\n\nSo the strategies would be: navigate to the merge request creation page, create the merge request, configure the branches and reviewer, then submit it. The corresponding universal strategies are US1, US9, US3, US4.\n\n\n```json\n{\n \"task_id\": 668,\n \"strategies\": [\n \"Navigate to the Merge Request creation page for the project\",\n \"Create a new merge request\",\n \"Configure source branch (a11yproject.com/redesign), target branch (master), and assign Justin Armstrong as reviewer\",\n \"Submit the merge request\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategies\": [\n \"Navigate To Page/Section\",\n \"Create Item\",\n \"Configure Parameters/Settings\",\n \"Execute Action/Process\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategy_ids\": [\"US1\", \"US9\", \"US3\", \"US4\"]\n}\n```",
"model_reasoning": null
},
{
"task_id": 678,
"task_intent": "Lookup orders that are canceled",
"expected_ids": [
"US1",
"US2",
"US3",
"US4"
],
"actual_ids": [
"US1",
"US2",
"US5"
],
"correct": false,
"model": "aiproxy/deepseek-reasoner",
"model_output": "\nOkay, let's tackle this task. The user wants to find canceled orders in the shopping admin site. First, I need to figure out the steps a GUI agent would take.\n\nStarting with navigation. The agent probably needs to go to the orders section. That's US1, Navigate To Page/Section. Then, once there, they need to filter the orders. Since the intent is to look up canceled ones, applying a filter for the status \"canceled\" makes sense. That's US2, Search/Filter/Sort Data. After applying the filter, the agent would execute the action to apply the filter, which might be clicking a \"Filter\" button or selecting from a dropdown. Wait, but configuring parameters might be part of setting the filter. Hmm, maybe US3 is part of setting the filter parameters. Or is the act of applying the filter considered executing an action? Let me think. US2 includes using filters, so maybe the steps are: navigate to orders, set the filter to canceled (US2), and then maybe execute the filter (US4). But sometimes applying a filter is part of the same step as configuring it. Maybe the strategy is to navigate, then filter using the status, which combines US2. Then, the agent would view the results. But do they need to execute an action to apply the filter? If the filter requires clicking a \"Apply\" button, then US4 would be needed. Otherwise, if selecting the filter automatically applies it, then US2 is sufficient. \n\nSo the strategies would be: 1. Navigate to the orders page (US1). 2. Apply the canceled status filter (US2). 3. Maybe execute the filter if needed (US4). But perhaps in some interfaces, selecting the filter from a dropdown automatically applies it, so US2 covers that. So the strategies would be Navigate to Orders, Filter by status canceled, then view the results. But the main steps are navigate, filter, and maybe execute. Alternatively, maybe the execution is part of the filter setup. \n\nLooking at the universal strategies examples: US2 example is \"Filter issues by the label 'Bug'.\" So that's just US2. So in this case, the steps would be navigate to orders (US1), then filter by canceled status (US2). Maybe that's enough. The user just needs to lookup the orders, so after filtering, the list is displayed. So the strategies would be: Navigate to Orders Section, Filter Orders by Canceled Status. So two steps. The universal strategies would be US1 and US2. \n\nBut maybe the task requires generating a report or something. But the intent is just to lookup,\" which implies viewing the list. So the answer would be strategies: Navigate to Orders Page, Filter Orders by Canceled Status. Universal strategies US1 and US2. The IDs are US1 and US2. \n\nSo the JSON output would have those two strategies and the corresponding US IDs.\n\n\n```json\n{\n \"task_id\": 678,\n \"strategies\": [\n \"Navigate to the Orders Management section\",\n \"Filter orders by status 'Canceled'\",\n \"Review the list of canceled orders\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategies\": [\n \"Navigate To Page/Section\",\n \"Search/Filter/Sort Data\",\n \"View/Inspect Item Details\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategy_ids\": [\"US1\", \"US2\", \"US5\"]\n}\n```",
"model_reasoning": null
},
{
"task_id": 682,
"task_intent": "Find a GitLab repository related to chatGPT and make a Reddit post linking to it in a relevant subreddit",
"expected_ids": [
"US2",
"US1",
"US9"
],
"actual_ids": [
"US2",
"US2",
"US6",
"US1",
"US9"
],
"correct": false,
"model": "aiproxy/deepseek-reasoner",
"model_output": "\nOkay, let's tackle this task. The user wants to find a GitLab repository related to ChatGPT and then post a link to it on Reddit in a relevant subreddit. \n\nFirst, I need to break down the steps. Starting with GitLab: they need to search for repositories related to ChatGPT. That would involve using the search feature on GitLab, maybe filtering by repositories. Then, they have to look through the results to find a suitable one. Once they find it, they need to get the repository URL.\n\nNext, moving to Reddit. They need to choose a subreddit that's relevant, like r/ChatGPT or r/MachineLearning. Then create a new post there, including the link to the GitLab repo. They might also need to add a title and description. Finally, submit the post.\n\nNow, mapping these steps to the universal strategies. Searching on GitLab would be US2 (Search/Filter/Sort Data). Navigating through results is US8 (Navigate Within Data/Results). Extracting the URL is US6 (Extract/Retrieve Information). On Reddit, navigating to the subreddit is US1. Creating the post is US9 (Create Item). Each step should reference the correct strategy ID. Let me check the examples to make sure. Yes, that seems right. So the strategies and their corresponding US IDs should be in order.\n\n\n```json\n{\n \"task_id\": 682,\n \"strategies\": [\n \"Search GitLab repositories for 'chatGPT'\",\n \"Filter and sort GitLab search results to identify relevant repositories\",\n \"Extract the URL of the chosen GitLab repository\",\n \"Navigate to a relevant subreddit (e.g., r/ChatGPT, r/opensource)\",\n \"Create a Reddit post with the repository link and context\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategies\": [\n \"Search/Filter/Sort Data\",\n \"Search/Filter/Sort Data\",\n \"Extract/Retrieve Information\",\n \"Navigate To Page/Section\",\n \"Create Item\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategy_ids\": [\"US2\", \"US2\", \"US6\", \"US1\", \"US9\"]\n}\n```",
"model_reasoning": null
},
{
"task_id": 686,
"task_intent": "Promote auth0/angular-storage to subreddit technology with the description from the repo itself.",
"expected_ids": [
"US1",
"US1",
"US3",
"US9"
],
"actual_ids": [
"US1",
"US5",
"US6",
"US1",
"US9",
"US4"
],
"correct": false,
"model": "aiproxy/deepseek-reasoner",
"model_output": "\nOkay, let's tackle this task. The user wants to promote the auth0/angular-storage repository to the technology subreddit using the description from the repo itself. \n\nFirst, I need to figure out the steps involved. The user is probably on GitLab, so they need to navigate to the specific repository. Once there, they should view the repo's details to get the description. Then, they need to extract that description. \n\nNext, they have to switch to Reddit. They need to go to the technology subreddit and create a new post. The title should mention the repo, and the body will include the extracted description. Finally, submit the post.\n\nLooking at the universal strategies, navigating to the repo on GitLab is US1. Viewing the details is US5. Extracting the description is US6. Then on Reddit, navigating to the subreddit is another US1. Creating the post is US9, and submitting it is US4. That covers all the necessary steps.\n\n\n```json\n{\n \"task_id\": 686,\n \"strategies\": [\n \"Navigate to auth0/angular-storage repository on GitLab\",\n \"View repository details to access description\",\n \"Extract repository description text\",\n \"Navigate to r/technology subreddit\",\n \"Create a new post with repository name and extracted description\",\n \"Submit the promotional post\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategies\": [\n \"Navigate To Page/Section\",\n \"View/Inspect Item Details\",\n \"Extract/Retrieve Information\",\n \"Navigate To Page/Section\",\n \"Create Item\",\n \"Execute Action/Process\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategy_ids\": [\"US1\", \"US5\", \"US6\", \"US1\", \"US9\", \"US4\"]\n}\n```",
"model_reasoning": null
},
{
"task_id": 69,
"task_intent": "Among the top 10 post in \"books\" forum, is there any post talks about supporting local book stores? If so, tell me the organizations involved",
"expected_ids": [
"US1",
"US5"
],
"actual_ids": [
"US1",
"US2",
"US7",
"US5",
"US6"
],
"correct": false,
"model": "aiproxy/deepseek-reasoner",
"model_output": "\nOkay, let's tackle this task. The user wants to know if any of the top 10 posts in the \"books\" forum on Reddit mention supporting local bookstores and, if so, which organizations are involved. \n\nFirst, I need to figure out the steps. Starting with navigation. The user needs to get to the \"books\" forum on Reddit. That's probably the subreddit. So the first step is navigating to the correct subreddit. That aligns with US1 (Navigate To Page/Section).\n\nNext, once on the books subreddit, the user needs to view the top posts. Reddit allows sorting posts (like hot, new, top). So sorting the posts by top would get the top 10. That's US2 (Search/Filter/Sort Data) because it's filtering or sorting the data.\n\nAfter sorting, the user needs to look through the top 10 posts. Each post's title and content need to be checked for mentions of supporting local bookstores. This involves analyzing the content, which is US7 (Analyze/Evaluate/Verify Data).\n\nIf any post is found, the next step is to view the details of that post. Clicking into the post to read the comments and content thoroughly. That's US5 (View/Inspect Item Details).\n\nWithin the post details, the user needs to extract information about any organizations mentioned. That's US6 (Extract/Retrieve Information).\n\nPutting it all together: navigate to the subreddit, sort the posts, analyze the top 10, check each post's details if relevant, and extract the org names. The strategies would be in that order, referencing the appropriate US steps.\n\n\n```json\n{\n \"task_id\": 69,\n \"strategies\": [\n \"Navigate to the \\\"books\\\" subreddit\",\n \"Sort posts by \\\"Top\\\" to view the top 10 posts\",\n \"Analyze post titles and content for mentions of supporting local bookstores\",\n \"View details of identified posts to inspect comments and descriptions\",\n \"Extract organization names from the post content or comments\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategies\": [\n \"Navigate To Page/Section\",\n \"Search/Filter/Sort Data\",\n \"Analyze/Evaluate/Verify Data\",\n \"View/Inspect Item Details\",\n \"Extract/Retrieve Information\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategy_ids\": [\"US1\", \"US2\", \"US7\", \"US5\", \"US6\"]\n}\n```",
"model_reasoning": null
},
{
"task_id": 693,
"task_intent": "Draft an email to the shop owner via their contact us function for a coupon as my refund is suppoed to be replaced by a coupon",
"expected_ids": [
"US1",
"US3",
"US3",
"US4"
],
"actual_ids": [
"US1",
"US3",
"US4"
],
"correct": true,
"model": "aiproxy/deepseek-reasoner",
"model_output": "\nOkay, let's tackle this task. The user wants to draft an email to a shop owner using the contact us function to request a coupon as a replacement for a refund. First, I need to figure out the steps involved.\n\nStarting with the contact page. The user probably needs to navigate to the \"Contact Us\" section of the shopping site. That's US1, Navigate To Page/Section. Then, they might have to select the specific shop or order related to the refund. Maybe there's a dropdown or a search to find the shop owner, which would be US2, Search/Filter/Sort Data.\n\nNext, drafting the email. The user needs to input their message, subject, and maybe attach any relevant info. That's configuring parameters, so US3. Finally, sending the email would be executing the action, US4. Also, after sending, they might need to check a confirmation message, which is US6, Extract/Retrieve Information.\n\nWait, but the main task is drafting and sending. So steps would be: navigate to contact us, maybe select the shop, compose the email with the request, and send it. Maybe verifying the confirmation is part of the process. Let me check the universal strategies again. US1 for navigation, US3 for composing the email content, US4 for sending. Maybe US6 to confirm it's sent. But the example didn't include US6. Hmm. The example output for the input had three steps. Let me structure it accordingly. So strategies: Navigate to Contact Us, Compose email with coupon request, Send the email. The universal strategies would be US1, US3, US4. That makes sense. The user might need to input the message details (US3) and then execute (US4). I think that's the right approach.\n\n\n```json\n{\n \"task_id\": 693,\n \"strategies\": [\n \"Navigate to the 'Contact Us' section for the shop\",\n \"Compose email requesting coupon replacement for refund\",\n \"Send the drafted email to the shop owner\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategies\": [\n \"Navigate To Page/Section\",\n \"Configure Parameters/Settings\",\n \"Execute Action/Process\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategy_ids\": [\"US1\", \"US3\", \"US4\"]\n}\n```",
"model_reasoning": null
},
{
"task_id": 695,
"task_intent": "Add a simple product named Energy-Bulk Man Yoga Pant with 50 in stock, available in size 38 and color yellow, priced at $69.99",
"expected_ids": [
"US1",
"US3",
"US3",
"US3",
"US9"
],
"actual_ids": [
"US1",
"US3",
"US4"
],
"correct": false,
"model": "aiproxy/deepseek-reasoner",
"model_output": "\nOkay, let's tackle this task. The user wants to add a simple product called \"Energy-Bulk Man Yoga Pant\" with specific details. First, I need to figure out the steps required in a shopping admin interface.\n\nStarting with navigation. The admin would need to go to the product management section, probably through a menu. That's US1: Navigate To Page/Section. Then, creating a new product involves filling out a form. So US9: Create Item applies here. \n\nNext, configuring the product details. The name, stock quantity, size, color, and price all need to be set. That's part of the form configuration, so US3: Configure Parameters/Settings. After filling in all the necessary fields, saving the product would be executing the action, which is US4: Execute Action/Process.\n\nWait, but creating the item (US9) might already include filling out the form and submitting. Hmm. Let me check the universal strategies again. US9 is about creating a new entity by filling a form and submitting. So maybe the steps down to submitting are part of US9. But the example given for US9 is \"Create a new project named...\", which implies that the entire process of filling the form and submitting is under US9. However, in the output example, they broke down into configure parameters and then execute action. So perhaps in this case, the steps are: navigate to the product creation page (US1), configure all the details (US3), then execute the save action (US4). But US9 is \"Create Item\" which is the overall action. But maybe the strategies are more granular. Let me check the example again.\n\nIn the input example, the task was to find top products, and the strategies were navigate, configure parameters, execute. So for creating a product, perhaps it's similar: navigate to the product creation page, configure the product details (name, stock, etc.), then execute the save action. So the universal strategies would be US1, US3, US4. But US9 is \"Create Item\" which is the overall action. However, the universal strategies in the example used US1, US3, US4. So maybe the strategies are broken down into those steps. So the answer would be strategies like \"Navigate to product creation page\", \"Configure product details...\", \"Save the product\". Then the universal strategies would be US1, US3, US4. But the example for US9 is \"Create a new project named...\", which is a single step. But perhaps in this case, the task requires multiple steps, so breaking it down into navigate, configure, execute. So the strategies would be:\n\n1. Navigate to the product creation page (US1)\n2. Configure product details (name, stock, size, color, price) (US3)\n3. Save the new product (US4)\n\nTherefore, the universal strategies are US1, US3, US4.\n\n\n```json\n{\n \"task_id\": 695,\n \"strategies\": [\n \"Navigate to Product Creation Page\",\n \"Configure Product Details (Name: Energy-Bulk Man Yoga Pant, Stock: 50, Size: 38, Color: Yellow, Price: $69.99)\",\n \"Save the New Product\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategies\": [\n \"Navigate To Page/Section\",\n \"Configure Parameters/Settings\",\n \"Execute Action/Process\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategy_ids\": [\"US1\", \"US3\", \"US4\"]\n}\n```",
"model_reasoning": null
},
{
"task_id": 7,
"task_intent": "Tell me the full address of all international airports that are within a driving distance of 50 km to Carnegie Mellon University",
"expected_ids": [
"US1",
"US7",
"US7"
],
"actual_ids": [
"US1",
"US2",
"US3",
"US4",
"US5",
"US6",
"US8",
"US7"
],
"correct": false,
"model": "aiproxy/deepseek-reasoner",
"model_output": "\nOkay, let's tackle this task. The user wants the full addresses of all international airports within a 50 km driving distance from Carnegie Mellon University. First, I need to figure out the steps a GUI agent would take on a map site.\n\nStarting with navigation. The agent would probably go to the map site and search for Carnegie Mellon University to get its location. That's like using US1, Navigate To Page/Section. Then, they need to find nearby airports. Maybe there's a search or filter feature for points of interest. So searching for airports nearby would be US2, Search/Filter/Sort Data.\n\nNext, the agent has to set the distance parameter to 50 km. That's configuring settings, which is US3. After applying the filter, the agent would execute the search, which is US4. Then, they need to look through the results, maybe check each airport's details to confirm it's international. Viewing details is US5. Extracting the address from each airport's info is US6. If there are multiple pages of results, they might need to navigate through them using US8. Finally, verifying that each airport is indeed international would involve analysis, which is US7.\n\nPutting it all together, the strategies would involve navigating to the location, searching and filtering, setting parameters, executing, viewing details, extracting info, navigating through results, and verifying the data. The corresponding universal strategies are US1, US2, US3, US4, US5, US6, US8, and US7.\n\n\n```json\n{\n \"task_id\": 7,\n \"strategies\": [\n \"Search for Carnegie Mellon University's location on the map\",\n \"Filter nearby points of interest to show only airports\",\n \"Configure search radius to 50 km driving distance\",\n \"Execute search for airports within the configured radius\",\n \"Inspect each airport result to check international status\",\n \"Extract full addresses of confirmed international airports\",\n \"Navigate through multiple pages of results if needed\",\n \"Verify all qualifying airports meet the criteria\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategies\": [\n \"Navigate To Page/Section\",\n \"Search/Filter/Sort Data\",\n \"Configure Parameters/Settings\",\n \"Execute Action/Process\",\n \"View/Inspect Item Details\",\n \"Extract/Retrieve Information\",\n \"Navigate Within Data/Results\",\n \"Analyze/Evaluate/Verify Data\"\n ],\n \"universal_strategy_ids\": [\"US1\", \"US2\", \"US3\", \"US4\", \"US5\", \"US6\", \"US8\", \"US7\"]\n}\n```",
"model_reasoning": null
}
]
}