name
stringlengths
25
31
instruction
stringlengths
232
1.35k
description
stringlengths
30
66
keywords
listlengths
4
4
schema_version
stringclasses
1 value
config
unknown
metadata
unknown
files
listlengths
17
9.17k
location
stringlengths
25
31
dataworld/p000500-consequence-2
运营这边的菜单结构这两年调过两次:2023年10月加了一批低价套餐,去年12月又下架了其中几款。最近复盘我在纠结一件事——我们这几档套餐(低价的、常规的、高端的)到底在怎么影响生意?具体说,套餐的定价结构(组合价相对成本、相对单点价的折让幅度)跟单均实收是什么关系,跟客人打出的物超所值分又是什么关系。我尤其想知道那批低价套餐是不是在用客单价换满意度,这笔账到底划不划算。麻烦你把数据捋一遍,给我一个有依据的结论,别只看表面数字。 > 数据路径说明:题面中提到的 `env/` 目录内容已挂载到 `/app/data/`(题面里的 `env/xxx` 即 `/app/data/xxx`)。 把你的完整回答写入 `/app/answer...
后果分析:菜单与套餐结构(data-world 世界 p000500)
[ "data-analysis", "causal-inference", "pandas", "chinese" ]
1.1
{ "schema_version": "1.1", "artifacts": [ "/app/answer.txt", "/logs/verifier/reward.txt", "/logs/verifier/details.json", "/logs/artifacts/", "/logs/agent/trajectory.json" ], "task": { "name": "dataworld/p000500-consequence-2", "description": "后果分析:菜单与套餐结构(data-world 世界 p000500)", ...
{ "difficulty_explanation": "第 2 层后果分析题:需在 p000500 世界的多套独立数据系统中完成数据清洗、关联与计算,并给出有 /app/data/ 文件证据支撑的后果推断结论。", "category": "data-analysis", "difficulty": "hard", "world": "p000500", "dag_nodes": 8, "dag_edges": 11, "dag_category_id": 2, "dag_category_name": "Customer, Pricing & Revenue / 客户·定价·收益" }
[ "environment/Dockerfile", "environment/data/crm/customer_feedback_events.csv", "environment/data/crm/customer_lifecycle_monthly.csv", "environment/data/crm/customer_master_scd.csv", "environment/data/finance/monthly_store_summary.xlsx", "environment/data/macro/regional_economic_indicators_monthly.csv", ...
dataworld-p000500-consequence-2
dataworld/p000502-cause-3
我们做儿童民谣流媒体快三年了,听众留存一直是最让我没底的事——首播一周后还在听的人少得可怜,一个月后更是所剩无几。下季度推广预算和产品迭代方向马上要定,我需要你把手头的数据捋一遍,把“到底是什么在驱动或预示听众的留存和召回”这件事给我讲明白:谁留得下来、谁会被召回回来、为什么,其中哪些是我们能信的真信号,哪些可能是数据本身把我们带偏了看错的。我不想看一堆相关系数罗列,要的是能拿来拍板的判断——哪个杠杆值得继续加码,哪个看着诱人其实不是那么回事。 > 数据路径说明:题面中提到的 `env/` 目录内容已挂载到 `/app/data/`(题面里的 `env/xxx` 即 `/app/data/xxx`)。 把你的完整回答写入 `/a...
原因分析:留存与召回(data-world 世界 p000502)
[ "data-analysis", "causal-inference", "pandas", "chinese" ]
1.1
{ "schema_version": "1.1", "artifacts": [ "/app/answer.txt", "/logs/verifier/reward.txt", "/logs/verifier/details.json", "/logs/artifacts/", "/logs/agent/trajectory.json" ], "task": { "name": "dataworld/p000502-cause-3", "description": "原因分析:留存与召回(data-world 世界 p000502)", "author...
{ "difficulty_explanation": "第 3 层原因分析题:需在 p000502 世界的多套独立数据系统中完成数据清洗、关联与计算,并给出有 /app/data/ 文件证据支撑的因果归因结论。", "category": "data-analysis", "difficulty": "hard", "world": "p000502", "dag_nodes": 12, "dag_edges": 25, "dag_category_id": 1, "dag_category_name": "Commercial Growth & Acquisition / 商业增长与获客" }
[ "environment/Dockerfile", "environment/data/analytics/listener_daily_engagement.parquet", "environment/data/analytics/retention_weekly.csv", "environment/data/calendar/external_environment_daily.csv", "environment/data/catalog/releases.csv", "environment/data/catalog/tracks_scd.parquet", "environment/da...
dataworld-p000502-cause-3
dataworld/p000505-cause-1
我们这一年在外部 7 个获客渠道上砸了不少预算,装量是有了,但我现在分不清哪些钱花得值、哪些其实在打水漂。你帮我把渠道触点这层数据捋一捋:到底是投得越多装得越多,还是素材本身的好坏也在起作用?哪些渠道的安装效率真的更高?有没有什么指标看着漂亮、实际却在坑我们? 另外数据里要是有会把我带偏的坑,也一并点出来——我接下来要拿你的结论去调预算,不想踩雷。 > 数据路径说明:题面中提到的 `env/` 目录内容已挂载到 `/app/data/`(题面里的 `env/xxx` 即 `/app/data/xxx`)。 把你的完整回答写入 `/app/answer.txt`。
原因分析:渠道触点流量(data-world 世界 p000505)
[ "data-analysis", "causal-inference", "pandas", "chinese" ]
1.1
{ "schema_version": "1.1", "artifacts": [ "/app/answer.txt", "/logs/verifier/reward.txt", "/logs/verifier/details.json", "/logs/artifacts/", "/logs/agent/trajectory.json" ], "task": { "name": "dataworld/p000505-cause-1", "description": "原因分析:渠道触点流量(data-world 世界 p000505)", "autho...
{ "difficulty_explanation": "第 1 层原因分析题:需在 p000505 世界的多套独立数据系统中完成数据清洗、关联与计算,并给出有 /app/data/ 文件证据支撑的因果归因结论。", "category": "data-analysis", "difficulty": "medium", "world": "p000505", "dag_nodes": 12, "dag_edges": 20, "dag_category_id": 1, "dag_category_name": "Commercial Growth & Acquisition / 商业增长与获客" }
[ "environment/Dockerfile", "environment/data/_meta/data_dictionary.md", "environment/data/_meta/export_manifest.json", "environment/data/ad_ops/creative_library.csv", "environment/data/ad_ops/daily_channel_spend.csv", "environment/data/attribution/daily_touchpoint_traffic.tsv", "environment/data/billing/...
dataworld-p000505-cause-1
dataworld/p000505-cause-2
今年新客数据有点看不懂,想让你帮我理一理。我们这一年改过一次注册流程(3 月那次),新客注册量和激活量前后起伏很大;投放这边七个渠道、十几套定向人群码一直在跑,老板让我判断到底哪些动作真正把新客"拉进来并激活"了,哪些渠道值得加预算。 具体我想知道两件事:一是装了我们 App 的人最终有没有注册、注册了的人有没有真正激活(首次进游戏或看剧),这中间是什么在卡人、什么在推动人;二是各获客渠道和定向人群在激活上到底差在哪,给我一个能落地的渠道/定向建议。过程中要是发现某些看起来很顺的结论其实站不住脚,也一并点出来,别让我拿着错判断去调预算。 > 数据路径说明:题面中提到的 `env/` 目录内容已挂载到 `/app/data/`(题面...
原因分析:新客注册激活(data-world 世界 p000505)
[ "data-analysis", "causal-inference", "pandas", "chinese" ]
1.1
{ "schema_version": "1.1", "artifacts": [ "/app/answer.txt", "/logs/verifier/reward.txt", "/logs/verifier/details.json", "/logs/artifacts/", "/logs/agent/trajectory.json" ], "task": { "name": "dataworld/p000505-cause-2", "description": "原因分析:新客注册激活(data-world 世界 p000505)", "autho...
{ "difficulty_explanation": "第 2 层原因分析题:需在 p000505 世界的多套独立数据系统中完成数据清洗、关联与计算,并给出有 /app/data/ 文件证据支撑的因果归因结论。", "category": "data-analysis", "difficulty": "hard", "world": "p000505", "dag_nodes": 12, "dag_edges": 20, "dag_category_id": 1, "dag_category_name": "Commercial Growth & Acquisition / 商业增长与获客" }
[ "environment/Dockerfile", "environment/data/_meta/data_dictionary.md", "environment/data/_meta/export_manifest.json", "environment/data/ad_ops/creative_library.csv", "environment/data/ad_ops/daily_channel_spend.csv", "environment/data/attribution/daily_touchpoint_traffic.tsv", "environment/data/billing/...
dataworld-p000505-cause-2
dataworld/p000505-consequence-2
我们最近在游戏侧做了不少促活的动作,游戏参与整体往上走,老板让我搞清楚一件事:用户在游戏里玩得越深,后面到底会发生什么。具体说,玩得深的用户会不会更频繁地切去看剧休息?他们的社交互动(观影派对、成就分享、社区这些)是更活跃,还是反而变少?最关键的是,玩得深到底有没有转化成花钱,尤其是游戏内购——如果有,是普遍在花还是集中在少数人身上?我想看到方向和大致的量级,以及哪些用户群体上表现不一样。 > 数据路径说明:题面中提到的 `env/` 目录内容已挂载到 `/app/data/`(题面里的 `env/xxx` 即 `/app/data/xxx`)。 把你的完整回答写入 `/app/answer.txt`。
后果分析:游戏参与深度(data-world 世界 p000505)
[ "data-analysis", "causal-inference", "pandas", "chinese" ]
1.1
{ "schema_version": "1.1", "artifacts": [ "/app/answer.txt", "/logs/verifier/reward.txt", "/logs/verifier/details.json", "/logs/artifacts/", "/logs/agent/trajectory.json" ], "task": { "name": "dataworld/p000505-consequence-2", "description": "后果分析:游戏参与深度(data-world 世界 p000505)", ...
{ "difficulty_explanation": "第 2 层后果分析题:需在 p000505 世界的多套独立数据系统中完成数据清洗、关联与计算,并给出有 /app/data/ 文件证据支撑的后果推断结论。", "category": "data-analysis", "difficulty": "hard", "world": "p000505", "dag_nodes": 12, "dag_edges": 20, "dag_category_id": 1, "dag_category_name": "Commercial Growth & Acquisition / 商业增长与获客" }
[ "environment/Dockerfile", "environment/data/_meta/data_dictionary.md", "environment/data/_meta/export_manifest.json", "environment/data/ad_ops/creative_library.csv", "environment/data/ad_ops/daily_channel_spend.csv", "environment/data/attribution/daily_touchpoint_traffic.tsv", "environment/data/billing/...
dataworld-p000505-consequence-2
dataworld/p000506-cause-2
我们这个文学遗产纵向面板马上要结题,数据室那边催着要一份关于「启蒙价值观量表」的归因小结。六轮问卷(Q10 理性主义、Q11 言论自由、Q12 个人主义三个分项)从 2021 跑到 2023,我想搞清楚到底是谁在抬这些分、谁在压它们——是人口背景(教育、城乡、收入)起决定作用,还是对 18 世纪经典文学的接触在起作用?文学接触这条线到底是越多越高,还是有拐点? 顺便帮我把「看着像信号、其实是坑」的地方挑出来:哪些波动是流失造成的、哪些是问卷模式或量表换版造成的,别让结论被这些带偏。我只要结论和它站得住的证据,不需要面面俱到。 > 数据路径说明:题面中提到的 `env/` 目录内容已挂载到 `/app/data/`(题面里的 `en...
原因分析:启蒙价值观量表得分(data-world 世界 p000506)
[ "data-analysis", "causal-inference", "pandas", "chinese" ]
1.1
{ "schema_version": "1.1", "artifacts": [ "/app/answer.txt", "/logs/verifier/reward.txt", "/logs/verifier/details.json", "/logs/artifacts/", "/logs/agent/trajectory.json" ], "task": { "name": "dataworld/p000506-cause-2", "description": "原因分析:启蒙价值观量表得分(data-world 世界 p000506)", "au...
{ "difficulty_explanation": "第 2 层原因分析题:需在 p000506 世界的多套独立数据系统中完成数据清洗、关联与计算,并给出有 /app/data/ 文件证据支撑的因果归因结论。", "category": "data-analysis", "difficulty": "hard", "world": "p000506", "dag_nodes": 9, "dag_edges": 13, "dag_category_id": 15, "dag_category_name": "Social Science, Survey & Behavioral / 社会科学·调查·...
[ "environment/Dockerfile", "environment/data/algorithm/daily_push/daily_push_2021.parquet", "environment/data/algorithm/daily_push/daily_push_2022.parquet", "environment/data/algorithm/daily_push/daily_push_2023.parquet", "environment/data/algorithm/daily_push/daily_push_2024H1.parquet", "environment/data/...
dataworld-p000506-cause-2
dataworld/p000507-cause-2
生产这边的数我看了,总觉得不对劲。今年(2024)的产线产出明显不如去年,厂长会上让我拿数据说清楚到底差在哪、是什么把实际产出压下去了,别只给我一句"设备老了"。MES 里的批次产出、设备状态、还有排程计划都在数据里,你帮我捋一捋:这两年实际产出相对计划到底掉了多少,主要被哪些因素吃掉了,这些因素之间谁更主导、谁只是看着像。重点放在能从批次和设备记录里坐实的证据上,别拿没数支撑的猜测凑结论。 > 数据路径说明:题面中提到的 `env/` 目录内容已挂载到 `/app/data/`(题面里的 `env/xxx` 即 `/app/data/xxx`)。 把你的完整回答写入 `/app/answer.txt`。
原因分析:生产执行与产出(data-world 世界 p000507)
[ "data-analysis", "causal-inference", "pandas", "chinese" ]
1.1
{ "schema_version": "1.1", "artifacts": [ "/app/answer.txt", "/logs/verifier/reward.txt", "/logs/verifier/details.json", "/logs/artifacts/", "/logs/agent/trajectory.json" ], "task": { "name": "dataworld/p000507-cause-2", "description": "原因分析:生产执行与产出(data-world 世界 p000507)", "auth...
{ "difficulty_explanation": "第 2 层原因分析题:需在 p000507 世界的多套独立数据系统中完成数据清洗、关联与计算,并给出有 /app/data/ 文件证据支撑的因果归因结论。", "category": "data-analysis", "difficulty": "hard", "world": "p000507", "dag_nodes": 11, "dag_edges": 15, "dag_category_id": 4, "dag_category_name": "Operations, Supply Chain & Manufacturing / 运营·...
[ "environment/Dockerfile", "environment/data/crm/customer_satisfaction_weekly.csv", "environment/data/crm/orders_raw.jsonl", "environment/data/erp/purchase_orders.csv", "environment/data/master/bom_master.csv", "environment/data/master/carrier_master.csv", "environment/data/master/customer_master.csv", ...
dataworld-p000507-cause-2
dataworld/p000507-cause-4
这两年我们的发运在途时效越来越难看——日常两三天,到 2024 下半年和每次大促前后动不动四五天往上,客户已经在催了。物流那边一直说是承运商不行、运力不够,想让我批钱换承运商、加运力。我不太信这个说法,但也没数据反驳。你把发运那套数据从头到尾捋一遍,告诉我:到底什么在拖慢我们的在途时效?是承运商的问题,还是别的?哪些因素是真能解释时效变化的、哪些只是看着像。最后给我一个能站住脚的判断:如果真要改善时效,该往哪个方向使劲。 > 数据路径说明:题面中提到的 `env/` 目录内容已挂载到 `/app/data/`(题面里的 `env/xxx` 即 `/app/data/xxx`)。 把你的完整回答写入 `/app/answer.tx...
原因分析:物流发运与时效(data-world 世界 p000507)
[ "data-analysis", "causal-inference", "pandas", "chinese" ]
1.1
{ "schema_version": "1.1", "artifacts": [ "/app/answer.txt", "/logs/verifier/reward.txt", "/logs/verifier/details.json", "/logs/artifacts/", "/logs/agent/trajectory.json" ], "task": { "name": "dataworld/p000507-cause-4", "description": "原因分析:物流发运与时效(data-world 世界 p000507)", "auth...
{ "difficulty_explanation": "第 4 层原因分析题:需在 p000507 世界的多套独立数据系统中完成数据清洗、关联与计算,并给出有 /app/data/ 文件证据支撑的因果归因结论。", "category": "data-analysis", "difficulty": "hard", "world": "p000507", "dag_nodes": 11, "dag_edges": 15, "dag_category_id": 4, "dag_category_name": "Operations, Supply Chain & Manufacturing / 运营·...
[ "environment/Dockerfile", "environment/data/crm/customer_satisfaction_weekly.csv", "environment/data/crm/orders_raw.jsonl", "environment/data/erp/purchase_orders.csv", "environment/data/master/bom_master.csv", "environment/data/master/carrier_master.csv", "environment/data/master/customer_master.csv", ...
dataworld-p000507-cause-4
dataworld/p000507-consequence-2
我每周锁 MPS、给产线下发日批次排程,可车间说排的量做不出来、销售说该到的货不到,两头都骂排程。我想弄明白:我们排下去的生产计划到底有多少真变成了产出,缺口主要卡在哪,排程本身有没有在添乱,这两年是不是越来越差。你拿排程和实际执行对一下,顺着往后看到库存和客户履约,给我一个有数有据的判断。 > 数据路径说明:题面中提到的 `env/` 目录内容已挂载到 `/app/data/`(题面里的 `env/xxx` 即 `/app/data/xxx`)。 把你的完整回答写入 `/app/answer.txt`。
后果分析:生产排程(data-world 世界 p000507)
[ "data-analysis", "causal-inference", "pandas", "chinese" ]
1.1
{ "schema_version": "1.1", "artifacts": [ "/app/answer.txt", "/logs/verifier/reward.txt", "/logs/verifier/details.json", "/logs/artifacts/", "/logs/agent/trajectory.json" ], "task": { "name": "dataworld/p000507-consequence-2", "description": "后果分析:生产排程(data-world 世界 p000507)", "a...
{ "difficulty_explanation": "第 2 层后果分析题:需在 p000507 世界的多套独立数据系统中完成数据清洗、关联与计算,并给出有 /app/data/ 文件证据支撑的后果推断结论。", "category": "data-analysis", "difficulty": "hard", "world": "p000507", "dag_nodes": 11, "dag_edges": 15, "dag_category_id": 4, "dag_category_name": "Operations, Supply Chain & Manufacturing / 运营·...
[ "environment/Dockerfile", "environment/data/crm/customer_satisfaction_weekly.csv", "environment/data/crm/orders_raw.jsonl", "environment/data/erp/purchase_orders.csv", "environment/data/master/bom_master.csv", "environment/data/master/carrier_master.csv", "environment/data/master/customer_master.csv", ...
dataworld-p000507-consequence-2
dataworld/p000512-consequence-1
市规划办那边让我牵头理一件事:我们这127个街区,十几年下来,社会经济底子不同的街区,后来的际遇差了多少?我想搞清楚一个街区的贫困程度跟它后来的基础设施状况、能拿到的城市更新投入、还有警力部署到底什么关系——方向上是不是越穷越糟,量级多大,有没有哪个区间例外或者反过来。下个月规划委员会要听一个说法,你帮我把这条线从数据里摸出来,给我一个能站得住的结论,哪些有把握、哪些因为数据本身的毛病说不死,也一并讲清楚。 > 数据路径说明:题面中提到的 `env/` 目录内容已挂载到 `/app/data/`(题面里的 `env/xxx` 即 `/app/data/xxx`)。 把你的完整回答写入 `/app/answer.txt`。
后果分析:街区社会经济基线(data-world 世界 p000512)
[ "data-analysis", "causal-inference", "pandas", "chinese" ]
1.1
{ "schema_version": "1.1", "artifacts": [ "/app/answer.txt", "/logs/verifier/reward.txt", "/logs/verifier/details.json", "/logs/artifacts/", "/logs/agent/trajectory.json" ], "task": { "name": "dataworld/p000512-consequence-1", "description": "后果分析:街区社会经济基线(data-world 世界 p000512)", ...
{ "difficulty_explanation": "第 1 层后果分析题:需在 p000512 世界的多套独立数据系统中完成数据清洗、关联与计算,并给出有 /app/data/ 文件证据支撑的后果推断结论。", "category": "data-analysis", "difficulty": "medium", "world": "p000512", "dag_nodes": 11, "dag_edges": 18, "dag_category_id": 13, "dag_category_name": "Public Policy & Program Evaluation / 公共政策与项...
[ "environment/Dockerfile", "environment/data/census/acs_methodology_notes.txt", "environment/data/census/migration_flows_annual.csv", "environment/data/census/tract_boundary_crosswalk_2010.csv", "environment/data/census/tract_socioeconomic_baseline_scd.csv", "environment/data/gis/infrastructure_survey_annu...
dataworld-p000512-consequence-1
dataworld/p000514-cause-1
我们这季想做更精准的拉新,市场那边吵了半天也没结论:到底什么样的人在我们合作流媒体上看过的 B 级片最多?是年轻的、有钱有闲的,还是别的什么人群?我手头有面板成员的人口档案,也有流媒体那边的观看汇总,但我自己不熟这批数据。 帮我查清楚:哪些面板特征和一个人看过的 B 级片数量挂钩、影响各有多大,哪些看着相关其实经不起推敲。下周我要拿结论去定拉新目标人群,所以别只甩一堆相关系数给我——说清楚谁最值得拉、凭什么,以及你哪里没把握。 > 数据路径说明:题面中提到的 `env/` 目录内容已挂载到 `/app/data/`(题面里的 `env/xxx` 即 `/app/data/xxx`)。 把你的完整回答写入 `/app/answe...
原因分析:邪典媒体曝光量(data-world 世界 p000514)
[ "data-analysis", "causal-inference", "pandas", "chinese" ]
1.1
{ "schema_version": "1.1", "artifacts": [ "/app/answer.txt", "/logs/verifier/reward.txt", "/logs/verifier/details.json", "/logs/artifacts/", "/logs/agent/trajectory.json" ], "task": { "name": "dataworld/p000514-cause-1", "description": "原因分析:邪典媒体曝光量(data-world 世界 p000514)", "auth...
{ "difficulty_explanation": "第 1 层原因分析题:需在 p000514 世界的多套独立数据系统中完成数据清洗、关联与计算,并给出有 /app/data/ 文件证据支撑的因果归因结论。", "category": "data-analysis", "difficulty": "medium", "world": "p000514", "dag_nodes": 8, "dag_edges": 10, "dag_category_id": 15, "dag_category_name": "Social Science, Survey & Behavioral / 社会科学·调...
[ "environment/Dockerfile", "environment/data/docs/panelist_welcome_guide.txt", "environment/data/docs/survey_protocol.md", "environment/data/panel_crm/panelist_profiles.csv", "environment/data/panel_crm/recruitment_log.csv", "environment/data/panel_crm/retention_followup.csv", "environment/data/social/mo...
dataworld-p000514-cause-1
dataworld/p000514-consequence-2
我下周要给产品组复盘这六轮调查的体验数据,想先弄清楚一件事:受访者对那批B级片的初始打分,到底会不会影响他们在后续任务环节里的行为。一个人给片子打完分之后,他对这些片子的态度能不能预测他接下来在这道题上花多长时间、会不会做到一半放弃、以及最后排顺序时来回改多少次? 我不太确定这些关系是不是在六轮里都成立,听说后面几轮题目变长、有人做到一半就崩了,所以也想让你看看是不是有些轮次里头这套规律就看不出来了。方向、强弱、在哪些地方成立或失效,给我一个能站得住的判断就行,别只甩一个相关系数给我。 > 数据路径说明:题面中提到的 `env/` 目录内容已挂载到 `/app/data/`(题面里的 `env/xxx` 即 `/app/data/...
后果分析:初始态度与评价(data-world 世界 p000514)
[ "data-analysis", "causal-inference", "pandas", "chinese" ]
1.1
{ "schema_version": "1.1", "artifacts": [ "/app/answer.txt", "/logs/verifier/reward.txt", "/logs/verifier/details.json", "/logs/artifacts/", "/logs/agent/trajectory.json" ], "task": { "name": "dataworld/p000514-consequence-2", "description": "后果分析:初始态度与评价(data-world 世界 p000514)", ...
{ "difficulty_explanation": "第 2 层后果分析题:需在 p000514 世界的多套独立数据系统中完成数据清洗、关联与计算,并给出有 /app/data/ 文件证据支撑的后果推断结论。", "category": "data-analysis", "difficulty": "hard", "world": "p000514", "dag_nodes": 8, "dag_edges": 10, "dag_category_id": 15, "dag_category_name": "Social Science, Survey & Behavioral / 社会科学·调查·...
[ "environment/Dockerfile", "environment/data/docs/panelist_welcome_guide.txt", "environment/data/docs/survey_protocol.md", "environment/data/panel_crm/panelist_profiles.csv", "environment/data/panel_crm/recruitment_log.csv", "environment/data/panel_crm/retention_followup.csv", "environment/data/social/mo...
dataworld-p000514-consequence-2
dataworld/p000515-cause-2
我是市长刑事司法服务办公室的分析主管。Millbridge 2008 到 2019 这十二年,严重犯罪报案量涨了四成多,市议会下个月要我们交一份报告,说清楚到底是什么在推高报案、又被哪些因素牵动。手头有警情、311 市政工单、警务月报、社区信任调查和人口普查几套数据,分属不同部门,口径和格式都不统一。 麻烦你把这些数据理顺,判断严重犯罪报案率到底被哪些因素驱动或预示——哪些是实打实的证据、哪些只是看着相关其实另有原因,哪些地方数据本身有坑、结论得打折扣。结论要拿去议会答辩,每个判断后面都得有能复算的数撑着。 > 数据路径说明:题面中提到的 `env/` 目录内容已挂载到 `/app/data/`(题面里的 `env/xxx` 即 ...
原因分析:严重犯罪报案率(data-world 世界 p000515)
[ "data-analysis", "causal-inference", "pandas", "chinese" ]
1.1
{ "schema_version": "1.1", "artifacts": [ "/app/answer.txt", "/logs/verifier/reward.txt", "/logs/verifier/details.json", "/logs/artifacts/", "/logs/agent/trajectory.json" ], "task": { "name": "dataworld/p000515-cause-2", "description": "原因分析:严重犯罪报案率(data-world 世界 p000515)", "auth...
{ "difficulty_explanation": "第 2 层原因分析题:需在 p000515 世界的多套独立数据系统中完成数据清洗、关联与计算,并给出有 /app/data/ 文件证据支撑的因果归因结论。", "category": "data-analysis", "difficulty": "hard", "world": "p000515", "dag_nodes": 9, "dag_edges": 13, "dag_category_id": 13, "dag_category_name": "Public Policy & Program Evaluation / 公共政策与项目评估...
[ "environment/Dockerfile", "environment/data/_raw/cad_daily_extract_sample.log", "environment/data/_raw/mocjs_program_config.kv", "environment/data/census/acs_tract_estimates_2008_2019.csv", "environment/data/census/migration_estimates_2008_2019.csv", "environment/data/corrections/offender_release_records_...
dataworld-p000515-cause-2
dataworld/p000515-cause-4
Millbridge 这十二年一直在掉人——全市从 2008 年的 15.26 万掉到 2019 年的 14.06 万。规划办想搞清楚居民到底为什么走、哪些街区在真正失血,好决定下一轮治安和住房干预往哪投。我手头有一份按街区年度统计的迁出/迁入估计,还有犯罪报案、矫正释放这些旁证数据。你别只给我一个总趋势——我要知道迁出背后真正在起作用的是什么,哪些证据靠得住、哪些看着像但其实不是。给我一个能站得住的判断。 > 数据路径说明:题面中提到的 `env/` 目录内容已挂载到 `/app/data/`(题面里的 `env/xxx` 即 `/app/data/xxx`)。 把你的完整回答写入 `/app/answer.txt`。
原因分析:居民搬迁与人口流动(data-world 世界 p000515)
[ "data-analysis", "causal-inference", "pandas", "chinese" ]
1.1
{ "schema_version": "1.1", "artifacts": [ "/app/answer.txt", "/logs/verifier/reward.txt", "/logs/verifier/details.json", "/logs/artifacts/", "/logs/agent/trajectory.json" ], "task": { "name": "dataworld/p000515-cause-4", "description": "原因分析:居民搬迁与人口流动(data-world 世界 p000515)", "au...
{ "difficulty_explanation": "第 4 层原因分析题:需在 p000515 世界的多套独立数据系统中完成数据清洗、关联与计算,并给出有 /app/data/ 文件证据支撑的因果归因结论。", "category": "data-analysis", "difficulty": "hard", "world": "p000515", "dag_nodes": 9, "dag_edges": 13, "dag_category_id": 13, "dag_category_name": "Public Policy & Program Evaluation / 公共政策与项目评估...
[ "environment/Dockerfile", "environment/data/_raw/cad_daily_extract_sample.log", "environment/data/_raw/mocjs_program_config.kv", "environment/data/census/acs_tract_estimates_2008_2019.csv", "environment/data/census/migration_estimates_2008_2019.csv", "environment/data/corrections/offender_release_records_...
dataworld-p000515-cause-4
dataworld/p000516-consequence-4
这批面板跨了 2020、2022、2024 三次大选,我想要一个判断:第三方选民的票,到底换来了多少代表性产出——能不能换到下一周期的自动 ballot access、辩论资格、候选人上不上得了 ballot。这条转换在哪些州走得通、哪些州卡住,三年是走强还是走弱,背后主要是阈值门槛在起作用还是别的因素。给我方向、量级,还有能撑住结论的数据,别只甩个结论给我。 > 数据路径说明:题面中提到的 `env/` 目录内容已挂载到 `/app/data/`(题面里的 `env/xxx` 即 `/app/data/xxx`)。 把你的完整回答写入 `/app/answer.txt`。
后果分析:投票行为与选举参与(data-world 世界 p000516)
[ "data-analysis", "causal-inference", "pandas", "chinese" ]
1.1
{ "schema_version": "1.1", "artifacts": [ "/app/answer.txt", "/logs/verifier/reward.txt", "/logs/verifier/details.json", "/logs/artifacts/", "/logs/agent/trajectory.json" ], "task": { "name": "dataworld/p000516-consequence-4", "description": "后果分析:投票行为与选举参与(data-world 世界 p000516)", ...
{ "difficulty_explanation": "第 4 层后果分析题:需在 p000516 世界的多套独立数据系统中完成数据清洗、关联与计算,并给出有 /app/data/ 文件证据支撑的后果推断结论。", "category": "data-analysis", "difficulty": "hard", "world": "p000516", "dag_nodes": 12, "dag_edges": 17, "dag_category_id": 15, "dag_category_name": "Social Science, Survey & Behavioral / 社会科学·调查...
[ "environment/Dockerfile", "environment/data/campaign/campaign_committees.parquet", "environment/data/campaign/digital_ad_exposure_log.parquet", "environment/data/campaign/precinct_competitiveness.parquet", "environment/data/campaign/targeting_pool_roster.parquet", "environment/data/campaign/voter_contact_...
dataworld-p000516-consequence-4
dataworld/p000518-cause-1
DEV-001 那台 UV-Vis 今年标定次数比去年翻了一番,是五台仪器里变化最扎眼的。我下周一要跟实验室主任交代这台仪器标定负担加重的原因——到底是仪器自身状态变了、排程在合理响应,还是排程本身出了问题。顺手帮我看看全实验室的标定质量:这两年下来的标定残差能不能接受,有没有哪台仪器或者我们用的参考物质在系统性地卡住标定能做到多准。 标定记录、设备老化状态、参考物质目录、维护日志都在数据目录里,你自己拼。我要的是结论加依据,别把整理过程当结论端上来。 > 数据路径说明:题面中提到的 `env/` 目录内容已挂载到 `/app/data/`(题面里的 `env/xxx` 即 `/app/data/xxx`)。 把你的完整回答写...
原因分析:仪器标定状态(data-world 世界 p000518)
[ "data-analysis", "causal-inference", "pandas", "chinese" ]
1.1
{ "schema_version": "1.1", "artifacts": [ "/app/answer.txt", "/logs/verifier/reward.txt", "/logs/verifier/details.json", "/logs/artifacts/", "/logs/agent/trajectory.json" ], "task": { "name": "dataworld/p000518-cause-1", "description": "原因分析:仪器标定状态(data-world 世界 p000518)", "autho...
{ "difficulty_explanation": "第 1 层原因分析题:需在 p000518 世界的多套独立数据系统中完成数据清洗、关联与计算,并给出有 /app/data/ 文件证据支撑的因果归因结论。", "category": "data-analysis", "difficulty": "medium", "world": "p000518", "dag_nodes": 12, "dag_edges": 15, "dag_category_id": 10, "dag_category_name": "Experimental & Physical Science / 实验与物理科学" ...
[ "environment/Dockerfile", "environment/data/analysis_platform/final_analysis_results.csv", "environment/data/analysis_platform/outlier_rejection_results.parquet", "environment/data/analysis_platform/replicate_variance.csv", "environment/data/analysis_platform/run_processing_map.csv", "environment/data/ana...
dataworld-p000518-cause-1
dataworld/p000518-consequence-1
最近几次质控复盘,好几起批次失控都扎堆在夏季高湿那几个月,技术主管怀疑是仪器室的环境(温度、湿度)在作怪。他想让你从这两年的运行数据里把这件事说清楚:仪器室的环境条件到底在多大程度上影响了测量读数和读数质量,方向是怎样的、量级有多大。实验室有五台光谱仪,原理各不相同,他特意交代别笼统下结论——哪台对环境最敏感、哪台最不敏感,要分开说清楚。 制样室那边的环境会不会也通过样品制备环节影响到最终出结果,他没什么把握,让你顺手也看一眼,给个判断就行。 > 数据路径说明:题面中提到的 `env/` 目录内容已挂载到 `/app/data/`(题面里的 `env/xxx` 即 `/app/data/xxx`)。 把你的完整回答写入 `/a...
后果分析:环境条件(data-world 世界 p000518)
[ "data-analysis", "causal-inference", "pandas", "chinese" ]
1.1
{ "schema_version": "1.1", "artifacts": [ "/app/answer.txt", "/logs/verifier/reward.txt", "/logs/verifier/details.json", "/logs/artifacts/", "/logs/agent/trajectory.json" ], "task": { "name": "dataworld/p000518-consequence-1", "description": "后果分析:环境条件(data-world 世界 p000518)", "a...
{ "difficulty_explanation": "第 1 层后果分析题:需在 p000518 世界的多套独立数据系统中完成数据清洗、关联与计算,并给出有 /app/data/ 文件证据支撑的后果推断结论。", "category": "data-analysis", "difficulty": "medium", "world": "p000518", "dag_nodes": 12, "dag_edges": 15, "dag_category_id": 10, "dag_category_name": "Experimental & Physical Science / 实验与物理科学" ...
[ "environment/Dockerfile", "environment/data/analysis_platform/final_analysis_results.csv", "environment/data/analysis_platform/outlier_rejection_results.parquet", "environment/data/analysis_platform/replicate_variance.csv", "environment/data/analysis_platform/run_processing_map.csv", "environment/data/ana...
dataworld-p000518-consequence-1
dataworld/p000518-consequence-3
小张,下季度我们要把异常读数剔除这一步写进测量不确定度评估的程序文件里,但在定稿前我需要你先把现状摸清楚。这两年我们出的每一份报告值和扩展不确定度,都是在剔除离群读数之后才算出来的,我一直担心两件事:一是剔除这步到底把我们报给客户的数值往哪个方向、改了多少;二是那些剔除比例特别高的批次,剔除之后不确定度是不是反而被压得太好看、没反映真实分散度。 你从原始读数和剔除结果一路追到重复性方差和最终报告,把剔除这一步对报告值和不确定度的影响量化出来,高剔除批次单独看。哪些设备或情形下剔除更激进、更不可靠,也一并告诉我。 > 数据路径说明:题面中提到的 `env/` 目录内容已挂载到 `/app/data/`(题面里的 `env/xxx` ...
后果分析:异常剔除结果(data-world 世界 p000518)
[ "data-analysis", "causal-inference", "pandas", "chinese" ]
1.1
{ "schema_version": "1.1", "artifacts": [ "/app/answer.txt", "/logs/verifier/reward.txt", "/logs/verifier/details.json", "/logs/artifacts/", "/logs/agent/trajectory.json" ], "task": { "name": "dataworld/p000518-consequence-3", "description": "后果分析:异常剔除结果(data-world 世界 p000518)", ...
{ "difficulty_explanation": "第 3 层后果分析题:需在 p000518 世界的多套独立数据系统中完成数据清洗、关联与计算,并给出有 /app/data/ 文件证据支撑的后果推断结论。", "category": "data-analysis", "difficulty": "hard", "world": "p000518", "dag_nodes": 12, "dag_edges": 15, "dag_category_id": 10, "dag_category_name": "Experimental & Physical Science / 实验与物理科学" }
[ "environment/Dockerfile", "environment/data/analysis_platform/final_analysis_results.csv", "environment/data/analysis_platform/outlier_rejection_results.parquet", "environment/data/analysis_platform/replicate_variance.csv", "environment/data/analysis_platform/run_processing_map.csv", "environment/data/ana...
dataworld-p000518-consequence-3
dataworld/p000520-cause-4
过去两年我们签了四十多个艺人,到现在已经走了10个,还有几个挂在 at_risk 状态上。我需要搞清楚到底是什么在驱动艺人流失——是播放量不行、收入太低,还是别的。版税结算和播放数据都在数据目录里,艺人当前和历史状态也有记录。 我不想看一份把所有变量都 corr 一遍的泛泛报告。给我能站住脚的结论:哪些因素真的预示或导致流失、量级多大,哪些看着相关其实是被别的东西带偏的或者口径算错了。如果有艺人明明数据很差却没走、或者数据还行却走了,把这种反例也讲清楚。 > 数据路径说明:题面中提到的 `env/` 目录内容已挂载到 `/app/data/`(题面里的 `env/xxx` 即 `/app/data/xxx`)。 把你的完整回答...
原因分析:Artist Retention & Reactivation(data-world 世界 p000520)
[ "data-analysis", "causal-inference", "pandas", "chinese" ]
1.1
{ "schema_version": "1.1", "artifacts": [ "/app/answer.txt", "/logs/verifier/reward.txt", "/logs/verifier/details.json", "/logs/artifacts/", "/logs/agent/trajectory.json" ], "task": { "name": "dataworld/p000520-cause-4", "description": "原因分析:Artist Retention & Reactivation(data-world...
{ "difficulty_explanation": "第 4 层原因分析题:需在 p000520 世界的多套独立数据系统中完成数据清洗、关联与计算,并给出有 /app/data/ 文件证据支撑的因果归因结论。", "category": "data-analysis", "difficulty": "hard", "world": "p000520", "dag_nodes": 11, "dag_edges": 13, "dag_category_id": 1, "dag_category_name": "Commercial Growth & Acquisition / 商业增长与获客" }
[ "environment/Dockerfile", "environment/data/analytics/daily_streams.parquet", "environment/data/analytics/market_trends_weekly.csv", "environment/data/crm/artist_profiles.csv", "environment/data/crm/artist_status_history.csv", "environment/data/crm/outreach_events.csv", "environment/data/crm/production_...
dataworld-p000520-cause-4
dataworld/p000520-consequence-1
A&R 的 Lin 发来一封邮件: 最近两个季度好几个流派在后台趋势看板上窜得很快,但我拿不准我们到底有没有跟上——scouting 是不是真的往热起来的流派偏了,marketing 预算又有没有跟着走。我想搞清楚:当一个流派在社交媒体和流媒体上的热度动起来之后,我们这边的反应是怎样的——scouting 外联和推广投放分别多久才跟上来、力度多大、有没有被什么稀释掉。给我一份能说清方向、快慢和量级的结论,我好判断接下来要不要调整节奏。 > 数据路径说明:题面中提到的 `env/` 目录内容已挂载到 `/app/data/`(题面里的 `env/xxx` 即 `/app/data/xxx`)。 把你的完整回答写入 `/app/a...
后果分析:Market & Genre Trends(data-world 世界 p000520)
[ "data-analysis", "causal-inference", "pandas", "chinese" ]
1.1
{ "schema_version": "1.1", "artifacts": [ "/app/answer.txt", "/logs/verifier/reward.txt", "/logs/verifier/details.json", "/logs/artifacts/", "/logs/agent/trajectory.json" ], "task": { "name": "dataworld/p000520-consequence-1", "description": "后果分析:Market & Genre Trends(data-world 世界 ...
{ "difficulty_explanation": "第 1 层后果分析题:需在 p000520 世界的多套独立数据系统中完成数据清洗、关联与计算,并给出有 /app/data/ 文件证据支撑的后果推断结论。", "category": "data-analysis", "difficulty": "medium", "world": "p000520", "dag_nodes": 11, "dag_edges": 13, "dag_category_id": 1, "dag_category_name": "Commercial Growth & Acquisition / 商业增长与获客" }
[ "environment/Dockerfile", "environment/data/analytics/daily_streams.parquet", "environment/data/analytics/market_trends_weekly.csv", "environment/data/crm/artist_profiles.csv", "environment/data/crm/artist_status_history.csv", "environment/data/crm/outreach_events.csv", "environment/data/crm/production_...
dataworld-p000520-consequence-1
dataworld/p000523-cause-1
帮我看一下广告投放这块。这两年我们的总投放涨了一倍多,但每个渠道、每个地区的单次展现成本(CPM)和点击率(CTR)月度之间波动很大,有的渠道涨有的渠道反而降,财务那边一直追问我钱到底花在哪了、是不是买贵了。 我想搞清楚一件事:到底是什么在驱动我们每个展现的成本和点击率——是我们自己买的量(投放量级)在变,还是市场上有什么外部因素在推?哪些是我们能控的,哪些是市场强加给我们的?渠道之间和地区之间是不是一样的逻辑,还是各走各的?给我一个有依据的判断,别只看个总量趋势就下结论。 > 数据路径说明:题面中提到的 `env/` 目录内容已挂载到 `/app/data/`(题面里的 `env/xxx` 即 `/app/data/xxx`)。...
原因分析:获客投放与触达(data-world 世界 p000523)
[ "data-analysis", "causal-inference", "pandas", "chinese" ]
1.1
{ "schema_version": "1.1", "artifacts": [ "/app/answer.txt", "/logs/verifier/reward.txt", "/logs/verifier/details.json", "/logs/artifacts/", "/logs/agent/trajectory.json" ], "task": { "name": "dataworld/p000523-cause-1", "description": "原因分析:获客投放与触达(data-world 世界 p000523)", "auth...
{ "difficulty_explanation": "第 1 层原因分析题:需在 p000523 世界的多套独立数据系统中完成数据清洗、关联与计算,并给出有 /app/data/ 文件证据支撑的因果归因结论。", "category": "data-analysis", "difficulty": "medium", "world": "p000523", "dag_nodes": 9, "dag_edges": 12, "dag_category_id": 1, "dag_category_name": "Commercial Growth & Acquisition / 商业增长与获客" }
[ "environment/Dockerfile", "environment/data/ad_platform/creative_registry.csv", "environment/data/ad_platform/daily_ad_performance.csv", "environment/data/ad_platform/monthly_market_index.csv", "environment/data/analytics/daily_user_activity.parquet", "environment/data/analytics/landing_sessions.jsonl", ...
dataworld-p000523-cause-1
dataworld/p000523-cause-2
最近两个季度新用户激活一直在好转——time-to-first-value 明显缩短,核心动作完成度也在抬。老板让我搞清楚这背后到底是什么在起作用:是我们这一年上的几个 onboarding 实验真有效,还是落地页路由调整带来的,又或者只是进来的用户结构变了。哪些是能复算的实打实的驱动、哪些是看着像但其实站不住,我得有个数,下半年才知道该往哪投。用这 21 个月的数据给我个结论。 > 数据路径说明:题面中提到的 `env/` 目录内容已挂载到 `/app/data/`(题面里的 `env/xxx` 即 `/app/data/xxx`)。 把你的完整回答写入 `/app/answer.txt`。
原因分析:新用户激活(data-world 世界 p000523)
[ "data-analysis", "causal-inference", "pandas", "chinese" ]
1.1
{ "schema_version": "1.1", "artifacts": [ "/app/answer.txt", "/logs/verifier/reward.txt", "/logs/verifier/details.json", "/logs/artifacts/", "/logs/agent/trajectory.json" ], "task": { "name": "dataworld/p000523-cause-2", "description": "原因分析:新用户激活(data-world 世界 p000523)", "author...
{ "difficulty_explanation": "第 2 层原因分析题:需在 p000523 世界的多套独立数据系统中完成数据清洗、关联与计算,并给出有 /app/data/ 文件证据支撑的因果归因结论。", "category": "data-analysis", "difficulty": "hard", "world": "p000523", "dag_nodes": 9, "dag_edges": 12, "dag_category_id": 1, "dag_category_name": "Commercial Growth & Acquisition / 商业增长与获客" }
[ "environment/Dockerfile", "environment/data/ad_platform/creative_registry.csv", "environment/data/ad_platform/daily_ad_performance.csv", "environment/data/ad_platform/monthly_market_index.csv", "environment/data/analytics/daily_user_activity.parquet", "environment/data/analytics/landing_sessions.jsonl", ...
dataworld-p000523-cause-2
dataworld/p000523-cause-3
我们是做游戏分析 SaaS 的 PixelArc。这两年注册用户涨了不少,但董事会现在盯的是留存——新用户到底留不留得住、哪些东西能预示他们留得下来。你手上有一份每个用户每天的活跃面板,其余用户维度的记录也都在数据目录里。帮我把"是什么决定一个新用户留不留下来"讲清楚:哪些因素和次日及早期留存强相关、量级有多大;最近这几个季度上的功能,到底有没有把留存带起来。给我一份有依据的结论,数据里有什么坑你自己掂量。 > 数据路径说明:题面中提到的 `env/` 目录内容已挂载到 `/app/data/`(题面里的 `env/xxx` 即 `/app/data/xxx`)。 把你的完整回答写入 `/app/answer.txt`。
原因分析:留存与活跃(data-world 世界 p000523)
[ "data-analysis", "causal-inference", "pandas", "chinese" ]
1.1
{ "schema_version": "1.1", "artifacts": [ "/app/answer.txt", "/logs/verifier/reward.txt", "/logs/verifier/details.json", "/logs/artifacts/", "/logs/agent/trajectory.json" ], "task": { "name": "dataworld/p000523-cause-3", "description": "原因分析:留存与活跃(data-world 世界 p000523)", "author...
{ "difficulty_explanation": "第 3 层原因分析题:需在 p000523 世界的多套独立数据系统中完成数据清洗、关联与计算,并给出有 /app/data/ 文件证据支撑的因果归因结论。", "category": "data-analysis", "difficulty": "hard", "world": "p000523", "dag_nodes": 9, "dag_edges": 12, "dag_category_id": 1, "dag_category_name": "Commercial Growth & Acquisition / 商业增长与获客" }
[ "environment/Dockerfile", "environment/data/ad_platform/creative_registry.csv", "environment/data/ad_platform/daily_ad_performance.csv", "environment/data/ad_platform/monthly_market_index.csv", "environment/data/analytics/daily_user_activity.parquet", "environment/data/analytics/landing_sessions.jsonl", ...
dataworld-p000523-cause-3
dataworld/p000524-cause-4
老规矩,麻烦你帮我看一下我们这 6 个组合的风险数据。风控复盘 2022 年时发现一件怪事:那年组合的 CVaR(条件回撤,尾部那块)涨得跟 VaR 不成比例,而且几个组合像约好了一起动。我想要个说法:到底是什么在驱动这 6 个组合的风险敞口(VaR 和 CVaR)?是单纯市场波动率上来了,还是另有原因?这风险在 6 个组合之间是均匀的,还是集中在某几个上?数据在投资组合那套文件里,相关的行情你自己找一下对上。 > 数据路径说明:题面中提到的 `env/` 目录内容已挂载到 `/app/data/`(题面里的 `env/xxx` 即 `/app/data/xxx`)。 把你的完整回答写入 `/app/answer.txt`。
原因分析:投资组合与风险敞口(data-world 世界 p000524)
[ "data-analysis", "causal-inference", "pandas", "chinese" ]
1.1
{ "schema_version": "1.1", "artifacts": [ "/app/answer.txt", "/logs/verifier/reward.txt", "/logs/verifier/details.json", "/logs/artifacts/", "/logs/agent/trajectory.json" ], "task": { "name": "dataworld/p000524-cause-4", "description": "原因分析:投资组合与风险敞口(data-world 世界 p000524)", "au...
{ "difficulty_explanation": "第 4 层原因分析题:需在 p000524 世界的多套独立数据系统中完成数据清洗、关联与计算,并给出有 /app/data/ 文件证据支撑的因果归因结论。", "category": "data-analysis", "difficulty": "hard", "world": "p000524", "dag_nodes": 9, "dag_edges": 12, "dag_category_id": 3, "dag_category_name": "Finance, FP&A & Markets / 财务·FP&A·金融市场" }
[ "environment/Dockerfile", "environment/data/crm/orders/orders_2016.csv", "environment/data/crm/orders/orders_2017.csv", "environment/data/crm/orders/orders_2018.csv", "environment/data/crm/orders/orders_2019.csv", "environment/data/crm/orders/orders_2020.csv", "environment/data/crm/orders/orders_2021.cs...
dataworld-p000524-cause-4
dataworld/p000524-consequence-3
华锐铜业这八年铜价上蹿下跳,capex 却一直没停。我下周一要跟董事会汇报这家公司的财务健康度,需要你先把账理清楚:这八年下来,公司的杠杆、偿债能力和经营现金流到底是变好了还是变差了,主要被什么因素推着走? 另外我尤其想搞明白一件事——这些财务上的好坏,到底有没有真正反映到股价上,还是说股价基本就跟着铜价走、资产负债表怎么样市场其实并不在意?给我一个有数据支撑的判断,别只给结论,关键数字和你的口径要能复算。 > 数据路径说明:题面中提到的 `env/` 目录内容已挂载到 `/app/data/`(题面里的 `env/xxx` 即 `/app/data/xxx`)。 把你的完整回答写入 `/app/answer.txt`。
后果分析:现金流与财务比率(data-world 世界 p000524)
[ "data-analysis", "causal-inference", "pandas", "chinese" ]
1.1
{ "schema_version": "1.1", "artifacts": [ "/app/answer.txt", "/logs/verifier/reward.txt", "/logs/verifier/details.json", "/logs/artifacts/", "/logs/agent/trajectory.json" ], "task": { "name": "dataworld/p000524-consequence-3", "description": "后果分析:现金流与财务比率(data-world 世界 p000524)", ...
{ "difficulty_explanation": "第 3 层后果分析题:需在 p000524 世界的多套独立数据系统中完成数据清洗、关联与计算,并给出有 /app/data/ 文件证据支撑的后果推断结论。", "category": "data-analysis", "difficulty": "hard", "world": "p000524", "dag_nodes": 9, "dag_edges": 12, "dag_category_id": 3, "dag_category_name": "Finance, FP&A & Markets / 财务·FP&A·金融市场" }
[ "environment/Dockerfile", "environment/data/crm/orders/orders_2016.csv", "environment/data/crm/orders/orders_2017.csv", "environment/data/crm/orders/orders_2018.csv", "environment/data/crm/orders/orders_2019.csv", "environment/data/crm/orders/orders_2020.csv", "environment/data/crm/orders/orders_2021.cs...
dataworld-p000524-consequence-3
dataworld/p000529-consequence-2
我们基金会媒体与民主项目正在复盘希腊 2009–2013 紧缩危机期间新闻媒体的政治报道到底产生了什么后果,想拿这份多源档案数据做依据。我需要你回答:媒体那几周怎么报道(用什么框架、什么语气、议题显著性多高),跟公众后来对体制的态度、以及社交媒体上的政治表达,到底是什么关系——方向、量级、在不同人群和不同框架上是否不一样,有没有滞后。 具体说,我想知道:当媒体整体语气偏负、或冲突性框架占比上升时,公众的体制支持是被拉低还是怎样?这种关联在受教育程度不同的人身上是否一样?冲突性框架和信息性框架分别把社交媒体上的行为推向转发还是原创发帖?请把能支持结论的量级和证据给出来,也把数据里那些会让人误判的地方点出来。我下周要拿这个去跟董事会讲...
后果分析:媒体报道与信息框架(data-world 世界 p000529)
[ "data-analysis", "causal-inference", "pandas", "chinese" ]
1.1
{ "schema_version": "1.1", "artifacts": [ "/app/answer.txt", "/logs/verifier/reward.txt", "/logs/verifier/details.json", "/logs/artifacts/", "/logs/agent/trajectory.json" ], "task": { "name": "dataworld/p000529-consequence-2", "description": "后果分析:媒体报道与信息框架(data-world 世界 p000529)", ...
{ "difficulty_explanation": "第 2 层后果分析题:需在 p000529 世界的多套独立数据系统中完成数据清洗、关联与计算,并给出有 /app/data/ 文件证据支撑的后果推断结论。", "category": "data-analysis", "difficulty": "hard", "world": "p000529", "dag_nodes": 11, "dag_edges": 16, "dag_category_id": 15, "dag_category_name": "Social Science, Survey & Behavioral / 社会科学·调查...
[ "environment/Dockerfile", "environment/data/elections/boundary_mapping.tsv", "environment/data/elections/constituency_registry.csv", "environment/data/elections/constituency_results.csv", "environment/data/elections/election_registry.csv", "environment/data/historical/finding_aid.md", "environment/data/...
dataworld-p000529-consequence-2
dataworld/p000530-consequence-1
校准组的同事甩来一个活:咱们仪器按季度校准,校准要停机排期、成本不低,他想优化校准节奏,让我从这两年的实验数据里把"仪器离上次校准越久、漂移越严重"这件事的影响给量化清楚。他想弄明白:随着校准后时间推移,漂移对测量结果(和理论值比偏离了多少、往哪个方向偏)以及报告的不确定度分别有多大影响;哪些仪器、哪种传感技术受漂移影响最重、下季度该优先排校准。最后给他一个判断:现在这个校准节奏合不合理,尤其是刚校准完那段时间的测量数据到底靠不靠谱。 > 数据路径说明:题面中提到的 `env/` 目录内容已挂载到 `/app/data/`(题面里的 `env/xxx` 即 `/app/data/xxx`)。 把你的完整回答写入 `/app/an...
后果分析:仪器校准状态(data-world 世界 p000530)
[ "data-analysis", "causal-inference", "pandas", "chinese" ]
1.1
{ "schema_version": "1.1", "artifacts": [ "/app/answer.txt", "/logs/verifier/reward.txt", "/logs/verifier/details.json", "/logs/artifacts/", "/logs/agent/trajectory.json" ], "task": { "name": "dataworld/p000530-consequence-1", "description": "后果分析:仪器校准状态(data-world 世界 p000530)", ...
{ "difficulty_explanation": "第 1 层后果分析题:需在 p000530 世界的多套独立数据系统中完成数据清洗、关联与计算,并给出有 /app/data/ 文件证据支撑的后果推断结论。", "category": "data-analysis", "difficulty": "medium", "world": "p000530", "dag_nodes": 11, "dag_edges": 17, "dag_category_id": 10, "dag_category_name": "Experimental & Physical Science / 实验与物理科学" ...
[ "environment/Dockerfile", "environment/data/calculation/formula_versions.csv", "environment/data/calculation/physical_quantities.csv", "environment/data/calibration/calibration_scd.csv", "environment/data/calibration/certificates/CAL_001_2023Q1.pdf", "environment/data/calibration/certificates/CAL_002_2023...
dataworld-p000530-consequence-1
dataworld/p000531-cause-1
我们是教育技术中心,管 LMS 平台。最近校领导一直追:学生在平台上的活跃程度(日均活跃时长)到底被什么牵着走?为什么有的学生天天泡在平台、有的几乎不登,同一门课不同学生也差一大截,而且我们一直在推的学业预警、辅导这些干预,到底有没有真把人拉回平台上来、能管多久。我想有个能站住脚的判断,知道哪些是真正在起作用的驱动因素,哪些只是看着相关、其实是被别的东西带出来的。 数据我让数据组给你开了权限:SIS 的学生和课程信息、LMS 的日活和作业、成绩系统的数据、还有教务那边的干预记录,都在一个目录下。你帮我把活跃度的驱动因素理清楚,尤其分清哪些是我们手上能动的、哪些只是学生或课程本身的属性;干预这块如果有效,把它的起效时间和持续期讲清楚...
原因分析:LMS学习行为(data-world 世界 p000531)
[ "data-analysis", "causal-inference", "pandas", "chinese" ]
1.1
{ "schema_version": "1.1", "artifacts": [ "/app/answer.txt", "/logs/verifier/reward.txt", "/logs/verifier/details.json", "/logs/artifacts/", "/logs/agent/trajectory.json" ], "task": { "name": "dataworld/p000531-cause-1", "description": "原因分析:LMS学习行为(data-world 世界 p000531)", "auth...
{ "difficulty_explanation": "第 1 层原因分析题:需在 p000531 世界的多套独立数据系统中完成数据清洗、关联与计算,并给出有 /app/data/ 文件证据支撑的因果归因结论。", "category": "data-analysis", "difficulty": "medium", "world": "p000531", "dag_nodes": 9, "dag_edges": 11, "dag_category_id": 14, "dag_category_name": "Education & Learning Analytics / 教育与学习分析" }
[ "environment/Dockerfile", "environment/data/academic/intervention_events.csv", "environment/data/academic/intervention_notes.json", "environment/data/grades/exam_scores.csv", "environment/data/grades/mastery_tracking_scd.csv", "environment/data/lms/assignment_submissions.csv", "environment/data/lms/dail...
dataworld-p000531-cause-1
dataworld/p000531-cause-4
下学期开学前,学工那边要我把退学风险这件事理一理,给学业指导中心一份能落地的判断。我们最关心的是:一个学生这学期读完,下学期还会不会继续在读(enrollment_retention 里的 is_enrolled_next_term),到底是哪些因素在驱动。手头有学生信息系统里的学期 GPA、留存记录、学生背景,教务系统里的教学干预事件。你帮我看看 GPA 高低跟留存的对应关系到底长什么样、教学干预有没有用、哪些类型更管用,最后给一个有依据的结论:风险主要被什么解释,干预该往哪类学生上投。数据里有不少坑,你自己甄别,别把假相关当结论报上来。 > 数据路径说明:题面中提到的 `env/` 目录内容已挂载到 `/app/data/`(题...
原因分析:留存状态(data-world 世界 p000531)
[ "data-analysis", "causal-inference", "pandas", "chinese" ]
1.1
{ "schema_version": "1.1", "artifacts": [ "/app/answer.txt", "/logs/verifier/reward.txt", "/logs/verifier/details.json", "/logs/artifacts/", "/logs/agent/trajectory.json" ], "task": { "name": "dataworld/p000531-cause-4", "description": "原因分析:留存状态(data-world 世界 p000531)", "authors...
{ "difficulty_explanation": "第 4 层原因分析题:需在 p000531 世界的多套独立数据系统中完成数据清洗、关联与计算,并给出有 /app/data/ 文件证据支撑的因果归因结论。", "category": "data-analysis", "difficulty": "hard", "world": "p000531", "dag_nodes": 9, "dag_edges": 11, "dag_category_id": 14, "dag_category_name": "Education & Learning Analytics / 教育与学习分析" }
[ "environment/Dockerfile", "environment/data/academic/intervention_events.csv", "environment/data/academic/intervention_notes.json", "environment/data/grades/exam_scores.csv", "environment/data/grades/mastery_tracking_scd.csv", "environment/data/lms/assignment_submissions.csv", "environment/data/lms/dail...
dataworld-p000531-cause-4
dataworld/p000531-consequence-1
教务处想让我们把退学风险这事摸一摸。这几年退学的学生不少,领导想知道:到底什么样的入学背景更容易读不下去?学生信息系统、LMS 学习平台、成绩系统那几张表都在,2021 级到 2024 级的学生都在里头。 你帮我看看:学生的入学基础(高中 GPA、入学分这些)跟他们最后能不能读下来是什么关系,强弱和方向都说清楚;不同背景的学生这几年在学习行为和成绩上走的是不是不一样的轨迹;最后给我个判断,哪些背景特征最该拿来给新生做退学预警,哪些看着相关其实不是那么回事。 > 数据路径说明:题面中提到的 `env/` 目录内容已挂载到 `/app/data/`(题面里的 `env/xxx` 即 `/app/data/xxx`)。 把你的完整回...
后果分析:学生背景(data-world 世界 p000531)
[ "data-analysis", "causal-inference", "pandas", "chinese" ]
1.1
{ "schema_version": "1.1", "artifacts": [ "/app/answer.txt", "/logs/verifier/reward.txt", "/logs/verifier/details.json", "/logs/artifacts/", "/logs/agent/trajectory.json" ], "task": { "name": "dataworld/p000531-consequence-1", "description": "后果分析:学生背景(data-world 世界 p000531)", "a...
{ "difficulty_explanation": "第 1 层后果分析题:需在 p000531 世界的多套独立数据系统中完成数据清洗、关联与计算,并给出有 /app/data/ 文件证据支撑的后果推断结论。", "category": "data-analysis", "difficulty": "medium", "world": "p000531", "dag_nodes": 9, "dag_edges": 11, "dag_category_id": 14, "dag_category_name": "Education & Learning Analytics / 教育与学习分析" }
[ "environment/Dockerfile", "environment/data/academic/intervention_events.csv", "environment/data/academic/intervention_notes.json", "environment/data/grades/exam_scores.csv", "environment/data/grades/mastery_tracking_scd.csv", "environment/data/lms/assignment_submissions.csv", "environment/data/lms/dail...
dataworld-p000531-consequence-1
dataworld/p000531-consequence-2
我们是教学发展中心,正在评估课程作业的迟交扣分政策到底有没有学业上的依据。想弄清楚一件事:学生作业交得迟、或者交得不完整,这种提交状态上的差异,会不会在之后的考试成绩里反映出来——是真的成绩更差,还是说迟交主要只是个纪律问题、跟实际学到多少关系不大?如果确实有影响,幅度有多大,是不是迟交得越久越严重,以及这种影响在平时测验、期中、期末上是不是一回事。 作业提交记录在 LMS,考试成绩在成绩系统,你把两边串起来看。给我一份能说清楚的结论,关键数字要经得起复核。 > 数据路径说明:题面中提到的 `env/` 目录内容已挂载到 `/app/data/`(题面里的 `env/xxx` 即 `/app/data/xxx`)。 把你的完整...
后果分析:作业提交状态(data-world 世界 p000531)
[ "data-analysis", "causal-inference", "pandas", "chinese" ]
1.1
{ "schema_version": "1.1", "artifacts": [ "/app/answer.txt", "/logs/verifier/reward.txt", "/logs/verifier/details.json", "/logs/artifacts/", "/logs/agent/trajectory.json" ], "task": { "name": "dataworld/p000531-consequence-2", "description": "后果分析:作业提交状态(data-world 世界 p000531)", ...
{ "difficulty_explanation": "第 2 层后果分析题:需在 p000531 世界的多套独立数据系统中完成数据清洗、关联与计算,并给出有 /app/data/ 文件证据支撑的后果推断结论。", "category": "data-analysis", "difficulty": "hard", "world": "p000531", "dag_nodes": 9, "dag_edges": 11, "dag_category_id": 14, "dag_category_name": "Education & Learning Analytics / 教育与学习分析" }
[ "environment/Dockerfile", "environment/data/academic/intervention_events.csv", "environment/data/academic/intervention_notes.json", "environment/data/grades/exam_scores.csv", "environment/data/grades/mastery_tracking_scd.csv", "environment/data/lms/assignment_submissions.csv", "environment/data/lms/dail...
dataworld-p000531-consequence-2
dataworld/p000531-consequence-3
小张,成绩管理科那边问了我个事,想让你帮着从数据里查清楚。 我们系统里每门课都给学生维护着知识掌握度(knowledge_tracing_score 那个 0 到 1 的分,还有个 skill_mastery_level 等级),按学生×课程随每次测评滚动更新。成绩科的人想知道:这个掌握度到底有多大用——它和学生在该学期拿到的 GPA、学业状态是个什么关系?掌握度高的学生是不是确实学期表现好、不容易落到试读退学那档?反过来掌握度低的是不是真的后面出问题多? 他们尤其纠结一点:是不是掌握度越高就越好,还是说到了某个水平往上再提意义就不大了。你把掌握度从低到高的学生分几档,看看每档对应的学期 GPA、academic_standin...
后果分析:掌握程度(data-world 世界 p000531)
[ "data-analysis", "causal-inference", "pandas", "chinese" ]
1.1
{ "schema_version": "1.1", "artifacts": [ "/app/answer.txt", "/logs/verifier/reward.txt", "/logs/verifier/details.json", "/logs/artifacts/", "/logs/agent/trajectory.json" ], "task": { "name": "dataworld/p000531-consequence-3", "description": "后果分析:掌握程度(data-world 世界 p000531)", "a...
{ "difficulty_explanation": "第 3 层后果分析题:需在 p000531 世界的多套独立数据系统中完成数据清洗、关联与计算,并给出有 /app/data/ 文件证据支撑的后果推断结论。", "category": "data-analysis", "difficulty": "hard", "world": "p000531", "dag_nodes": 9, "dag_edges": 11, "dag_category_id": 14, "dag_category_name": "Education & Learning Analytics / 教育与学习分析" }
[ "environment/Dockerfile", "environment/data/academic/intervention_events.csv", "environment/data/academic/intervention_notes.json", "environment/data/grades/exam_scores.csv", "environment/data/grades/mastery_tracking_scd.csv", "environment/data/lms/assignment_submissions.csv", "environment/data/lms/dail...
dataworld-p000531-consequence-3
dataworld/p000532-cause-1
网站流量和点击从 2024 年初开始明显往下掉,董事会问我到底是市场大环境不行、还是我们广告投得不对、又或者竞品抢得太凶。相关数据我都让人给你了,你帮我理一理:这两年到底是什么在驱动我们的流量和点击?2024 年这波下滑是真问题,还是正常的季节波动?另外我们广告投放的效率到底怎么样,钱花得值不值? 不用写太长,把主要驱动因素和量级讲清楚就行,下周战略会我要拿去用。 > 数据路径说明:题面中提到的 `env/` 目录内容已挂载到 `/app/data/`(题面里的 `env/xxx` 即 `/app/data/xxx`)。 把你的完整回答写入 `/app/answer.txt`。
原因分析:渠道流量与点击(data-world 世界 p000532)
[ "data-analysis", "causal-inference", "pandas", "chinese" ]
1.1
{ "schema_version": "1.1", "artifacts": [ "/app/answer.txt", "/logs/verifier/reward.txt", "/logs/verifier/details.json", "/logs/artifacts/", "/logs/agent/trajectory.json" ], "task": { "name": "dataworld/p000532-cause-1", "description": "原因分析:渠道流量与点击(data-world 世界 p000532)", "auth...
{ "difficulty_explanation": "第 1 层原因分析题:需在 p000532 世界的多套独立数据系统中完成数据清洗、关联与计算,并给出有 /app/data/ 文件证据支撑的因果归因结论。", "category": "data-analysis", "difficulty": "medium", "world": "p000532", "dag_nodes": 12, "dag_edges": 17, "dag_category_id": 1, "dag_category_name": "Commercial Growth & Acquisition / 商业增长与获客" }
[ "environment/Dockerfile", "environment/data/ad_platform/campaign_delivery_events_2023H1.parquet", "environment/data/ad_platform/campaign_delivery_events_2023H2.parquet", "environment/data/ad_platform/campaign_delivery_events_2024H1.parquet", "environment/data/ad_platform/campaign_metadata.csv", "environme...
dataworld-p000532-cause-1
dataworld/p000532-cause-3
最近几个新 cohort 的次月留存(D30)有点往下走,老板让我搞清楚我们到底靠什么把人留住。你把手上的留存数据和用户行为数据捋一捋,看看哪些因素跟用户留不留下来关系最大——功能用得深不深、有没有付费、激活情况这些,各自的影响有多大、有没有边界(比如用到什么程度再往上意义就不大了)。另外付费用户留存一直比免费高不少,市场拿这个当卖点,我想确认两件事:一是这个差距是不是真的随时间在缩小,二是它到底是不是付费本身带来的,还是背后另有原因。结论要经得起追问:哪些是实打实的、哪些只是数据看着像但其实站不住,帮我分开。 > 数据路径说明:题面中提到的 `env/` 目录内容已挂载到 `/app/data/`(题面里的 `env/xxx` 即...
原因分析:用户留存与活跃(data-world 世界 p000532)
[ "data-analysis", "causal-inference", "pandas", "chinese" ]
1.1
{ "schema_version": "1.1", "artifacts": [ "/app/answer.txt", "/logs/verifier/reward.txt", "/logs/verifier/details.json", "/logs/artifacts/", "/logs/agent/trajectory.json" ], "task": { "name": "dataworld/p000532-cause-3", "description": "原因分析:用户留存与活跃(data-world 世界 p000532)", "auth...
{ "difficulty_explanation": "第 3 层原因分析题:需在 p000532 世界的多套独立数据系统中完成数据清洗、关联与计算,并给出有 /app/data/ 文件证据支撑的因果归因结论。", "category": "data-analysis", "difficulty": "hard", "world": "p000532", "dag_nodes": 12, "dag_edges": 17, "dag_category_id": 1, "dag_category_name": "Commercial Growth & Acquisition / 商业增长与获客" }
[ "environment/Dockerfile", "environment/data/ad_platform/campaign_delivery_events_2023H1.parquet", "environment/data/ad_platform/campaign_delivery_events_2023H2.parquet", "environment/data/ad_platform/campaign_delivery_events_2024H1.parquet", "environment/data/ad_platform/campaign_metadata.csv", "environme...
dataworld-p000532-cause-3
dataworld/p000532-cause-4
最近复盘这18个月(2023-01到2024-06)的月度经营数据,有几个数我看着不踏实,想请你帮我理一理。月度表里营收、ROAS、回本周期、LTV、北极星指标(NSS)这几列我都翻了:营收2024年初冲到高点后开始往下走,但ROAS和回本周期反而比2023年好看不少,LTV还在慢慢爬,NSS也还在涨。我想搞清楚——这些指标的变化到底是被什么驱动的?哪些是真实的改善或恶化,哪些只是数字上的假象?尤其2024这半年,营收和获客那头到底发生了什么;NSS这个北极星看着还在涨,是真健康还是在透支老本?把能支撑结论的数据和口径都摆出来,区分清楚哪些是可靠证据、哪些受数据局限。 > 数据路径说明:题面中提到的 `env/` 目录内容已挂载到 ...
原因分析:营收回报与北极星指标(data-world 世界 p000532)
[ "data-analysis", "causal-inference", "pandas", "chinese" ]
1.1
{ "schema_version": "1.1", "artifacts": [ "/app/answer.txt", "/logs/verifier/reward.txt", "/logs/verifier/details.json", "/logs/artifacts/", "/logs/agent/trajectory.json" ], "task": { "name": "dataworld/p000532-cause-4", "description": "原因分析:营收回报与北极星指标(data-world 世界 p000532)", "a...
{ "difficulty_explanation": "第 4 层原因分析题:需在 p000532 世界的多套独立数据系统中完成数据清洗、关联与计算,并给出有 /app/data/ 文件证据支撑的因果归因结论。", "category": "data-analysis", "difficulty": "hard", "world": "p000532", "dag_nodes": 12, "dag_edges": 17, "dag_category_id": 1, "dag_category_name": "Commercial Growth & Acquisition / 商业增长与获客" }
[ "environment/Dockerfile", "environment/data/ad_platform/campaign_delivery_events_2023H1.parquet", "environment/data/ad_platform/campaign_delivery_events_2023H2.parquet", "environment/data/ad_platform/campaign_delivery_events_2024H1.parquet", "environment/data/ad_platform/campaign_metadata.csv", "environme...
dataworld-p000532-cause-4
dataworld/p000532-consequence-4
我管 CRM 这块,最近在复盘召回(reactivation)投放的投入产出,想让你帮我从数据里把这笔账算清楚。 我们一直在给流失风险用户推召回(in_app_push / email_push / email 三种渠道),但我心里一直没底:召回到底有没有用、用在哪段流失时长上最划算、最后真的能找回多少收入。具体我想知道几件事:用户流失得越久,召回成功的概率怎么变,是不是有个明显的失效拐点;三种推送渠道的召回效果差很多吗,还是说渠道本身只是流失时长的影子;我们这股召回投放的力气主要花在哪、和实际能召回回来的人是不是对得上;以及最后真正能从召回里找回多少付费收入,这个量级值不值得继续投。 召回事件、用户留存和订单都在数据里,你把它...
后果分析:召回触达与唤醒(data-world 世界 p000532)
[ "data-analysis", "causal-inference", "pandas", "chinese" ]
1.1
{ "schema_version": "1.1", "artifacts": [ "/app/answer.txt", "/logs/verifier/reward.txt", "/logs/verifier/details.json", "/logs/artifacts/", "/logs/agent/trajectory.json" ], "task": { "name": "dataworld/p000532-consequence-4", "description": "后果分析:召回触达与唤醒(data-world 世界 p000532)", ...
{ "difficulty_explanation": "第 4 层后果分析题:需在 p000532 世界的多套独立数据系统中完成数据清洗、关联与计算,并给出有 /app/data/ 文件证据支撑的后果推断结论。", "category": "data-analysis", "difficulty": "hard", "world": "p000532", "dag_nodes": 12, "dag_edges": 17, "dag_category_id": 1, "dag_category_name": "Commercial Growth & Acquisition / 商业增长与获客" }
[ "environment/Dockerfile", "environment/data/ad_platform/campaign_delivery_events_2023H1.parquet", "environment/data/ad_platform/campaign_delivery_events_2023H2.parquet", "environment/data/ad_platform/campaign_delivery_events_2024H1.parquet", "environment/data/ad_platform/campaign_metadata.csv", "environme...
dataworld-p000532-consequence-4
dataworld/p000534-cause-2
我是州卫生政策办公室的分析主管。我们正在盘整过去十几年全州 72 个县的基层医疗服务利用情况——人均年度基层就诊次数、预防性筛查达标率、慢病登记管理率这几个指标,想搞清楚到底是什么在驱动各县、各年基层利用的差异:是医保覆盖、医疗设施供给、交通可达性,还是卫生项目资金投入?哪些因素影响最大、最直接? 数据室里五个系统的 dump 都在,口径和编码各搞各的,对齐是我们这边的活。我需要你把数据理顺后给出结论:哪些因素是基层利用的可靠驱动,量级和方向如何;哪些看起来相关其实是被别的因素带偏的伪信号;还有哪些年份的数据本身有坑、用的时候要打折扣。不用面面俱到,但结论得有数据撑住,别让我拿着一份经不起复算的报告去汇报。 > 数据路径说明:题面...
原因分析:基层医疗服务利用(data-world 世界 p000534)
[ "data-analysis", "causal-inference", "pandas", "chinese" ]
1.1
{ "schema_version": "1.1", "artifacts": [ "/app/answer.txt", "/logs/verifier/reward.txt", "/logs/verifier/details.json", "/logs/artifacts/", "/logs/agent/trajectory.json" ], "task": { "name": "dataworld/p000534-cause-2", "description": "原因分析:基层医疗服务利用(data-world 世界 p000534)", "aut...
{ "difficulty_explanation": "第 2 层原因分析题:需在 p000534 世界的多套独立数据系统中完成数据清洗、关联与计算,并给出有 /app/data/ 文件证据支撑的因果归因结论。", "category": "data-analysis", "difficulty": "hard", "world": "p000534", "dag_nodes": 9, "dag_edges": 12, "dag_category_id": 13, "dag_category_name": "Public Policy & Program Evaluation / 公共政策与项目评估...
[ "environment/Dockerfile", "environment/data/census/acs5_insurance_tract_2009_2023.csv", "environment/data/census/acs5_socioeconomic_tract_2009_2023.csv", "environment/data/census/tract_county_crosswalk_2010_2020.csv", "environment/data/ehr/er_inpatient_utilization_county_2009_2024.csv", "environment/data/...
dataworld-p000534-cause-2
dataworld/p000534-consequence-1
州卫生政策研究办的同事把这套 2009–2024 的区域医疗数据室甩给我,说是五个系统各自 dump 出来的,让我先回答一件事:社区社会经济状况——就是普查那几个收入、贫困、教育、就业指标——到底牵动了下游哪些面,医保覆盖、就医利用、健康结果这些。我要知道方向是正是负、差距有多大、是不是所有社区都一个样、这十几年里有没有哪个时点突然拐了弯。别只甩我一张相关系数表:哪些关联换种算法还站得住,哪些一看就是数据本身的问题带出来的,这个得讲清楚。下周拨款听证会要用,给个有依据的结论。 > 数据路径说明:题面中提到的 `env/` 目录内容已挂载到 `/app/data/`(题面里的 `env/xxx` 即 `/app/data/xxx`)。...
后果分析:社区社会经济状况(data-world 世界 p000534)
[ "data-analysis", "causal-inference", "pandas", "chinese" ]
1.1
{ "schema_version": "1.1", "artifacts": [ "/app/answer.txt", "/logs/verifier/reward.txt", "/logs/verifier/details.json", "/logs/artifacts/", "/logs/agent/trajectory.json" ], "task": { "name": "dataworld/p000534-consequence-1", "description": "后果分析:社区社会经济状况(data-world 世界 p000534)", ...
{ "difficulty_explanation": "第 1 层后果分析题:需在 p000534 世界的多套独立数据系统中完成数据清洗、关联与计算,并给出有 /app/data/ 文件证据支撑的后果推断结论。", "category": "data-analysis", "difficulty": "medium", "world": "p000534", "dag_nodes": 9, "dag_edges": 12, "dag_category_id": 13, "dag_category_name": "Public Policy & Program Evaluation / 公共政策与项目...
[ "environment/Dockerfile", "environment/data/census/acs5_insurance_tract_2009_2023.csv", "environment/data/census/acs5_socioeconomic_tract_2009_2023.csv", "environment/data/census/tract_county_crosswalk_2010_2020.csv", "environment/data/ehr/er_inpatient_utilization_county_2009_2024.csv", "environment/data/...
dataworld-p000534-consequence-1
dataworld/p000535-cause-2
这学期好几个班的班主任都反映学生"学习参与"忽高忽低——有的孩子天天登录却几乎不看视频,有的作业总拖到最后一刻。教研和运营想搞清楚到底是谁在背后拉动学生的登录、视频观看和作业提交及时性这三件事,好决定下学期把有限的精力投到设备网络保障、课程设计调整还是家长沟通上。 埋点里能拿到登录、视频观看、作业提交三类事件,课程维度和家长参与度也在各自的表里。帮我把这几路数据串起来,看看设备网络条件、课程设计、家长参与这几个方向各自对学生参与影响多大、是不是真的,哪些看着相关其实经不起推敲,最后给我一个能指导排课和投入优先级的结论。 > 数据路径说明:题面中提到的 `env/` 目录内容已挂载到 `/app/data/`(题面里的 `env/x...
原因分析:学习行为参与(data-world 世界 p000535)
[ "data-analysis", "causal-inference", "pandas", "chinese" ]
1.1
{ "schema_version": "1.1", "artifacts": [ "/app/answer.txt", "/logs/verifier/reward.txt", "/logs/verifier/details.json", "/logs/artifacts/", "/logs/agent/trajectory.json" ], "task": { "name": "dataworld/p000535-cause-2", "description": "原因分析:学习行为参与(data-world 世界 p000535)", "autho...
{ "difficulty_explanation": "第 2 层原因分析题:需在 p000535 世界的多套独立数据系统中完成数据清洗、关联与计算,并给出有 /app/data/ 文件证据支撑的因果归因结论。", "category": "data-analysis", "difficulty": "hard", "world": "p000535", "dag_nodes": 9, "dag_edges": 13, "dag_category_id": 14, "dag_category_name": "Education & Learning Analytics / 教育与学习分析" }
[ "environment/Dockerfile", "environment/data/course_mgmt/course_design_dim.csv", "environment/data/course_mgmt/intervention_records.csv", "environment/data/crm_billing/churn_risk_scores.csv", "environment/data/crm_billing/enrollment_scd.csv", "environment/data/in_world/parent_app_usage_guide_2024.pdf", "...
dataworld-p000535-cause-2
dataworld/p000535-cause-3
这学期教务复盘,老板让我搞清楚一件事:学生的随堂测验得分和课后作业表现(正确率、错题重做),到底是被什么带动的。学习行为埋点、专注度采样、课后干预执行这几摊数据平时各看各的,还没人把它们和测评结果对到一起看过。 我想要个能落地的判断:哪些因素是真在起作用、哪些只是看着相关;还有——加大课后练习强度这事,是不是一直有用,还是到某个程度就开始反效果。别只丢一张相关系数表给我,我得拿这个去和教研组拍板下学期的练习量。 > 数据路径说明:题面中提到的 `env/` 目录内容已挂载到 `/app/data/`(题面里的 `env/xxx` 即 `/app/data/xxx`)。 把你的完整回答写入 `/app/answer.txt`。
原因分析:测评与练习结果(data-world 世界 p000535)
[ "data-analysis", "causal-inference", "pandas", "chinese" ]
1.1
{ "schema_version": "1.1", "artifacts": [ "/app/answer.txt", "/logs/verifier/reward.txt", "/logs/verifier/details.json", "/logs/artifacts/", "/logs/agent/trajectory.json" ], "task": { "name": "dataworld/p000535-cause-3", "description": "原因分析:测评与练习结果(data-world 世界 p000535)", "auth...
{ "difficulty_explanation": "第 3 层原因分析题:需在 p000535 世界的多套独立数据系统中完成数据清洗、关联与计算,并给出有 /app/data/ 文件证据支撑的因果归因结论。", "category": "data-analysis", "difficulty": "hard", "world": "p000535", "dag_nodes": 9, "dag_edges": 13, "dag_category_id": 14, "dag_category_name": "Education & Learning Analytics / 教育与学习分析" }
[ "environment/Dockerfile", "environment/data/course_mgmt/course_design_dim.csv", "environment/data/course_mgmt/intervention_records.csv", "environment/data/crm_billing/churn_risk_scores.csv", "environment/data/crm_billing/enrollment_scd.csv", "environment/data/in_world/parent_app_usage_guide_2024.pdf", "...
dataworld-p000535-cause-3
dataworld/p000535-consequence-2
教研侧最近在复盘学生运营策略,想请你理清一个问题:学生在这套平台上的学习参与行为(登录、看视频、交作业),到底在下游换来了什么、又搭进去了什么。 我们一直推着学生多登录、多看视频、按时交作业,运营也拿"学习时长""登录天数"当激励指标。但教研几位老师反映,有些孩子看着很积极、时长拉得很长,测验却没见起色,甚至越学越坐不住。所以我们想知道:看视频看到什么程度,成绩就基本到顶了,再逼着多看是不是浪费?单日学太久,会不会反而让后面的学习状态往下掉、得不偿失?作业拖交,对这次作业本身的成绩影响有多大?还有,这些关系在不同年级是不是一样,低年级和高年级有没有差别。 你手上能用的是各系统的导出数据,不用每张表都过一遍,重点是把这些参与行为和...
后果分析:学习行为参与(data-world 世界 p000535)
[ "data-analysis", "causal-inference", "pandas", "chinese" ]
1.1
{ "schema_version": "1.1", "artifacts": [ "/app/answer.txt", "/logs/verifier/reward.txt", "/logs/verifier/details.json", "/logs/artifacts/", "/logs/agent/trajectory.json" ], "task": { "name": "dataworld/p000535-consequence-2", "description": "后果分析:学习行为参与(data-world 世界 p000535)", ...
{ "difficulty_explanation": "第 2 层后果分析题:需在 p000535 世界的多套独立数据系统中完成数据清洗、关联与计算,并给出有 /app/data/ 文件证据支撑的后果推断结论。", "category": "data-analysis", "difficulty": "hard", "world": "p000535", "dag_nodes": 9, "dag_edges": 13, "dag_category_id": 14, "dag_category_name": "Education & Learning Analytics / 教育与学习分析" }
[ "environment/Dockerfile", "environment/data/course_mgmt/course_design_dim.csv", "environment/data/course_mgmt/intervention_records.csv", "environment/data/crm_billing/churn_risk_scores.csv", "environment/data/crm_billing/enrollment_scd.csv", "environment/data/in_world/parent_app_usage_guide_2024.pdf", "...
dataworld-p000535-consequence-2
dataworld/p000536-consequence-2
我们这家偏远社区店靠不固定的支线航班和季节性驳船补货,每次到货都登记在收货记录里。最近盘库存我总觉得到货量和实际能上架卖的对不上,想让你把到货这件事彻底理清楚:每次到货到底有多少真正变成了能卖的库存、我们在到货入库这个环节大概丢了多少货、丢在哪些品类上。 另外我想知道,一批货到货之后大概能撑多久才会再次断货——是不是有些品类到货没多久货架又空了、有些能撑很久。你直接看数据算,给我量级和方向就行,但结论要有依据、能复算。 > 数据路径说明:题面中提到的 `env/` 目录内容已挂载到 `/app/data/`(题面里的 `env/xxx` 即 `/app/data/xxx`)。 把你的完整回答写入 `/app/answer.tx...
后果分析:在途与到货入库(data-world 世界 p000536)
[ "data-analysis", "causal-inference", "pandas", "chinese" ]
1.1
{ "schema_version": "1.1", "artifacts": [ "/app/answer.txt", "/logs/verifier/reward.txt", "/logs/verifier/details.json", "/logs/artifacts/", "/logs/agent/trajectory.json" ], "task": { "name": "dataworld/p000536-consequence-2", "description": "后果分析:在途与到货入库(data-world 世界 p000536)", ...
{ "difficulty_explanation": "第 2 层后果分析题:需在 p000536 世界的多套独立数据系统中完成数据清洗、关联与计算,并给出有 /app/data/ 文件证据支撑的后果推断结论。", "category": "data-analysis", "difficulty": "hard", "world": "p000536", "dag_nodes": 10, "dag_edges": 12, "dag_category_id": 4, "dag_category_name": "Operations, Supply Chain & Manufacturing / 运营·...
[ "environment/Dockerfile", "environment/data/crm/customer_monthly_summary.csv", "environment/data/crm/nps_responses.csv", "environment/data/docs/reorder_policy.md", "environment/data/docs/supplier_directory.csv", "environment/data/logistics/transport_schedule.csv", "environment/data/ops/generator_fuel_lo...
dataworld-p000536-consequence-2
dataworld/p000536-consequence-3
最近老有居民和游客抱怨货架空、买不到东西,我想搞清楚我们的库存到底是怎么转化成缺货的。你把 WMS 的日终库存快照和 POS 交易流水对起来看:整体缺货暴露有多严重、库存水平和缺货之间是什么关系、哪些品类和商品被卡得最死、什么时候最集中,还有 POS 里那些缺货登记能不能反映全貌。最后告诉我风险集中在哪儿,我好排补货优先级。 > 数据路径说明:题面中提到的 `env/` 目录内容已挂载到 `/app/data/`(题面里的 `env/xxx` 即 `/app/data/xxx`)。 把你的完整回答写入 `/app/answer.txt`。
后果分析:门店有效库存(data-world 世界 p000536)
[ "data-analysis", "causal-inference", "pandas", "chinese" ]
1.1
{ "schema_version": "1.1", "artifacts": [ "/app/answer.txt", "/logs/verifier/reward.txt", "/logs/verifier/details.json", "/logs/artifacts/", "/logs/agent/trajectory.json" ], "task": { "name": "dataworld/p000536-consequence-3", "description": "后果分析:门店有效库存(data-world 世界 p000536)", ...
{ "difficulty_explanation": "第 3 层后果分析题:需在 p000536 世界的多套独立数据系统中完成数据清洗、关联与计算,并给出有 /app/data/ 文件证据支撑的后果推断结论。", "category": "data-analysis", "difficulty": "hard", "world": "p000536", "dag_nodes": 10, "dag_edges": 12, "dag_category_id": 4, "dag_category_name": "Operations, Supply Chain & Manufacturing / 运营·...
[ "environment/Dockerfile", "environment/data/crm/customer_monthly_summary.csv", "environment/data/crm/nps_responses.csv", "environment/data/docs/reorder_policy.md", "environment/data/docs/supplier_directory.csv", "environment/data/logistics/transport_schedule.csv", "environment/data/ops/generator_fuel_lo...
dataworld-p000536-consequence-3
dataworld/p000537-consequence-1
我们从 2016 年起在这批样地上做了近十年的恢复干预——除草剂、补播、计划火烧、机械割草都有,马上要给资助方和下一轮规划交账。我需要一份讲清楚干预后果的材料:入侵植被到底压下去没有、压下去能撑多久;补播起没起作用、种子来源是不是值得多花钱;还有不同类型的干预对生境本身的影响是不是一个方向。哪些结论能站得住、哪些要打折扣,也请一并说明。 > 数据路径说明:题面中提到的 `env/` 目录内容已挂载到 `/app/data/`(题面里的 `env/xxx` 即 `/app/data/xxx`)。 把你的完整回答写入 `/app/answer.txt`。
后果分析:恢复干预措施(data-world 世界 p000537)
[ "data-analysis", "causal-inference", "pandas", "chinese" ]
1.1
{ "schema_version": "1.1", "artifacts": [ "/app/answer.txt", "/logs/verifier/reward.txt", "/logs/verifier/details.json", "/logs/artifacts/", "/logs/agent/trajectory.json" ], "task": { "name": "dataworld/p000537-consequence-1", "description": "后果分析:恢复干预措施(data-world 世界 p000537)", ...
{ "difficulty_explanation": "第 1 层后果分析题:需在 p000537 世界的多套独立数据系统中完成数据清洗、关联与计算,并给出有 /app/data/ 文件证据支撑的后果推断结论。", "category": "data-analysis", "difficulty": "medium", "world": "p000537", "dag_nodes": 11, "dag_edges": 17, "dag_category_id": 11, "dag_category_name": "Environment, Climate & Geospatial / 环境·气候·地...
[ "environment/Dockerfile", "environment/data/climate/daily_weather.csv", "environment/data/climate/extreme_events.csv", "environment/data/climate/weather_station_metadata.tsv", "environment/data/field/ecosystem_function_2015_2019.csv", "environment/data/field/ecosystem_function_2020_2024.jsonl", "environ...
dataworld-p000537-consequence-1
dataworld/p000537-consequence-2
我们这个半干旱草地恢复监测网络跑了十年,22 个固定样地,每次野外访问都会在同一张样方里同步量微生境结构(裸土、碎石、枯落层、粗糙度)和原生植物定殖情况(物种数、盖度、幼苗存活、累计定株)。最近有同事在内部会上说"裸土越多原生植物越难活",我有点怀疑——裸土斑块不是该给种子接触土壤的安全位点吗? 我想请你从这些年的访问数据里把微生境异质性的变化和原生植物定殖结果之间的关系理清楚:到底哪个微生境指标跟定殖结果关联最强、方向是什么、量级多大,是不是像会上说的那样单调地越差。顺便注意一下不同样地、不同时段之间这个关系稳不稳,以及数据本身有什么会影响结论的地方。结论要能落到"我们该不该担心裸土"这种话上。 > 数据路径说明:题面中提到的 ...
后果分析:微生境异质性(data-world 世界 p000537)
[ "data-analysis", "causal-inference", "pandas", "chinese" ]
1.1
{ "schema_version": "1.1", "artifacts": [ "/app/answer.txt", "/logs/verifier/reward.txt", "/logs/verifier/details.json", "/logs/artifacts/", "/logs/agent/trajectory.json" ], "task": { "name": "dataworld/p000537-consequence-2", "description": "后果分析:微生境异质性(data-world 世界 p000537)", ...
{ "difficulty_explanation": "第 2 层后果分析题:需在 p000537 世界的多套独立数据系统中完成数据清洗、关联与计算,并给出有 /app/data/ 文件证据支撑的后果推断结论。", "category": "data-analysis", "difficulty": "hard", "world": "p000537", "dag_nodes": 11, "dag_edges": 17, "dag_category_id": 11, "dag_category_name": "Environment, Climate & Geospatial / 环境·气候·地理空...
[ "environment/Dockerfile", "environment/data/climate/daily_weather.csv", "environment/data/climate/extreme_events.csv", "environment/data/climate/weather_station_metadata.tsv", "environment/data/field/ecosystem_function_2015_2019.csv", "environment/data/field/ecosystem_function_2020_2024.jsonl", "environ...
dataworld-p000537-consequence-2
dataworld/p000538-cause-3
我们这批 RNA-seq 数据的差异表达和变异检出结果已经冻结出来了(差异表达在 `bioinfo/de/`,变异在 VCF 里),现在要为下个月的转化读出会准备一份驱动因素判断。临床那边最关心的是:我们看到的这些差异表达和变异信号,到底是被真实的肿瘤生物学拉动的,还是被某些技术环节放大出来的?哪些命中能往报告里放、哪些得先打个问号? 具体地,我想弄清楚三件事:一是疾病分期在我们的差异表达里扮演什么角色、量级有多大;二是化合物处理那几组(C-007 的 24/48/72h)的转录响应跟活力读数是不是同步的;三是从 RNA-seq 检出的变异来看,晚期肿瘤是不是真的积累了更多变异,以及这些变异检出的质量本身有没有系统性问题。DE 结...
原因分析:差异表达与变异检出(data-world 世界 p000538)
[ "data-analysis", "causal-inference", "pandas", "chinese" ]
1.1
{ "schema_version": "1.1", "artifacts": [ "/app/answer.txt", "/logs/verifier/reward.txt", "/logs/verifier/details.json", "/logs/artifacts/", "/logs/agent/trajectory.json" ], "task": { "name": "dataworld/p000538-cause-3", "description": "原因分析:差异表达与变异检出(data-world 世界 p000538)", "au...
{ "difficulty_explanation": "第 3 层原因分析题:需在 p000538 世界的多套独立数据系统中完成数据清洗、关联与计算,并给出有 /app/data/ 文件证据支撑的因果归因结论。", "category": "data-analysis", "difficulty": "hard", "world": "p000538", "dag_nodes": 12, "dag_edges": 15, "dag_category_id": 9, "dag_category_name": "Bioinformatics & Omics / 生物信息·组学" }
[ "environment/Dockerfile", "environment/data/bioinfo/alignment/alignment_metrics.tsv", "environment/data/bioinfo/batch/batch_annotations.tsv", "environment/data/bioinfo/batch/pca_coordinates.tsv", "environment/data/bioinfo/counts/coverage_depth.tsv", "environment/data/bioinfo/counts/raw_gene_counts.tsv", ...
dataworld-p000538-cause-3
dataworld/p000538-cause-4
我们刚冻结了 2025 年 Q1 的靶点优先排序(500 个候选靶点,每个带 target_rank、druggability_score、clinical_relevance_score)。下周优先级评审会上我要汇报,需要你先把这份数据摸清楚:到底是什么在驱动这些排序——整体优先级(target_rank)和那两个分数各自由什么决定?排在最前面的靶点是不是真的就是我们最该推进临床转化的候选,还是说排序被某个我们该控制的因子主导了?把数据里站得住的、以及看着相关其实是干扰的,都帮我理清楚。 > 数据路径说明:题面中提到的 `env/` 目录内容已挂载到 `/app/data/`(题面里的 `env/xxx` 即 `/app/data...
原因分析:生物标志物与靶点排序(data-world 世界 p000538)
[ "data-analysis", "causal-inference", "pandas", "chinese" ]
1.1
{ "schema_version": "1.1", "artifacts": [ "/app/answer.txt", "/logs/verifier/reward.txt", "/logs/verifier/details.json", "/logs/artifacts/", "/logs/agent/trajectory.json" ], "task": { "name": "dataworld/p000538-cause-4", "description": "原因分析:生物标志物与靶点排序(data-world 世界 p000538)", "a...
{ "difficulty_explanation": "第 4 层原因分析题:需在 p000538 世界的多套独立数据系统中完成数据清洗、关联与计算,并给出有 /app/data/ 文件证据支撑的因果归因结论。", "category": "data-analysis", "difficulty": "hard", "world": "p000538", "dag_nodes": 12, "dag_edges": 15, "dag_category_id": 9, "dag_category_name": "Bioinformatics & Omics / 生物信息·组学" }
[ "environment/Dockerfile", "environment/data/bioinfo/alignment/alignment_metrics.tsv", "environment/data/bioinfo/batch/batch_annotations.tsv", "environment/data/bioinfo/batch/pca_coordinates.tsv", "environment/data/bioinfo/counts/coverage_depth.tsv", "environment/data/bioinfo/counts/raw_gene_counts.tsv", ...
dataworld-p000538-cause-4
dataworld/p000538-consequence-3
下周二靶点评审会,我得先把手头这批 RNA-seq 的差异表达和变异检出结果理清楚再上会。临床分期那几个比较、几个化合物处理比较都在里面,通路富集和靶点排序也都跑完了。我想让你帮我看看,这些差异表达和变异的信号里,哪些是真往下传到通路富集和靶点排序的,哪些只是 p 值漂亮、其实是噪声。 另外帮我对比一下分期驱动和化合物驱动这两条线:它们的差异表达各自是什么形态、往下游传的时候差别在哪;变异检出这块单独能说明什么。结论拿数据撑着,方向和量级讲清楚,那些容易把判断带偏的地方也帮我标出来。 > 数据路径说明:题面中提到的 `env/` 目录内容已挂载到 `/app/data/`(题面里的 `env/xxx` 即 `/app/data/x...
后果分析:差异表达与变异检出(data-world 世界 p000538)
[ "data-analysis", "causal-inference", "pandas", "chinese" ]
1.1
{ "schema_version": "1.1", "artifacts": [ "/app/answer.txt", "/logs/verifier/reward.txt", "/logs/verifier/details.json", "/logs/artifacts/", "/logs/agent/trajectory.json" ], "task": { "name": "dataworld/p000538-consequence-3", "description": "后果分析:差异表达与变异检出(data-world 世界 p000538)", ...
{ "difficulty_explanation": "第 3 层后果分析题:需在 p000538 世界的多套独立数据系统中完成数据清洗、关联与计算,并给出有 /app/data/ 文件证据支撑的后果推断结论。", "category": "data-analysis", "difficulty": "hard", "world": "p000538", "dag_nodes": 12, "dag_edges": 15, "dag_category_id": 9, "dag_category_name": "Bioinformatics & Omics / 生物信息·组学" }
[ "environment/Dockerfile", "environment/data/bioinfo/alignment/alignment_metrics.tsv", "environment/data/bioinfo/batch/batch_annotations.tsv", "environment/data/bioinfo/batch/pca_coordinates.tsv", "environment/data/bioinfo/counts/coverage_depth.tsv", "environment/data/bioinfo/counts/raw_gene_counts.tsv", ...
dataworld-p000538-consequence-3
dataworld/p000539-cause-3
Hi — Priya from Digital here. You've seen it: our match-day mentions swing wildly from fixture to fixture, and we can never tell in advance which ones will bury the moderation queue and which will go quiet. We're trying to staff moderation and time our content around next month's run of fixtures, and I want to stop rel...
原因分析:Social Media Engagement(data-world 世界 p000539)
[ "data-analysis", "causal-inference", "pandas", "chinese" ]
1.1
{ "schema_version": "1.1", "artifacts": [ "/app/answer.txt", "/logs/verifier/reward.txt", "/logs/verifier/details.json", "/logs/artifacts/", "/logs/agent/trajectory.json" ], "task": { "name": "dataworld/p000539-cause-3", "description": "原因分析:Social Media Engagement(data-world 世界 p000...
{ "difficulty_explanation": "第 3 层原因分析题:需在 p000539 世界的多套独立数据系统中完成数据清洗、关联与计算,并给出有 /app/data/ 文件证据支撑的因果归因结论。", "category": "data-analysis", "difficulty": "hard", "world": "p000539", "dag_nodes": 10, "dag_edges": 17, "dag_category_id": 15, "dag_category_name": "Social Science, Survey & Behavioral / 社会科学·调查...
[ "environment/Dockerfile", "environment/data/panel/attrition_log.csv", "environment/data/panel/codebook_v2.pdf", "environment/data/panel/fan_roster.csv", "environment/data/panel/survey_responses.csv", "environment/data/panel/wave_schedule.csv", "environment/data/social_media/pl_engagement_events.jsonl", ...
dataworld-p000539-cause-3
dataworld/p000539-consequence-1
支持者洞察组在准备一份内部简报,主题是“俱乐部认同强度到底能换来什么”。组里老板的直觉是认同越强的球迷越有价值,但他拿不准这个直觉在数据里站不站得住。我想请你用三个赛季的面板调查加票务数据,把“球迷对所支持俱乐部的认同强度”和它下游几类能观测到的球迷行为之间的关系理清楚——朋友圈的构成、到场看球、对宿敌和非英超足球的态度这些方向都看看。重点不是简单回答“有没有正相关”,而是搞清楚这种关系在哪里强、在哪里弱、在哪里干脆撞到顶,以及哪些地方直接拿原始数字算会得出错的结论。最后我要能对着数字说:“认同在 A 上有用但只到 X,在 B 上对 Y 这类人根本不起作用。” > 数据路径说明:题面中提到的 `env/` 目录内容已挂载到 `/ap...
后果分析:Club Identity & Heritage(data-world 世界 p000539)
[ "data-analysis", "causal-inference", "pandas", "chinese" ]
1.1
{ "schema_version": "1.1", "artifacts": [ "/app/answer.txt", "/logs/verifier/reward.txt", "/logs/verifier/details.json", "/logs/artifacts/", "/logs/agent/trajectory.json" ], "task": { "name": "dataworld/p000539-consequence-1", "description": "后果分析:Club Identity & Heritage(data-world ...
{ "difficulty_explanation": "第 1 层后果分析题:需在 p000539 世界的多套独立数据系统中完成数据清洗、关联与计算,并给出有 /app/data/ 文件证据支撑的后果推断结论。", "category": "data-analysis", "difficulty": "medium", "world": "p000539", "dag_nodes": 10, "dag_edges": 17, "dag_category_id": 15, "dag_category_name": "Social Science, Survey & Behavioral / 社会科学·...
[ "environment/Dockerfile", "environment/data/panel/attrition_log.csv", "environment/data/panel/codebook_v2.pdf", "environment/data/panel/fan_roster.csv", "environment/data/panel/survey_responses.csv", "environment/data/panel/wave_schedule.csv", "environment/data/social_media/pl_engagement_events.jsonl", ...
dataworld-p000539-consequence-1
dataworld/p000541-cause-3
我是 PS Plus 订阅留存的负责人。这季度退订量又抬头了,老板让我搞清楚到底哪些订阅者最容易取消、为什么——是社交关系、自动续费设置、订阅档次,还是别的什么在起作用,以及哪些信号真的能拿来预警或干预,哪些只是看着相关。数据在 env/ 下,计费订阅、社交社区、账户画像那些表都在里面,你看着用。给我一份有依据的结论,别只罗列指标,要能说清谁该被优先盯住、背后的机制大概是什么。 > 数据路径说明:题面中提到的 `env/` 目录内容已挂载到 `/app/data/`(题面里的 `env/xxx` 即 `/app/data/xxx`)。 把你的完整回答写入 `/app/answer.txt`。
原因分析:续费与留存行为(data-world 世界 p000541)
[ "data-analysis", "causal-inference", "pandas", "chinese" ]
1.1
{ "schema_version": "1.1", "artifacts": [ "/app/answer.txt", "/logs/verifier/reward.txt", "/logs/verifier/details.json", "/logs/artifacts/", "/logs/agent/trajectory.json" ], "task": { "name": "dataworld/p000541-cause-3", "description": "原因分析:续费与留存行为(data-world 世界 p000541)", "auth...
{ "difficulty_explanation": "第 3 层原因分析题:需在 p000541 世界的多套独立数据系统中完成数据清洗、关联与计算,并给出有 /app/data/ 文件证据支撑的因果归因结论。", "category": "data-analysis", "difficulty": "hard", "world": "p000541", "dag_nodes": 12, "dag_edges": 17, "dag_category_id": 2, "dag_category_name": "Customer, Pricing & Revenue / 客户·定价·收益" }
[ "environment/Dockerfile", "environment/data/billing/monthly_clv.parquet", "environment/data/billing/renewal_events.csv", "environment/data/billing/subscription_scd.parquet", "environment/data/crm/account_player_profile.parquet", "environment/data/crm/hardware_device_state.parquet", "environment/data/crm...
dataworld-p000541-cause-3
dataworld/p000541-consequence-3
我们这两年促销密度一直在加。定价组有人提了个担心:会不会有一批用户被'养'成了不打折不买的习惯,而这批人长期看其实给我们贡献的价值更低?我想在下次定价评审前搞清楚一件事——在这批初版 PS4 用户里,越是习惯等折扣买的客户,生命周期价值是不是真的更低?如果是,低多少?给我个能拿去和定价组对线的结论就行。 > 数据路径说明:题面中提到的 `env/` 目录内容已挂载到 `/app/data/`(题面里的 `env/xxx` 即 `/app/data/xxx`)。 把你的完整回答写入 `/app/answer.txt`。
后果分析:折扣敏感度(data-world 世界 p000541)
[ "data-analysis", "causal-inference", "pandas", "chinese" ]
1.1
{ "schema_version": "1.1", "artifacts": [ "/app/answer.txt", "/logs/verifier/reward.txt", "/logs/verifier/details.json", "/logs/artifacts/", "/logs/agent/trajectory.json" ], "task": { "name": "dataworld/p000541-consequence-3", "description": "后果分析:折扣敏感度(data-world 世界 p000541)", "...
{ "difficulty_explanation": "第 3 层后果分析题:需在 p000541 世界的多套独立数据系统中完成数据清洗、关联与计算,并给出有 /app/data/ 文件证据支撑的后果推断结论。", "category": "data-analysis", "difficulty": "hard", "world": "p000541", "dag_nodes": 12, "dag_edges": 17, "dag_category_id": 2, "dag_category_name": "Customer, Pricing & Revenue / 客户·定价·收益" }
[ "environment/Dockerfile", "environment/data/billing/monthly_clv.parquet", "environment/data/billing/renewal_events.csv", "environment/data/billing/subscription_scd.parquet", "environment/data/crm/account_player_profile.parquet", "environment/data/crm/hardware_device_state.parquet", "environment/data/crm...
dataworld-p000541-consequence-3
dataworld/p000544-cause-1
教区里神父配置一直不均衡——有些堂区常年不到一个神父撑着,有些却有好几位,这几年还陆续并掉了几座堂区。教务委员会让我牵头摸清楚:到底是什么在决定各堂区神父配置的厚薄?是堂区自身的规模、城乡位置、建堂年头,还是所在地区天主教人口占比、世俗化程度这些外部环境?哪些因素真能解释差异,哪些只是看着相关、其实另有其因?最后我想知道,照这些因素看,下一批最可能撑不住、得考虑合并的是哪类堂区。 > 数据路径说明:题面中提到的 `env/` 目录内容已挂载到 `/app/data/`(题面里的 `env/xxx` 即 `/app/data/xxx`)。 把你的完整回答写入 `/app/answer.txt`。
原因分析:教区背景特征(data-world 世界 p000544)
[ "data-analysis", "causal-inference", "pandas", "chinese" ]
1.1
{ "schema_version": "1.1", "artifacts": [ "/app/answer.txt", "/logs/verifier/reward.txt", "/logs/verifier/details.json", "/logs/artifacts/", "/logs/agent/trajectory.json" ], "task": { "name": "dataworld/p000544-cause-1", "description": "原因分析:教区背景特征(data-world 世界 p000544)", "autho...
{ "difficulty_explanation": "第 1 层原因分析题:需在 p000544 世界的多套独立数据系统中完成数据清洗、关联与计算,并给出有 /app/data/ 文件证据支撑的因果归因结论。", "category": "data-analysis", "difficulty": "medium", "world": "p000544", "dag_nodes": 12, "dag_edges": 19, "dag_category_id": 15, "dag_category_name": "Social Science, Survey & Behavioral / 社会科学·...
[ "environment/Dockerfile", "environment/data/crm/engagement_monthly.csv", "environment/data/crm/service_donation_events.csv", "environment/data/demographics/regional_stats_annual.csv", "environment/data/parish_registry/life_events.csv", "environment/data/parish_registry/member_registry.csv", "environment...
dataworld-p000544-cause-1
dataworld/p000544-cause-2
主教大人让我看看咱们教区这八年的登记数据,搞清楚一件事:到底是什么在驱动信徒的宗教实践——望弥撒、告解这些——谁去得多、谁去得少,原因可能是什么。下个月教务会议要拿这个做参考,决定把有限的牧灵资源往哪投。数据是登记系统、堂区档案、问卷那些导出来的几份表,都在数据目录里,你自己看着拼。我只要一份能说清楚的结论:哪些因素真的跟实践频度有关、关系长什么样、有多可靠;哪些看着像其实不是那么回事,也帮我点出来。别给我一堆图表流水账,我要的是能下判断的洞察。 > 数据路径说明:题面中提到的 `env/` 目录内容已挂载到 `/app/data/`(题面里的 `env/xxx` 即 `/app/data/xxx`)。 把你的完整回答写入 `/...
原因分析:宗教实践频度(data-world 世界 p000544)
[ "data-analysis", "causal-inference", "pandas", "chinese" ]
1.1
{ "schema_version": "1.1", "artifacts": [ "/app/answer.txt", "/logs/verifier/reward.txt", "/logs/verifier/details.json", "/logs/artifacts/", "/logs/agent/trajectory.json" ], "task": { "name": "dataworld/p000544-cause-2", "description": "原因分析:宗教实践频度(data-world 世界 p000544)", "autho...
{ "difficulty_explanation": "第 2 层原因分析题:需在 p000544 世界的多套独立数据系统中完成数据清洗、关联与计算,并给出有 /app/data/ 文件证据支撑的因果归因结论。", "category": "data-analysis", "difficulty": "hard", "world": "p000544", "dag_nodes": 12, "dag_edges": 19, "dag_category_id": 15, "dag_category_name": "Social Science, Survey & Behavioral / 社会科学·调查...
[ "environment/Dockerfile", "environment/data/crm/engagement_monthly.csv", "environment/data/crm/service_donation_events.csv", "environment/data/demographics/regional_stats_annual.csv", "environment/data/parish_registry/life_events.csv", "environment/data/parish_registry/member_registry.csv", "environment...
dataworld-p000544-cause-2
dataworld/p000544-cause-4
这两年我们一直在掉血,注册信徒的月度活跃度眼看着往下走,主教让我弄清楚到底是谁在流失、为什么流失,以及走掉的人里还有没有回来的。CRM 那张月度参与表(engagement_monthly)标了 dropout_flag、inactivity_months、return_to_faith_flag 和 re_catechumen_status,但这些字段怎么用、跟登记系统、生命事件、服务奉献那些表怎么对上,得你自己理。我想要的是一份有依据的判断:把能解释流失和回归差异的因素找出来、比一比谁强谁弱,说清哪些证据靠得住、哪些看着相关其实是数据里的坑,顺带估一下各路的规模,好决定下一步把有限的精力投到哪。 > 数据路径说明:题面中提到的 ...
原因分析:流失与回归行为(data-world 世界 p000544)
[ "data-analysis", "causal-inference", "pandas", "chinese" ]
1.1
{ "schema_version": "1.1", "artifacts": [ "/app/answer.txt", "/logs/verifier/reward.txt", "/logs/verifier/details.json", "/logs/artifacts/", "/logs/agent/trajectory.json" ], "task": { "name": "dataworld/p000544-cause-4", "description": "原因分析:流失与回归行为(data-world 世界 p000544)", "auth...
{ "difficulty_explanation": "第 4 层原因分析题:需在 p000544 世界的多套独立数据系统中完成数据清洗、关联与计算,并给出有 /app/data/ 文件证据支撑的因果归因结论。", "category": "data-analysis", "difficulty": "hard", "world": "p000544", "dag_nodes": 12, "dag_edges": 19, "dag_category_id": 15, "dag_category_name": "Social Science, Survey & Behavioral / 社会科学·调查...
[ "environment/Dockerfile", "environment/data/crm/engagement_monthly.csv", "environment/data/crm/service_donation_events.csv", "environment/data/demographics/regional_stats_annual.csv", "environment/data/parish_registry/life_events.csv", "environment/data/parish_registry/member_registry.csv", "environment...
dataworld-p000544-cause-4
dataworld/p000545-cause-1
我们这个跨文化儿童青少年精神科服务网络跑了六年,每个孩子 intake 时都会做一次基线症状评估。院方最近在讨论早期资源怎么投——哪些家庭的孩子一走进来症状就已经更重,我们好提前把社工、翻译、社区转介对准他们。临床那边一直有个说法:低收入、移民背景、语言不通、还有没好保险的家庭,孩子基线就更严重。 我想让你从我们自己的数据里把这件事看清楚:这几个因素里,哪些真的跟首次评估的症状严重度挂钩、关联大概多强,哪些其实只是看着相关、并不是独立的影响。给我一份能站得住的判断,说清楚哪些是实打实的驱动因素、哪些是假象,以及你有多大把握——结论得能经得起换个口径复核。 > 数据路径说明:题面中提到的 `env/` 目录内容已挂载到 `/app/...
原因分析:初始临床评估与基线(data-world 世界 p000545)
[ "data-analysis", "causal-inference", "pandas", "chinese" ]
1.1
{ "schema_version": "1.1", "artifacts": [ "/app/answer.txt", "/logs/verifier/reward.txt", "/logs/verifier/details.json", "/logs/artifacts/", "/logs/agent/trajectory.json" ], "task": { "name": "dataworld/p000545-cause-1", "description": "原因分析:初始临床评估与基线(data-world 世界 p000545)", "au...
{ "difficulty_explanation": "第 1 层原因分析题:需在 p000545 世界的多套独立数据系统中完成数据清洗、关联与计算,并给出有 /app/data/ 文件证据支撑的因果归因结论。", "category": "data-analysis", "difficulty": "medium", "world": "p000545", "dag_nodes": 10, "dag_edges": 14, "dag_category_id": 7, "dag_category_name": "Clinical & Healthcare / 临床与医疗" }
[ "environment/Dockerfile", "environment/data/billing_claims/claim_adjustments.csv", "environment/data/billing_claims/insurance_claims.csv", "environment/data/clinical_assessment/baseline_evaluations.csv", "environment/data/clinical_assessment/clinical_notes/cultural_formulation_notes.json", "environment/da...
dataworld-p000545-cause-1
dataworld/p000545-cause-2
我们这个儿童精神科网络的质控会上老在吵一件事:不同族裔和语言背景的孩子,最后落到的诊断标签差很多。一半人说是这些群体病情本来就不一样,另一半说是评估过程把同一类表现归因归偏了。我想让你把这桩事查清楚——这些孩子最终拿到的精神科诊断,到底多大程度上是被真实的临床严重程度驱动的,多大程度是文化或语言因素在系统性地把相似表现归到不同诊断上。如果存在这种归因偏倚,告诉我偏在哪些群体和诊断类别上,方向是诊断过度还是不足。还有一件事:我们评估流程里有没有哪个环节看起来能减轻这种偏倚。用这几年的就诊和诊断数据,给我一份能站得住的结论。哪些是可靠证据、哪些受数据局限说不死、哪些是看着相关其实站不住的,都要分开讲。 > 数据路径说明:题面中提到的 `...
原因分析:精神科诊断(data-world 世界 p000545)
[ "data-analysis", "causal-inference", "pandas", "chinese" ]
1.1
{ "schema_version": "1.1", "artifacts": [ "/app/answer.txt", "/logs/verifier/reward.txt", "/logs/verifier/details.json", "/logs/artifacts/", "/logs/agent/trajectory.json" ], "task": { "name": "dataworld/p000545-cause-2", "description": "原因分析:精神科诊断(data-world 世界 p000545)", "author...
{ "difficulty_explanation": "第 2 层原因分析题:需在 p000545 世界的多套独立数据系统中完成数据清洗、关联与计算,并给出有 /app/data/ 文件证据支撑的因果归因结论。", "category": "data-analysis", "difficulty": "hard", "world": "p000545", "dag_nodes": 10, "dag_edges": 14, "dag_category_id": 7, "dag_category_name": "Clinical & Healthcare / 临床与医疗" }
[ "environment/Dockerfile", "environment/data/billing_claims/claim_adjustments.csv", "environment/data/billing_claims/insurance_claims.csv", "environment/data/clinical_assessment/baseline_evaluations.csv", "environment/data/clinical_assessment/clinical_notes/cultural_formulation_notes.json", "environment/da...
dataworld-p000545-cause-2
dataworld/p000545-consequence-2
我管临床运营和财务两条线,想搞清楚我们精神科开出去的治疗医嘱到底怎么往下传导的。具体两件事:第一,处方复杂度——单药、联合用药(≥2种精神科药)、长程心理治疗(计划>12次)这些不同的开法,每个就诊周期的总报销和患者自付差多少,是线性涨还是到某档突然跳?第二,用药方案的副作用负担(尤其抗精神病类)怎么影响孩子实际吃药的依从性,方向和幅度多大,哪些家庭受影响最重,开始吃药后几个月里依从性是稳定还是变化。给我能落到运营决策上的量级判断,别只给趋势,也别把数据里的坑当结论。 > 数据路径说明:题面中提到的 `env/` 目录内容已挂载到 `/app/data/`(题面里的 `env/xxx` 即 `/app/data/xxx`)。 把...
后果分析:治疗方案与医嘱(data-world 世界 p000545)
[ "data-analysis", "causal-inference", "pandas", "chinese" ]
1.1
{ "schema_version": "1.1", "artifacts": [ "/app/answer.txt", "/logs/verifier/reward.txt", "/logs/verifier/details.json", "/logs/artifacts/", "/logs/agent/trajectory.json" ], "task": { "name": "dataworld/p000545-consequence-2", "description": "后果分析:治疗方案与医嘱(data-world 世界 p000545)", ...
{ "difficulty_explanation": "第 2 层后果分析题:需在 p000545 世界的多套独立数据系统中完成数据清洗、关联与计算,并给出有 /app/data/ 文件证据支撑的后果推断结论。", "category": "data-analysis", "difficulty": "hard", "world": "p000545", "dag_nodes": 10, "dag_edges": 14, "dag_category_id": 7, "dag_category_name": "Clinical & Healthcare / 临床与医疗" }
[ "environment/Dockerfile", "environment/data/billing_claims/claim_adjustments.csv", "environment/data/billing_claims/insurance_claims.csv", "environment/data/clinical_assessment/baseline_evaluations.csv", "environment/data/clinical_assessment/clinical_notes/cultural_formulation_notes.json", "environment/da...
dataworld-p000545-consequence-2
dataworld/p000546-consequence-2
局里在复盘这五年的工业监管成效,我把这活儿派给你。手头有52家设施五年的月度排放申报、空气站和水质断面的日度监测、气象站数据,还有执法台账。我想弄清楚一件事:这些设施的排放,在空气质量和水质监测里到底留没留下能量化、能比较的痕迹?分别有多大量级、在哪些站点或行业最强;又有哪些看着像是排放造成的、其实主要是气象条件或采样方式带出来的,得替我撇清楚。另外,执法对排放有没有起到压减、大概多久见效,也顺带给我一句。 结论要站得住,关键的量级和限定条件都落到数上,别让我汇报时被问住。 > 数据路径说明:题面中提到的 `env/` 目录内容已挂载到 `/app/data/`(题面里的 `env/xxx` 即 `/app/data/xxx`)。...
后果分析:工业排放与生产活动(data-world 世界 p000546)
[ "data-analysis", "causal-inference", "pandas", "chinese" ]
1.1
{ "schema_version": "1.1", "artifacts": [ "/app/answer.txt", "/logs/verifier/reward.txt", "/logs/verifier/details.json", "/logs/artifacts/", "/logs/agent/trajectory.json" ], "task": { "name": "dataworld/p000546-consequence-2", "description": "后果分析:工业排放与生产活动(data-world 世界 p000546)", ...
{ "difficulty_explanation": "第 2 层后果分析题:需在 p000546 世界的多套独立数据系统中完成数据清洗、关联与计算,并给出有 /app/data/ 文件证据支撑的后果推断结论。", "category": "data-analysis", "difficulty": "hard", "world": "p000546", "dag_nodes": 10, "dag_edges": 14, "dag_category_id": 11, "dag_category_name": "Environment, Climate & Geospatial / 环境·气候·地理空...
[ "environment/Dockerfile", "environment/data/air_quality_daily.csv", "environment/data/crop_yields_seasonal.csv", "environment/data/disaster_events_catalog.csv", "environment/data/enforcement_actions_log.csv", "environment/data/health_outcomes_weekly.csv", "environment/data/hydrology_water_quality_daily....
dataworld-p000546-consequence-2
dataworld/p000551-cause-2
这半年业务线老来问:我们的 offer 为什么有的接有的不接,发的金额也忽高忽低,到底什么在左右录用决策?你把 ATS 里的面试评分和 offer 数据理一下,看看从进面试到发不发 offer、发多少、对方接不接,背后是什么在驱动——我们的录用标准是不是一直稳定,还是看情况在变。我要的是能说清“什么真的预示了 offer 结果、什么只是看着相关”的结论,不是一堆描述性统计。 > 数据路径说明:题面中提到的 `env/` 目录内容已挂载到 `/app/data/`(题面里的 `env/xxx` 即 `/app/data/xxx`)。 把你的完整回答写入 `/app/answer.txt`。
原因分析:人才甄选与录用决策(data-world 世界 p000551)
[ "data-analysis", "causal-inference", "pandas", "chinese" ]
1.1
{ "schema_version": "1.1", "artifacts": [ "/app/answer.txt", "/logs/verifier/reward.txt", "/logs/verifier/details.json", "/logs/artifacts/", "/logs/agent/trajectory.json" ], "task": { "name": "dataworld/p000551-cause-2", "description": "原因分析:人才甄选与录用决策(data-world 世界 p000551)", "au...
{ "difficulty_explanation": "第 2 层原因分析题:需在 p000551 世界的多套独立数据系统中完成数据清洗、关联与计算,并给出有 /app/data/ 文件证据支撑的因果归因结论。", "category": "data-analysis", "difficulty": "hard", "world": "p000551", "dag_nodes": 10, "dag_edges": 16, "dag_category_id": 5, "dag_category_name": "People / HR & Org / 人力与组织" }
[ "environment/Dockerfile", "environment/data/ats/candidate_outcomes.csv", "environment/data/ats/channel_mapping.csv", "environment/data/ats/funnel_events.csv", "environment/data/ats/requisitions.csv", "environment/data/bi/revenue_allocation_notes.txt", "environment/data/bi/team_monthly_metrics.parquet", ...
dataworld-p000551-cause-2
dataworld/p000553-cause-1
我们这条有机农业走廊有 12 个气象站,从 2013 年到 2024 年逐日记录了温度、降水、湿度、风、辐射这些。这几年农时老是被天气打个措手不及——有的年份冬天莫名暖、开春没霜冻,有的年份雨季迟迟不来、来了又下得特别猛,种植排期很被动。我想搞清楚:这十二年里局地天气的年际波动,到底是被什么驱动的?是不是跟那个厄尔尼诺/拉尼娜的大气候背景有关,还是季风强弱的年际变化? 你把各站的日度记录和那份气候背景摘要对起来看,分别把温度(尤其冬季最低温)、雨季到来的早晚、生长季降水总量、以及暴雨霜冻这类极端情况,跟气候背景的相位和季风指数对上,看哪些是真信号、哪些只是数据里的坑或者似是而非的相关。各个子区域(平原/丘陵/城郊)是不是反应不一样...
原因分析:局地天气(data-world 世界 p000553)
[ "data-analysis", "causal-inference", "pandas", "chinese" ]
1.1
{ "schema_version": "1.1", "artifacts": [ "/app/answer.txt", "/logs/verifier/reward.txt", "/logs/verifier/details.json", "/logs/artifacts/", "/logs/agent/trajectory.json" ], "task": { "name": "dataworld/p000553-cause-1", "description": "原因分析:局地天气(data-world 世界 p000553)", "authors...
{ "difficulty_explanation": "第 1 层原因分析题:需在 p000553 世界的多套独立数据系统中完成数据清洗、关联与计算,并给出有 /app/data/ 文件证据支撑的因果归因结论。", "category": "data-analysis", "difficulty": "medium", "world": "p000553", "dag_nodes": 11, "dag_edges": 18, "dag_category_id": 11, "dag_category_name": "Environment, Climate & Geospatial / 环境·气候·地...
[ "environment/Dockerfile", "environment/data/air_quality/hourly/monitor_AQ01.csv", "environment/data/air_quality/hourly/monitor_AQ02.csv", "environment/data/air_quality/hourly/monitor_AQ03.csv", "environment/data/air_quality/hourly/monitor_AQ04.csv", "environment/data/air_quality/hourly/monitor_AQ05.csv", ...
dataworld-p000553-cause-1
dataworld/p000553-cause-4
我们这条有机农业走廊从 2013 年跑到现在,每茬采收都按批次登记了产量和品质——鲜重、干物质、糖度、A级品率、蛋白这些指标。最近品控和农技两边都在抱怨:有的年份品质掉得厉害,有的茬口产量又莫名偏低,说不清是被什么带下来的。老板让我把这十几年攒下来的采收记录好好捋一遍,搞清楚到底是什么在驱动产量和品质的波动。 你手上有采收台账,旁边气象、物候、病虫害那些监测数据应该都能对得上。我想知道主要的驱动因素是哪些、各自影响有多大,而且得分清楚——哪些更伤产量、哪些更伤品质。结论得有数据撑着,别只凭印象,也别把碰巧一起动的东西当成原因。 > 数据路径说明:题面中提到的 `env/` 目录内容已挂载到 `/app/data/`(题面里的 `e...
原因分析:农业产量与品质(data-world 世界 p000553)
[ "data-analysis", "causal-inference", "pandas", "chinese" ]
1.1
{ "schema_version": "1.1", "artifacts": [ "/app/answer.txt", "/logs/verifier/reward.txt", "/logs/verifier/details.json", "/logs/artifacts/", "/logs/agent/trajectory.json" ], "task": { "name": "dataworld/p000553-cause-4", "description": "原因分析:农业产量与品质(data-world 世界 p000553)", "auth...
{ "difficulty_explanation": "第 4 层原因分析题:需在 p000553 世界的多套独立数据系统中完成数据清洗、关联与计算,并给出有 /app/data/ 文件证据支撑的因果归因结论。", "category": "data-analysis", "difficulty": "hard", "world": "p000553", "dag_nodes": 11, "dag_edges": 18, "dag_category_id": 11, "dag_category_name": "Environment, Climate & Geospatial / 环境·气候·地理空...
[ "environment/Dockerfile", "environment/data/air_quality/hourly/monitor_AQ01.csv", "environment/data/air_quality/hourly/monitor_AQ02.csv", "environment/data/air_quality/hourly/monitor_AQ03.csv", "environment/data/air_quality/hourly/monitor_AQ04.csv", "environment/data/air_quality/hourly/monitor_AQ05.csv", ...
dataworld-p000553-cause-4
dataworld/p000554-cause-2
帮我看看进店浏览这块到底怎么回事。这两年(2023到2024年中)每天来逛小程序的人时多时少,好的时候一天几百,差的时候才几十,波动很大。我想搞清楚是什么在驱动这些起伏——是季节、天气,还是我在各渠道投的广告、那些促销活动,或者这两年口碑慢慢涨上来有没有帮上忙。 说白了,我想知道哪些是真起作用的、哪些只是看着像起作用。这样我才知道接下来广告费该怎么花、促销值不值得做、旺季前要不要提前备。数据都在手头几个导出文件里,你自己摸清楚怎么关联。 > 数据路径说明:题面中提到的 `env/` 目录内容已挂载到 `/app/data/`(题面里的 `env/xxx` 即 `/app/data/xxx`)。 把你的完整回答写入 `/app/...
原因分析:首次触达与兴趣(data-world 世界 p000554)
[ "data-analysis", "causal-inference", "pandas", "chinese" ]
1.1
{ "schema_version": "1.1", "artifacts": [ "/app/answer.txt", "/logs/verifier/reward.txt", "/logs/verifier/details.json", "/logs/artifacts/", "/logs/agent/trajectory.json" ], "task": { "name": "dataworld/p000554-cause-2", "description": "原因分析:首次触达与兴趣(data-world 世界 p000554)", "auth...
{ "difficulty_explanation": "第 2 层原因分析题:需在 p000554 世界的多套独立数据系统中完成数据清洗、关联与计算,并给出有 /app/data/ 文件证据支撑的因果归因结论。", "category": "data-analysis", "difficulty": "hard", "world": "p000554", "dag_nodes": 12, "dag_edges": 19, "dag_category_id": 1, "dag_category_name": "Commercial Growth & Acquisition / 商业增长与获客" }
[ "environment/Dockerfile", "environment/data/community/monthly_brand_reputation.csv", "environment/data/community/weekly_community_activity.csv", "environment/data/crm/referrals.csv", "environment/data/crm/retention.csv", "environment/data/finance/monthly_pl.csv", "environment/data/marketing/promo_events...
dataworld-p000554-cause-2
dataworld/p000554-consequence-3
最近几个旺季爆单日,配送延迟和品控投诉明显多了,有老客在群里抱怨。我想搞清楚一件事:客户头一回下单那次要是赶上了糟糕的履约体验,后面到底受不受影响——他还愿不愿意复购?会不会因此不把咱们推荐给身边的人?这两个后果各自有多严重、有没有个临界点?另外这种事是不是就集中在那几个爆单日,平时单不多的时候其实根本没事?给我算清楚,我好决定旺季到底要不要限单或者加人手。 > 数据路径说明:题面中提到的 `env/` 目录内容已挂载到 `/app/data/`(题面里的 `env/xxx` 即 `/app/data/xxx`)。 把你的完整回答写入 `/app/answer.txt`。
后果分析:履约与品质体验(data-world 世界 p000554)
[ "data-analysis", "causal-inference", "pandas", "chinese" ]
1.1
{ "schema_version": "1.1", "artifacts": [ "/app/answer.txt", "/logs/verifier/reward.txt", "/logs/verifier/details.json", "/logs/artifacts/", "/logs/agent/trajectory.json" ], "task": { "name": "dataworld/p000554-consequence-3", "description": "后果分析:履约与品质体验(data-world 世界 p000554)", ...
{ "difficulty_explanation": "第 3 层后果分析题:需在 p000554 世界的多套独立数据系统中完成数据清洗、关联与计算,并给出有 /app/data/ 文件证据支撑的后果推断结论。", "category": "data-analysis", "difficulty": "hard", "world": "p000554", "dag_nodes": 12, "dag_edges": 19, "dag_category_id": 1, "dag_category_name": "Commercial Growth & Acquisition / 商业增长与获客" }
[ "environment/Dockerfile", "environment/data/community/monthly_brand_reputation.csv", "environment/data/community/weekly_community_activity.csv", "environment/data/crm/referrals.csv", "environment/data/crm/retention.csv", "environment/data/finance/monthly_pl.csv", "environment/data/marketing/promo_events...
dataworld-p000554-consequence-3
dataworld/p000555-cause-2
我们保护区这套42个固定样方的寄主植物季度调查从1995年跑到现在,每个样方每季记寄主植物密度、花蜜资源评分、物种数,部分样本还测了叶片含氮量。鳞翅目保护说到底得看寄主植物这一环,可我手头攒了快三十年数据,却说不清这些寄主植物指标到底被什么左右——环境在变、景观也在变,哪个真在起作用、哪个只是搭车看着相关,我判断不了。 麻烦你把手头能拿到的数据串起来查一查:寄主植物的这几个方面主要受什么驱动,各自的证据有多硬,又有哪些看着像有关、其实经不起推敲。我要的是能拿去向上级汇报的判断和依据,不是把所有相关系数铺一遍。 > 数据路径说明:题面中提到的 `env/` 目录内容已挂载到 `/app/data/`(题面里的 `env/xxx` 即...
原因分析:寄主植物状态(data-world 世界 p000555)
[ "data-analysis", "causal-inference", "pandas", "chinese" ]
1.1
{ "schema_version": "1.1", "artifacts": [ "/app/answer.txt", "/logs/verifier/reward.txt", "/logs/verifier/details.json", "/logs/artifacts/", "/logs/agent/trajectory.json" ], "task": { "name": "dataworld/p000555-cause-2", "description": "原因分析:寄主植物状态(data-world 世界 p000555)", "autho...
{ "difficulty_explanation": "第 2 层原因分析题:需在 p000555 世界的多套独立数据系统中完成数据清洗、关联与计算,并给出有 /app/data/ 文件证据支撑的因果归因结论。", "category": "data-analysis", "difficulty": "hard", "world": "p000555", "dag_nodes": 10, "dag_edges": 16, "dag_category_id": 11, "dag_category_name": "Environment, Climate & Geospatial / 环境·气候·地理空...
[ "environment/Dockerfile", "environment/data/air_quality/aq_station_catalog.csv", "environment/data/air_quality/daily_airquality.csv", "environment/data/collections/collector_registry.csv", "environment/data/collections/specimen_records.csv", "environment/data/disasters/disaster_events.csv", "environment...
dataworld-p000555-cause-2
dataworld/p000557-cause-2
下赛季会员运营预算卡得紧,老板让我先搞清楚一件事:到底是什么在拉动会员等级提升和忠诚度积分累积,好决定钱往哪投。你从会员系统和 App 那几个表里看看,哪些行为跟会员往高等级走、积分往上涨最相关。 我有点拿不准——有些看上去相关的因素,到底是真在起作用,还是只是跟着别的现象一起出现而已。帮我把真正驱动的东西和那些只是看着像的假象分开讲清楚,别让我把钱投错地方。另外最高那档会员是不是已经到顶、再怎么互动也拉不动了,这个我也想一并确认。 > 数据路径说明:题面中提到的 `env/` 目录内容已挂载到 `/app/data/`(题面里的 `env/xxx` 即 `/app/data/xxx`)。 把你的完整回答写入 `/app/an...
原因分析:会员状态与忠诚度(data-world 世界 p000557)
[ "data-analysis", "causal-inference", "pandas", "chinese" ]
1.1
{ "schema_version": "1.1", "artifacts": [ "/app/answer.txt", "/logs/verifier/reward.txt", "/logs/verifier/details.json", "/logs/artifacts/", "/logs/agent/trajectory.json" ], "task": { "name": "dataworld/p000557-cause-2", "description": "原因分析:会员状态与忠诚度(data-world 世界 p000557)", "aut...
{ "difficulty_explanation": "第 2 层原因分析题:需在 p000557 世界的多套独立数据系统中完成数据清洗、关联与计算,并给出有 /app/data/ 文件证据支撑的因果归因结论。", "category": "data-analysis", "difficulty": "hard", "world": "p000557", "dag_nodes": 10, "dag_edges": 15, "dag_category_id": 2, "dag_category_name": "Customer, Pricing & Revenue / 客户·定价·收益" }
[ "environment/Dockerfile", "environment/data/app/engagement_events.parquet", "environment/data/app/push_notification_logs.csv", "environment/data/crm/clv_daily_snapshots.parquet", "environment/data/crm/loyalty_point_ledger.csv", "environment/data/crm/membership_scd.csv", "environment/data/ecommerce/merch...
dataworld-p000557-cause-2
dataworld/p000557-cause-4
市场部副总让我看一眼会员生命周期价值(CLV)这事。CRM 每天给每个活跃会员出一条快照,里面有历史收入、预测 CLV、流失概率和会员等级,但没人系统地拆过到底是什么在驱动这些数。他想搞清楚哪些可观察的行为——App 活跃、购票续约、商品消费——真的和预测 CLV、流失概率挂钩、各自分量多大;以及会员等级在这中间到底起多大作用,还是说高 CLV 其实主要被别的东西解释。 他特别想知道,高 CLV 到底是因为人本来就是高等级会员,还是有哪些我们能干预的行为在起作用——毕竟会员等级、App 活跃、消费这些本来就搅在一起。挑一个时间截面做就行,不用追全历史。下周给他一份能站得住的结论。 > 数据路径说明:题面中提到的 `env/` 目录...
原因分析:客户生命周期价值(data-world 世界 p000557)
[ "data-analysis", "causal-inference", "pandas", "chinese" ]
1.1
{ "schema_version": "1.1", "artifacts": [ "/app/answer.txt", "/logs/verifier/reward.txt", "/logs/verifier/details.json", "/logs/artifacts/", "/logs/agent/trajectory.json" ], "task": { "name": "dataworld/p000557-cause-4", "description": "原因分析:客户生命周期价值(data-world 世界 p000557)", "aut...
{ "difficulty_explanation": "第 4 层原因分析题:需在 p000557 世界的多套独立数据系统中完成数据清洗、关联与计算,并给出有 /app/data/ 文件证据支撑的因果归因结论。", "category": "data-analysis", "difficulty": "hard", "world": "p000557", "dag_nodes": 10, "dag_edges": 15, "dag_category_id": 2, "dag_category_name": "Customer, Pricing & Revenue / 客户·定价·收益" }
[ "environment/Dockerfile", "environment/data/app/engagement_events.parquet", "environment/data/app/push_notification_logs.csv", "environment/data/crm/clv_daily_snapshots.parquet", "environment/data/crm/loyalty_point_ledger.csv", "environment/data/crm/membership_scd.csv", "environment/data/ecommerce/merch...
dataworld-p000557-cause-4
dataworld/p000559-cause-2
游戏上线快半年了,拉新一直在跑,但我心里没底:花预算拉进来的人,到底有多少是真能留下来的。帮我从新手期看起——玩家装完游戏后有没有走完新手教程、首日玩了多久、第二天还回不回来。 我想搞清楚的是,能激活(走完教程、首日有像样时长)并且次日还回来的人,和那些一上来就流失的人,到底差在哪。希望结论能告诉我该重点关注哪类用户、哪些信号预示着留得住,别只甩我一堆整体平均数。 > 数据路径说明:题面中提到的 `env/` 目录内容已挂载到 `/app/data/`(题面里的 `env/xxx` 即 `/app/data/xxx`)。 把你的完整回答写入 `/app/answer.txt`。
原因分析:新手激活与早期留存(data-world 世界 p000559)
[ "data-analysis", "causal-inference", "pandas", "chinese" ]
1.1
{ "schema_version": "1.1", "artifacts": [ "/app/answer.txt", "/logs/verifier/reward.txt", "/logs/verifier/details.json", "/logs/artifacts/", "/logs/agent/trajectory.json" ], "task": { "name": "dataworld/p000559-cause-2", "description": "原因分析:新手激活与早期留存(data-world 世界 p000559)", "au...
{ "difficulty_explanation": "第 2 层原因分析题:需在 p000559 世界的多套独立数据系统中完成数据清洗、关联与计算,并给出有 /app/data/ 文件证据支撑的因果归因结论。", "category": "data-analysis", "difficulty": "hard", "world": "p000559", "dag_nodes": 8, "dag_edges": 10, "dag_category_id": 1, "dag_category_name": "Commercial Growth & Acquisition / 商业增长与获客" }
[ "environment/Dockerfile", "environment/data/bi/cohort_roi_daily.csv", "environment/data/billing/transactions.jsonl", "environment/data/mmp/campaign_daily.csv", "environment/data/mmp/install_events.jsonl", "environment/data/telemetry/combat_events.jsonl", "environment/data/telemetry/dau_daily.csv", "en...
dataworld-p000559-cause-2
dataworld/p000559-cause-3
运营那边在问,上线半年了,日活和人均时长到底被什么拽着走。我们的直觉是两股劲在拉:一批人猛玩一阵突然就不见了,新进的人又留不住。你从埋点和活跃账本里把这事理清楚——尤其是玩家把主线内容推到头之后活跃会怎样、新玩家头一天的表现能不能预示他后面还来不来。给我有依据的结论,别只甩相关系数,哪些是真在驱动、哪些只是搭边碰巧的,要分清楚。 > 数据路径说明:题面中提到的 `env/` 目录内容已挂载到 `/app/data/`(题面里的 `env/xxx` 即 `/app/data/xxx`)。 把你的完整回答写入 `/app/answer.txt`。
原因分析:玩家活跃状态(data-world 世界 p000559)
[ "data-analysis", "causal-inference", "pandas", "chinese" ]
1.1
{ "schema_version": "1.1", "artifacts": [ "/app/answer.txt", "/logs/verifier/reward.txt", "/logs/verifier/details.json", "/logs/artifacts/", "/logs/agent/trajectory.json" ], "task": { "name": "dataworld/p000559-cause-3", "description": "原因分析:玩家活跃状态(data-world 世界 p000559)", "autho...
{ "difficulty_explanation": "第 3 层原因分析题:需在 p000559 世界的多套独立数据系统中完成数据清洗、关联与计算,并给出有 /app/data/ 文件证据支撑的因果归因结论。", "category": "data-analysis", "difficulty": "hard", "world": "p000559", "dag_nodes": 8, "dag_edges": 10, "dag_category_id": 1, "dag_category_name": "Commercial Growth & Acquisition / 商业增长与获客" }
[ "environment/Dockerfile", "environment/data/bi/cohort_roi_daily.csv", "environment/data/billing/transactions.jsonl", "environment/data/mmp/campaign_daily.csv", "environment/data/mmp/install_events.jsonl", "environment/data/telemetry/combat_events.jsonl", "environment/data/telemetry/dau_daily.csv", "en...
dataworld-p000559-cause-3
dataworld/p000560-cause-2
政策研究处的同事甩过来一个活:所里那套长期家户面板跑了三十多年,里头每个受访者每一波都记了职业阶级(EGP 八类)、收入十分位、资产所有权、权威层级这几项位置指标。他想弄清楚的是——一个人的阶级位置到底是被什么推上去或压下来的?是念了多少书,还是家里本来底子厚,又或者是赶上宏观资本积累的好时候手里有资产?这几条哪个更管用、是不是一直管用、对谁都管用,他要一个能拿去写简报的说法。 宏观年度指标、家户面板的家庭背景和教育阶级两份表都在数据目录里。他特别提醒:宏观那张表的格式跟别的都不一样,别按惯性读;另外资产那列里有填 9 的,他拿不准那是什么,让我们自己判断该不该用。结论要落到收入十分位这个位置指标上,把几条可能的原因比一比,说清哪...
原因分析:个体阶级位置(data-world 世界 p000560)
[ "data-analysis", "causal-inference", "pandas", "chinese" ]
1.1
{ "schema_version": "1.1", "artifacts": [ "/app/answer.txt", "/logs/verifier/reward.txt", "/logs/verifier/details.json", "/logs/artifacts/", "/logs/agent/trajectory.json" ], "task": { "name": "dataworld/p000560-cause-2", "description": "原因分析:个体阶级位置(data-world 世界 p000560)", "autho...
{ "difficulty_explanation": "第 2 层原因分析题:需在 p000560 世界的多套独立数据系统中完成数据清洗、关联与计算,并给出有 /app/data/ 文件证据支撑的因果归因结论。", "category": "data-analysis", "difficulty": "hard", "world": "p000560", "dag_nodes": 10, "dag_edges": 13, "dag_category_id": 15, "dag_category_name": "Social Science, Survey & Behavioral / 社会科学·调查...
[ "environment/Dockerfile", "environment/data/labor/labor_market_institutions.csv", "environment/data/labor/labor_market_institutions.dta", "environment/data/labor/working_conditions_cross_section.csv", "environment/data/macro/macro_economic_indicators.csv", "environment/data/panel/education_and_class.parqu...
dataworld-p000560-cause-2
dataworld/p000561-consequence-1
选举策略组让我整理一份关于"社会经济背景"的简报。我们这套 18 轮跟踪民调加 12000 人面板跑下来,我自己的直觉是受访者的教育、收入、职业、城乡这些背景差异,会在好几个环节显形——但具体显在哪儿、差多少、是不是越往上越强,我还没数。你帮我把这条线捋清楚:背景不同的群体,在我们调查里被观测到的方式有没有差别,他们实际的政治参与行为长什么样,以及这些差别最终在选区得票上留下什么印记。哪些地方能下结论、哪些地方我们手上的数据其实说不清,也一并讲清楚。 > 数据路径说明:题面中提到的 `env/` 目录内容已挂载到 `/app/data/`(题面里的 `env/xxx` 即 `/app/data/xxx`)。 把你的完整回答写入 ...
后果分析:社会经济背景(data-world 世界 p000561)
[ "data-analysis", "causal-inference", "pandas", "chinese" ]
1.1
{ "schema_version": "1.1", "artifacts": [ "/app/answer.txt", "/logs/verifier/reward.txt", "/logs/verifier/details.json", "/logs/artifacts/", "/logs/agent/trajectory.json" ], "task": { "name": "dataworld/p000561-consequence-1", "description": "后果分析:社会经济背景(data-world 世界 p000561)", ...
{ "difficulty_explanation": "第 1 层后果分析题:需在 p000561 世界的多套独立数据系统中完成数据清洗、关联与计算,并给出有 /app/data/ 文件证据支撑的后果推断结论。", "category": "data-analysis", "difficulty": "medium", "world": "p000561", "dag_nodes": 10, "dag_edges": 16, "dag_category_id": 15, "dag_category_name": "Social Science, Survey & Behavioral / 社会科学·...
[ "environment/Dockerfile", "environment/data/election_comm/bulletin_2022.pdf", "environment/data/election_comm/bulletin_2023.pdf", "environment/data/election_comm/district_metadata.csv", "environment/data/election_comm/results.csv", "environment/data/media_monitor/channel_codes.csv", "environment/data/me...
dataworld-p000561-consequence-1
dataworld/p000563-cause-1
我们社工个案系统这六年攒了九千多条家庭不良事件记录,下周我要跟区里汇报预防性介入的资源该往哪倾斜。在那之前我需要一份判断依据:到底什么样的家庭更容易反复出事、出更严重的事?除了家庭自身的情况,社区那边的环境有没有预示作用?我不想凭印象拍板,你把数据里能站得住的、还有说不清的,都给我摆出来。 > 数据路径说明:题面中提到的 `env/` 目录内容已挂载到 `/app/data/`(题面里的 `env/xxx` 即 `/app/data/xxx`)。 把你的完整回答写入 `/app/answer.txt`。
原因分析:家庭不良事件(data-world 世界 p000563)
[ "data-analysis", "causal-inference", "pandas", "chinese" ]
1.1
{ "schema_version": "1.1", "artifacts": [ "/app/answer.txt", "/logs/verifier/reward.txt", "/logs/verifier/details.json", "/logs/artifacts/", "/logs/agent/trajectory.json" ], "task": { "name": "dataworld/p000563-cause-1", "description": "原因分析:家庭不良事件(data-world 世界 p000563)", "autho...
{ "difficulty_explanation": "第 1 层原因分析题:需在 p000563 世界的多套独立数据系统中完成数据清洗、关联与计算,并给出有 /app/data/ 文件证据支撑的因果归因结论。", "category": "data-analysis", "difficulty": "medium", "world": "p000563", "dag_nodes": 10, "dag_edges": 12, "dag_category_id": 15, "dag_category_name": "Social Science, Survey & Behavioral / 社会科学·...
[ "environment/Dockerfile", "environment/data/clinical_baseline_scd.csv", "environment/data/clinical_therapy_sessions.csv", "environment/data/community_socioeconomic_dim.csv", "environment/data/outcome_composite_index.csv", "environment/data/school_records_term.parquet", "environment/data/social_work_case...
dataworld-p000563-cause-1
dataworld/p000563-consequence-1
区里这套儿童追踪数据跑了好几年了,社工、学校、临床、问卷几边都有。最近上面想理一件事:那些家里出了急性不良事件的孩子——失业、驱逐、家暴、断水断电这类——之后到底怎么样了。我不要一个泛泛的'有影响',我要知道影响落在哪几个面、各自什么方向、有多大、是马上就显现还是隔一阵才来、是不是所有孩子都一样。你把能对上的几边数据拼起来,给我一份有依据的后果刻画,能说清楚的就说清楚,说不清的地方也讲明白为什么。 > 数据路径说明:题面中提到的 `env/` 目录内容已挂载到 `/app/data/`(题面里的 `env/xxx` 即 `/app/data/xxx`)。 把你的完整回答写入 `/app/answer.txt`。
后果分析:家庭不良事件(data-world 世界 p000563)
[ "data-analysis", "causal-inference", "pandas", "chinese" ]
1.1
{ "schema_version": "1.1", "artifacts": [ "/app/answer.txt", "/logs/verifier/reward.txt", "/logs/verifier/details.json", "/logs/artifacts/", "/logs/agent/trajectory.json" ], "task": { "name": "dataworld/p000563-consequence-1", "description": "后果分析:家庭不良事件(data-world 世界 p000563)", ...
{ "difficulty_explanation": "第 1 层后果分析题:需在 p000563 世界的多套独立数据系统中完成数据清洗、关联与计算,并给出有 /app/data/ 文件证据支撑的后果推断结论。", "category": "data-analysis", "difficulty": "medium", "world": "p000563", "dag_nodes": 10, "dag_edges": 12, "dag_category_id": 15, "dag_category_name": "Social Science, Survey & Behavioral / 社会科学·...
[ "environment/Dockerfile", "environment/data/clinical_baseline_scd.csv", "environment/data/clinical_therapy_sessions.csv", "environment/data/community_socioeconomic_dim.csv", "environment/data/outcome_composite_index.csv", "environment/data/school_records_term.parquet", "environment/data/social_work_case...
dataworld-p000563-consequence-1
dataworld/p000567-cause-4
老张,麻烦你看下咱们这物流履约的情况。老板最近老念叨运费高、客户还总抱怨到货慢,让我下周给个说法。TMS 发运明细在 tms/shipments.csv,订单在 erp/sales_orders.csv,成品库存快照在 wms/finished_goods_inventory_daily.csv,承运商、仓库这些主数据在 master/ 和 docs/ 下都有。 我想弄清楚两件事:一是我们的运费到底被什么抬上去的——是订单太小、发太远、还是分批发运折腾的;二是客户到货慢、晚于交期的单子,根子到底在哪,是承运商不行、路途远,还是我们自己没货可发。你把数据捋一遍,给我个有依据的结论,哪些是真原因、哪些看着像但其实不是。口径你自己定,但...
原因分析:履约与配送(data-world 世界 p000567)
[ "data-analysis", "causal-inference", "pandas", "chinese" ]
1.1
{ "schema_version": "1.1", "artifacts": [ "/app/answer.txt", "/logs/verifier/reward.txt", "/logs/verifier/details.json", "/logs/artifacts/", "/logs/agent/trajectory.json" ], "task": { "name": "dataworld/p000567-cause-4", "description": "原因分析:履约与配送(data-world 世界 p000567)", "author...
{ "difficulty_explanation": "第 4 层原因分析题:需在 p000567 世界的多套独立数据系统中完成数据清洗、关联与计算,并给出有 /app/data/ 文件证据支撑的因果归因结论。", "category": "data-analysis", "difficulty": "hard", "world": "p000567", "dag_nodes": 12, "dag_edges": 17, "dag_category_id": 4, "dag_category_name": "Operations, Supply Chain & Manufacturing / 运营·...
[ "environment/Dockerfile", "environment/data/crm/customer_satisfaction_daily.csv", "environment/data/docs/customer_id_crosswalk.csv", "environment/data/docs/erp_export_field_guide.txt", "environment/data/docs/mes_xml_schema_change_notice_202306.txt", "environment/data/docs/srm_portal_changelog.txt", "env...
dataworld-p000567-cause-4
dataworld/p000573-cause-3
这二十年我们在盆地这边陆续落地了 80 项地基工程,档案都在 geotech 那份 foundation_projects 里,记了每项是浅基础、摩擦桩还是端承桩,还有桩长、埋深、设计荷载和施工质量评分。我下季度要牵头做一版"场地可建性快速研判"流程,想在拿地或方案早期就能预判一项工程大概会落到哪种基础、桩大概打多深,好提前估工期造价、也帮选址避坑。 你把这 80 项的资料理一理,看看是哪些因素在决定一项工程最后用了哪种基础、桩打多长——勘察出来的地层条件、建筑本身的荷载、场地有没有深开挖这些里头,哪个真起作用、起多大作用,哪些看着相关其实不是那么回事。结论要能落到"以后碰到什么场地、什么建筑,大概率会怎么选"上。 > 数据路径说...
原因分析:地基设计与施工(data-world 世界 p000573)
[ "data-analysis", "causal-inference", "pandas", "chinese" ]
1.1
{ "schema_version": "1.1", "artifacts": [ "/app/answer.txt", "/logs/verifier/reward.txt", "/logs/verifier/details.json", "/logs/artifacts/", "/logs/agent/trajectory.json" ], "task": { "name": "dataworld/p000573-cause-3", "description": "原因分析:地基设计与施工(data-world 世界 p000573)", "auth...
{ "difficulty_explanation": "第 3 层原因分析题:需在 p000573 世界的多套独立数据系统中完成数据清洗、关联与计算,并给出有 /app/data/ 文件证据支撑的因果归因结论。", "category": "data-analysis", "difficulty": "hard", "world": "p000573", "dag_nodes": 12, "dag_edges": 19, "dag_category_id": 11, "dag_category_name": "Environment, Climate & Geospatial / 环境·气候·地理空...
[ "environment/Dockerfile", "environment/data/geo/dem_grid_100m.parquet", "environment/data/geo/formation_code_mapping_2006_2015.csv", "environment/data/geo/formation_lithology.csv", "environment/data/geo/land_use_scd.csv", "environment/data/geotech/borehole_logs/BH-001.pdf", "environment/data/geotech/bor...
dataworld-p000573-cause-3
dataworld/p000573-cause-4
我们结构安全科管着全市 120 个地基沉降监测点,这些年攒下的沉降和变形数据一直在涨,但各点差别很大——有的几十毫米,有的上百,不均匀的也不少。领导要一份判断:到底是什么在驱动这些点的沉降和变形?哪些因素是实打实在起作用、我们能照着排风险、盯重点,哪些只是看着相关、其实经不起推敲? 把沉降监测数据和手头其他相关资料串起来看,给我一份能从数据里复核的结论:主要驱动是哪几个、各自影响多大、哪类点最该盯。结论要有依据,别把巧合当因果。 > 数据路径说明:题面中提到的 `env/` 目录内容已挂载到 `/app/data/`(题面里的 `env/xxx` 即 `/app/data/xxx`)。 把你的完整回答写入 `/app/answ...
原因分析:地基沉降与变形(data-world 世界 p000573)
[ "data-analysis", "causal-inference", "pandas", "chinese" ]
1.1
{ "schema_version": "1.1", "artifacts": [ "/app/answer.txt", "/logs/verifier/reward.txt", "/logs/verifier/details.json", "/logs/artifacts/", "/logs/agent/trajectory.json" ], "task": { "name": "dataworld/p000573-cause-4", "description": "原因分析:地基沉降与变形(data-world 世界 p000573)", "auth...
{ "difficulty_explanation": "第 4 层原因分析题:需在 p000573 世界的多套独立数据系统中完成数据清洗、关联与计算,并给出有 /app/data/ 文件证据支撑的因果归因结论。", "category": "data-analysis", "difficulty": "hard", "world": "p000573", "dag_nodes": 12, "dag_edges": 19, "dag_category_id": 11, "dag_category_name": "Environment, Climate & Geospatial / 环境·气候·地理空...
[ "environment/Dockerfile", "environment/data/geo/dem_grid_100m.parquet", "environment/data/geo/formation_code_mapping_2006_2015.csv", "environment/data/geo/formation_lithology.csv", "environment/data/geo/land_use_scd.csv", "environment/data/geotech/borehole_logs/BH-001.pdf", "environment/data/geotech/bor...
dataworld-p000573-cause-4
dataworld/p000573-consequence-2
我们这二十年攒了80项地基工程,每项都有勘察钻孔的承载力、压缩模量这些参数,也有最终用了什么基础、桩打多深、以及竣工后的沉降监测。我下季度要向上面报一份东西:这批项目里,到底是哪些因为地耐力不行被逼着上了桩基、而不是用便宜的浅基础?那些上了桩的项目,桩长是被什么卡着定的?最后想确认一件事——为弱地基多花的桩基钱,有没有真的把长期沉降压下去、比浅基础表现更好? 你把钻孔试验、项目设计、沉降监测这几张表对起来算一算,给我一个有依据的结论。重点是弱地基怎么逼出桩基方案、桩长由什么决定、以及不同基础类型的长期沉降差多少,方向和量级都要说清楚。 > 数据路径说明:题面中提到的 `env/` 目录内容已挂载到 `/app/data/`(题面里...
后果分析:岩土工程参数(data-world 世界 p000573)
[ "data-analysis", "causal-inference", "pandas", "chinese" ]
1.1
{ "schema_version": "1.1", "artifacts": [ "/app/answer.txt", "/logs/verifier/reward.txt", "/logs/verifier/details.json", "/logs/artifacts/", "/logs/agent/trajectory.json" ], "task": { "name": "dataworld/p000573-consequence-2", "description": "后果分析:岩土工程参数(data-world 世界 p000573)", ...
{ "difficulty_explanation": "第 2 层后果分析题:需在 p000573 世界的多套独立数据系统中完成数据清洗、关联与计算,并给出有 /app/data/ 文件证据支撑的后果推断结论。", "category": "data-analysis", "difficulty": "hard", "world": "p000573", "dag_nodes": 12, "dag_edges": 19, "dag_category_id": 11, "dag_category_name": "Environment, Climate & Geospatial / 环境·气候·地理空...
[ "environment/Dockerfile", "environment/data/geo/dem_grid_100m.parquet", "environment/data/geo/formation_code_mapping_2006_2015.csv", "environment/data/geo/formation_lithology.csv", "environment/data/geo/land_use_scd.csv", "environment/data/geotech/borehole_logs/BH-001.pdf", "environment/data/geotech/bor...
dataworld-p000573-consequence-2
dataworld/p000576-cause-1
Hi — I'm pulling together a briefing for the Finance Secretary on how central-scheme funds have been allocated across our 75 districts over the last six fiscal years (FY2019–FY2024). The PFMS quarterly allocation files and the census socioeconomic extracts are what we've got. The headline question is whether the money ...
原因分析:Fiscal Allocation(data-world 世界 p000576)
[ "data-analysis", "causal-inference", "pandas", "chinese" ]
1.1
{ "schema_version": "1.1", "artifacts": [ "/app/answer.txt", "/logs/verifier/reward.txt", "/logs/verifier/details.json", "/logs/artifacts/", "/logs/agent/trajectory.json" ], "task": { "name": "dataworld/p000576-cause-1", "description": "原因分析:Fiscal Allocation(data-world 世界 p000576)",...
{ "difficulty_explanation": "第 1 层原因分析题:需在 p000576 世界的多套独立数据系统中完成数据清洗、关联与计算,并给出有 /app/data/ 文件证据支撑的因果归因结论。", "category": "data-analysis", "difficulty": "medium", "world": "p000576", "dag_nodes": 10, "dag_edges": 18, "dag_category_id": 13, "dag_category_name": "Public Policy & Program Evaluation / 公共政策与项...
[ "environment/Dockerfile", "environment/data/cctns/crime_statistics_monthly.csv", "environment/data/cctns/fir_register_extract_sample.csv", "environment/data/census/annual_sample_supplement_methodology.pdf", "environment/data/census/district_socioeconomic_baseline.csv", "environment/data/gpas/beneficiary_r...
dataworld-p000576-cause-1
dataworld/p000576-cause-3
我从规划那边接手一摊子。我们有一套按"区×季度"记录的经济民生指标——就业率、月均工资、新登记企业数、MGNREGA 人天——覆盖全省 75 个区、2019 到 2024 年。上面在复盘这六年民生表现,问我:到底是什么在驱动各区的就业和收入差异?这些年政府下了不少力气,可谁也说不清到底是哪些投入真在起作用,还是只是看着像那么回事。 你从数据里把这件事查清楚,给我一个能站住的判断:哪些因素真的跟就业、工资、企业活力的差异有关,哪些只是表面相关、经不起推敲。要分清可靠证据和数据局限,别把巧合当因果。 > 数据路径说明:题面中提到的 `env/` 目录内容已挂载到 `/app/data/`(题面里的 `env/xxx` 即 `/app/...
原因分析:Economic Livelihoods(data-world 世界 p000576)
[ "data-analysis", "causal-inference", "pandas", "chinese" ]
1.1
{ "schema_version": "1.1", "artifacts": [ "/app/answer.txt", "/logs/verifier/reward.txt", "/logs/verifier/details.json", "/logs/artifacts/", "/logs/agent/trajectory.json" ], "task": { "name": "dataworld/p000576-cause-3", "description": "原因分析:Economic Livelihoods(data-world 世界 p000576...
{ "difficulty_explanation": "第 3 层原因分析题:需在 p000576 世界的多套独立数据系统中完成数据清洗、关联与计算,并给出有 /app/data/ 文件证据支撑的因果归因结论。", "category": "data-analysis", "difficulty": "hard", "world": "p000576", "dag_nodes": 10, "dag_edges": 18, "dag_category_id": 13, "dag_category_name": "Public Policy & Program Evaluation / 公共政策与项目评...
[ "environment/Dockerfile", "environment/data/cctns/crime_statistics_monthly.csv", "environment/data/cctns/fir_register_extract_sample.csv", "environment/data/census/annual_sample_supplement_methodology.pdf", "environment/data/census/district_socioeconomic_baseline.csv", "environment/data/gpas/beneficiary_r...
dataworld-p000576-cause-3
dataworld/p000576-consequence-2
我们是 Anant Pradesh 邦福利交付司。手头有 FY2019–FY2024 六个财年的多系统数据——从财政拨付、项目瞄准、设施交付,到受益人逐笔领用记录,再到区里的经济生计、人力发展指标和半年一次的满意度调查。厅里要复盘一件事:十二个福利项目真正发到受益人手里、被“用”掉之后,往下到底产生了什么效果?具体想弄清:受益人领到的现金和服务,跟他们随后的家庭生计、孩子上学和健康、以及对政府的满意度,分别是什么关系。 帮我把“受益使用”到这三个方向的关系讲清楚——方向是正还是负、有多大、在哪些群体或地区上表现不一样、几年里怎么变化,以及数据里有哪些坑可能让结论走偏。各区、各项目、各时间段要理清口径,几个系统的文件得串起来看。三个...
后果分析:Beneficiary Utilization(data-world 世界 p000576)
[ "data-analysis", "causal-inference", "pandas", "chinese" ]
1.1
{ "schema_version": "1.1", "artifacts": [ "/app/answer.txt", "/logs/verifier/reward.txt", "/logs/verifier/details.json", "/logs/artifacts/", "/logs/agent/trajectory.json" ], "task": { "name": "dataworld/p000576-consequence-2", "description": "后果分析:Beneficiary Utilization(data-world 世...
{ "difficulty_explanation": "第 2 层后果分析题:需在 p000576 世界的多套独立数据系统中完成数据清洗、关联与计算,并给出有 /app/data/ 文件证据支撑的后果推断结论。", "category": "data-analysis", "difficulty": "hard", "world": "p000576", "dag_nodes": 10, "dag_edges": 18, "dag_category_id": 13, "dag_category_name": "Public Policy & Program Evaluation / 公共政策与项目评...
[ "environment/Dockerfile", "environment/data/cctns/crime_statistics_monthly.csv", "environment/data/cctns/fir_register_extract_sample.csv", "environment/data/census/annual_sample_supplement_methodology.pdf", "environment/data/census/district_socioeconomic_baseline.csv", "environment/data/gpas/beneficiary_r...
dataworld-p000576-consequence-2
dataworld/p000578-cause-3
北部战区(Region C)是这两年冲突最集中的地方,几个区的烈度走势又很不一样,领导要一份简报:到底什么在驱动各区域月度冲突烈度的变化?现在两种说法吵得最凶——一派说是外部给各派系的军事援助在推高战事,一派说是本土的抗议和动员在升级局势。这两条线你都得查,看外部援助和本土动员各自跟冲突烈度是什么关系、哪个更站得住。哪些判断有硬证据、哪些只是碰巧同向或受了数据本身的局限,也帮我们标清楚,别让简报到时候被人挑出反例。 > 数据路径说明:题面中提到的 `env/` 目录内容已挂载到 `/app/data/`(题面里的 `env/xxx` 即 `/app/data/xxx`)。 把你的完整回答写入 `/app/answer.txt`。...
原因分析:冲突事件强度(data-world 世界 p000578)
[ "data-analysis", "causal-inference", "pandas", "chinese" ]
1.1
{ "schema_version": "1.1", "artifacts": [ "/app/answer.txt", "/logs/verifier/reward.txt", "/logs/verifier/details.json", "/logs/artifacts/", "/logs/agent/trajectory.json" ], "task": { "name": "dataworld/p000578-cause-3", "description": "原因分析:冲突事件强度(data-world 世界 p000578)", "autho...
{ "difficulty_explanation": "第 3 层原因分析题:需在 p000578 世界的多套独立数据系统中完成数据清洗、关联与计算,并给出有 /app/data/ 文件证据支撑的因果归因结论。", "category": "data-analysis", "difficulty": "hard", "world": "p000578", "dag_nodes": 11, "dag_edges": 17, "dag_category_id": 15, "dag_category_name": "Social Science, Survey & Behavioral / 社会科学·调查...
[ "environment/Dockerfile", "environment/data/conflict_db/conflict_events.csv", "environment/data/conflict_db/conflict_intensity_monthly.parquet", "environment/data/conflict_db/mobilization_events.csv", "environment/data/displacement_tracking/monthly_displacement.csv", "environment/data/displacement_trackin...
dataworld-p000578-cause-3
dataworld/p000578-consequence-4
我们准备对外发布 2016–2023 各区域「支持政治暴力」的调查读数,但外勤一直反映:冲突区的不少片区进不去,电话框也打不通,好几波只能靠关键知情人凑数。发布前我得先弄清——这种够不到人的情况,是不是系统性地把我们测出来的支持率带偏了?偏哪边、偏多少? 重点帮我对比冲突区和稳定区,再看看我们事后加的那些权重到底纠没纠回来。如果冲突区的数字确实不可靠,我得知道发布时该不该给它单独打补丁。 > 数据路径说明:题面中提到的 `env/` 目录内容已挂载到 `/app/data/`(题面里的 `env/xxx` 即 `/app/data/xxx`)。 把你的完整回答写入 `/app/answer.txt`。
后果分析:调查可及性与抽样框架(data-world 世界 p000578)
[ "data-analysis", "causal-inference", "pandas", "chinese" ]
1.1
{ "schema_version": "1.1", "artifacts": [ "/app/answer.txt", "/logs/verifier/reward.txt", "/logs/verifier/details.json", "/logs/artifacts/", "/logs/agent/trajectory.json" ], "task": { "name": "dataworld/p000578-consequence-4", "description": "后果分析:调查可及性与抽样框架(data-world 世界 p000578)", ...
{ "difficulty_explanation": "第 4 层后果分析题:需在 p000578 世界的多套独立数据系统中完成数据清洗、关联与计算,并给出有 /app/data/ 文件证据支撑的后果推断结论。", "category": "data-analysis", "difficulty": "hard", "world": "p000578", "dag_nodes": 11, "dag_edges": 17, "dag_category_id": 15, "dag_category_name": "Social Science, Survey & Behavioral / 社会科学·调查...
[ "environment/Dockerfile", "environment/data/conflict_db/conflict_events.csv", "environment/data/conflict_db/conflict_intensity_monthly.parquet", "environment/data/conflict_db/mobilization_events.csv", "environment/data/displacement_tracking/monthly_displacement.csv", "environment/data/displacement_trackin...
dataworld-p000578-consequence-4
dataworld/p000582-cause-2
创伤外科质控会上大家吵起来了:从病人到院到进手术室的时间(time-to-intervention)和手术的复杂程度,差异大得离谱——有人不到两小时就开刀,有人拖了二十多个小时;有的就一台简单手术,有的是四五台连做的多发伤大手术。委员会想知道这背后到底是被什么驱动的:是伤情本身、影像发现、还是病人的用药和基础病?哪些是临床上合理的差异,哪些可能是流程问题。你把数据里能支持的部分理清楚,给我一份有依据的结论,别拿轶闻说事。 > 数据路径说明:题面中提到的 `env/` 目录内容已挂载到 `/app/data/`(题面里的 `env/xxx` 即 `/app/data/xxx`)。 把你的完整回答写入 `/app/answer.tx...
原因分析:治疗干预与手术操作(data-world 世界 p000582)
[ "data-analysis", "causal-inference", "pandas", "chinese" ]
1.1
{ "schema_version": "1.1", "artifacts": [ "/app/answer.txt", "/logs/verifier/reward.txt", "/logs/verifier/details.json", "/logs/artifacts/", "/logs/agent/trajectory.json" ], "task": { "name": "dataworld/p000582-cause-2", "description": "原因分析:治疗干预与手术操作(data-world 世界 p000582)", "au...
{ "difficulty_explanation": "第 2 层原因分析题:需在 p000582 世界的多套独立数据系统中完成数据清洗、关联与计算,并给出有 /app/data/ 文件证据支撑的因果归因结论。", "category": "data-analysis", "difficulty": "hard", "world": "p000582", "dag_nodes": 12, "dag_edges": 24, "dag_category_id": 7, "dag_category_name": "Clinical & Healthcare / 临床与医疗" }
[ "environment/Dockerfile", "environment/data/adverse_events/safety_reports.csv", "environment/data/billing/charge_items.csv", "environment/data/billing/diagnosis_codes.csv", "environment/data/billing/drg_assignments.csv", "environment/data/billing/procedure_codes.csv", "environment/data/ehr/discharge_dis...
dataworld-p000582-cause-2
dataworld/p000588-consequence-1
我们刚熬过 2022–2024 这个周期,2023 年中失业率一度冲破 8%,是这三年最刺眼的经济事件。老板让我把这次经济下行留下的"政治后遗症"理清楚——别停在"经济差政治就极端"这种印象上,得拿数据说清楚政客当时的话语是怎么转向的、幅度有多大、不同阵营有没有分野,再看看老百姓这两年的政治身份认同有没有被这次压力重塑,是跟着经济同步走还是滞后、滞后多久。哪些敢下结论、哪些因为数据本身的限制说不清,也要交代。给我一份能直接拿去汇报的判断。 > 数据路径说明:题面中提到的 `env/` 目录内容已挂载到 `/app/data/`(题面里的 `env/xxx` 即 `/app/data/xxx`)。 把你的完整回答写入 `/app/...
后果分析:社会经济环境(data-world 世界 p000588)
[ "data-analysis", "causal-inference", "pandas", "chinese" ]
1.1
{ "schema_version": "1.1", "artifacts": [ "/app/answer.txt", "/logs/verifier/reward.txt", "/logs/verifier/details.json", "/logs/artifacts/", "/logs/agent/trajectory.json" ], "task": { "name": "dataworld/p000588-consequence-1", "description": "后果分析:社会经济环境(data-world 世界 p000588)", ...
{ "difficulty_explanation": "第 1 层后果分析题:需在 p000588 世界的多套独立数据系统中完成数据清洗、关联与计算,并给出有 /app/data/ 文件证据支撑的后果推断结论。", "category": "data-analysis", "difficulty": "medium", "world": "p000588", "dag_nodes": 10, "dag_edges": 13, "dag_category_id": 15, "dag_category_name": "Social Science, Survey & Behavioral / 社会科学·...
[ "environment/Dockerfile", "environment/data/economy/methodology_notes.txt", "environment/data/economy/quarterly_indicators.csv", "environment/data/economy/revision_log.csv", "environment/data/election/precinct_results.csv", "environment/data/election/turnout_records.csv", "environment/data/election/vote...
dataworld-p000588-consequence-1
dataworld/p000588-consequence-3
我们这个双周追踪做了两年多(W001–W040),每周对外发出去的支持率和误差范围,都要先过接触方式、激励金额和事后分层权重这套流程。最近复盘,运营那边质疑我们前期的数不够稳,客户也在问:到底是接触和加权这套做法在影响发出去的数,还是纯粹样本量的事。受访者原始数据和周度聚合表我都给你了。帮我理清楚:这套抽样接触和权重调整的做法,对最终发布的支持率和误差范围到底造成了什么影响——哪些波受影响最大、量级多大,以及这两年里平台在接触方式和激励上做了哪些调整。不用给我列报告提纲,把依据和数字摆清楚就行。 > 数据路径说明:题面中提到的 `env/` 目录内容已挂载到 `/app/data/`(题面里的 `env/xxx` 即 `/app/d...
后果分析:抽样接触与权重调整(data-world 世界 p000588)
[ "data-analysis", "causal-inference", "pandas", "chinese" ]
1.1
{ "schema_version": "1.1", "artifacts": [ "/app/answer.txt", "/logs/verifier/reward.txt", "/logs/verifier/details.json", "/logs/artifacts/", "/logs/agent/trajectory.json" ], "task": { "name": "dataworld/p000588-consequence-3", "description": "后果分析:抽样接触与权重调整(data-world 世界 p000588)", ...
{ "difficulty_explanation": "第 3 层后果分析题:需在 p000588 世界的多套独立数据系统中完成数据清洗、关联与计算,并给出有 /app/data/ 文件证据支撑的后果推断结论。", "category": "data-analysis", "difficulty": "hard", "world": "p000588", "dag_nodes": 10, "dag_edges": 13, "dag_category_id": 15, "dag_category_name": "Social Science, Survey & Behavioral / 社会科学·调查...
[ "environment/Dockerfile", "environment/data/economy/methodology_notes.txt", "environment/data/economy/quarterly_indicators.csv", "environment/data/economy/revision_log.csv", "environment/data/election/precinct_results.csv", "environment/data/election/turnout_records.csv", "environment/data/election/vote...
dataworld-p000588-consequence-3
dataworld/p000589-cause-2
下季度促销日历和包装升级的预算要定了,老板让我先把"到底是什么在驱动下单"讲清楚。手里有三年订单、定价、促销、产品和客户数据,你帮我判断这几个杠杆里哪些真在拉动成交、拉动到什么程度、加码到哪就不划算了。别笼统跟我说"促销有效"——我想知道深度加码还灵不灵、对哪类客群灵。 顺带把那些看着像、其实经不起推敲的效应也排掉,别让它们混进结论。最后给的东西要能直接拍下季度预算。 > 数据路径说明:题面中提到的 `env/` 目录内容已挂载到 `/app/data/`(题面里的 `env/xxx` 即 `/app/data/xxx`)。 把你的完整回答写入 `/app/answer.txt`。
原因分析:购买行为与交易(data-world 世界 p000589)
[ "data-analysis", "causal-inference", "pandas", "chinese" ]
1.1
{ "schema_version": "1.1", "artifacts": [ "/app/answer.txt", "/logs/verifier/reward.txt", "/logs/verifier/details.json", "/logs/artifacts/", "/logs/agent/trajectory.json" ], "task": { "name": "dataworld/p000589-cause-2", "description": "原因分析:购买行为与交易(data-world 世界 p000589)", "auth...
{ "difficulty_explanation": "第 2 层原因分析题:需在 p000589 世界的多套独立数据系统中完成数据清洗、关联与计算,并给出有 /app/data/ 文件证据支撑的因果归因结论。", "category": "data-analysis", "difficulty": "hard", "world": "p000589", "dag_nodes": 11, "dag_edges": 21, "dag_category_id": 2, "dag_category_name": "Customer, Pricing & Revenue / 客户·定价·收益" }
[ "environment/Dockerfile", "environment/data/billing/customer_ltv_monthly.csv", "environment/data/billing/financial_summary_monthly.xlsx", "environment/data/billing/renewal_retention_monthly.csv", "environment/data/crm/customer_health_monthly.csv", "environment/data/crm/customer_profile_scd.csv", "enviro...
dataworld-p000589-cause-2
dataworld/p000589-consequence-1
这两年我们在包装上没少花钱——磁吸盒、烫金、特种纸越用越多,设计评分也一路往4分以上拉。上周复盘会上老板问我,这些包装投入到底在生意上换来什么,我给不出一个有数的说法。你帮我把这条线从头到尾量一下:包装材质和设计评分的差异,最终落在价格、落在用户怎么买、落在客户拿到手之后的体验上,分别是什么样子。 哪些地方是真有回报、值得继续投的,哪些地方已经投到头了再加钱边际很小,还有没有哪类客人对这套包装根本不感冒。各系统的导出表你比我熟,给我一份能直接拿去跟老板对的结论,关键数字要能复算,别只给定性判断。 > 数据路径说明:题面中提到的 `env/` 目录内容已挂载到 `/app/data/`(题面里的 `env/xxx` 即 `/app/d...
后果分析:产品组合与包装设计(data-world 世界 p000589)
[ "data-analysis", "causal-inference", "pandas", "chinese" ]
1.1
{ "schema_version": "1.1", "artifacts": [ "/app/answer.txt", "/logs/verifier/reward.txt", "/logs/verifier/details.json", "/logs/artifacts/", "/logs/agent/trajectory.json" ], "task": { "name": "dataworld/p000589-consequence-1", "description": "后果分析:产品组合与包装设计(data-world 世界 p000589)", ...
{ "difficulty_explanation": "第 1 层后果分析题:需在 p000589 世界的多套独立数据系统中完成数据清洗、关联与计算,并给出有 /app/data/ 文件证据支撑的后果推断结论。", "category": "data-analysis", "difficulty": "medium", "world": "p000589", "dag_nodes": 11, "dag_edges": 21, "dag_category_id": 2, "dag_category_name": "Customer, Pricing & Revenue / 客户·定价·收益" }
[ "environment/Dockerfile", "environment/data/billing/customer_ltv_monthly.csv", "environment/data/billing/financial_summary_monthly.xlsx", "environment/data/billing/renewal_retention_monthly.csv", "environment/data/crm/customer_health_monthly.csv", "environment/data/crm/customer_profile_scd.csv", "enviro...
dataworld-p000589-consequence-1
dataworld/p000589-consequence-4
财务总监要在月底董事会上回应一个老问题:我们一直对外讲"高价值客户撑起了大部分利润",但每次被追问都拿不出过硬的数。她想让你从数据里把这件事彻底说清楚。 一是按客户终身价值(LTV)给客户排个序,看头部客户到底集中了多少利润——我们惯常的说法站不站得住,量级是多少。二是把每个首购批次客户的 LTV 水平,和他们在月度损益表里体现出的盈利表现对上(毛利率、客单收入、获客成本回收快慢这些),LTV 高的批次是不是真的更赚钱;这个关联有多强、在什么条件下才成立、有没有被别的因素带偏。 她要能上会的结论:方向、量级、以及数据本身有哪些坑会影响判断,都得讲明白。 > 数据路径说明:题面中提到的 `env/` 目录内容已挂载到 `/app/...
后果分析:客户终身价值(data-world 世界 p000589)
[ "data-analysis", "causal-inference", "pandas", "chinese" ]
1.1
{ "schema_version": "1.1", "artifacts": [ "/app/answer.txt", "/logs/verifier/reward.txt", "/logs/verifier/details.json", "/logs/artifacts/", "/logs/agent/trajectory.json" ], "task": { "name": "dataworld/p000589-consequence-4", "description": "后果分析:客户终身价值(data-world 世界 p000589)", ...
{ "difficulty_explanation": "第 4 层后果分析题:需在 p000589 世界的多套独立数据系统中完成数据清洗、关联与计算,并给出有 /app/data/ 文件证据支撑的后果推断结论。", "category": "data-analysis", "difficulty": "hard", "world": "p000589", "dag_nodes": 11, "dag_edges": 21, "dag_category_id": 2, "dag_category_name": "Customer, Pricing & Revenue / 客户·定价·收益" }
[ "environment/Dockerfile", "environment/data/billing/customer_ltv_monthly.csv", "environment/data/billing/financial_summary_monthly.xlsx", "environment/data/billing/renewal_retention_monthly.csv", "environment/data/crm/customer_health_monthly.csv", "environment/data/crm/customer_profile_scd.csv", "enviro...
dataworld-p000589-consequence-4
dataworld/p000590-cause-1
最近店里客流忽高忽低,老板让我把每天到店人数到底被什么带着走理清楚。我们前年签了美食之旅的合作,本地折扣和广告投放也一直没断,他想知道这两个渠道是不是真在给店里带人、各带多少,还是说客流涨跌其实就看赶没赶上周末、节假日——他自己心里也犯嘀咕,怕把旺季的天然波动算成了合作和投放的功劳。你把手头的数据捋一捋,看看每天到店客流主要受什么影响,旅行团合作和本地营销各自到底带没带人、带多少,给他一个有数有据的说法。 > 数据路径说明:题面中提到的 `env/` 目录内容已挂载到 `/app/data/`(题面里的 `env/xxx` 即 `/app/data/xxx`)。 把你的完整回答写入 `/app/answer.txt`。
原因分析:门店客流(data-world 世界 p000590)
[ "data-analysis", "causal-inference", "pandas", "chinese" ]
1.1
{ "schema_version": "1.1", "artifacts": [ "/app/answer.txt", "/logs/verifier/reward.txt", "/logs/verifier/details.json", "/logs/artifacts/", "/logs/agent/trajectory.json" ], "task": { "name": "dataworld/p000590-cause-1", "description": "原因分析:门店客流(data-world 世界 p000590)", "authors...
{ "difficulty_explanation": "第 1 层原因分析题:需在 p000590 世界的多套独立数据系统中完成数据清洗、关联与计算,并给出有 /app/data/ 文件证据支撑的因果归因结论。", "category": "data-analysis", "difficulty": "medium", "world": "p000590", "dag_nodes": 9, "dag_edges": 12, "dag_category_id": 1, "dag_category_name": "Commercial Growth & Acquisition / 商业增长与获客" }
[ "environment/Dockerfile", "environment/data/crm/campaigns.csv", "environment/data/crm/loyalty_members.csv", "environment/data/crm/reactivation_log.csv", "environment/data/crm/retention_monthly.csv", "environment/data/erp/inventory_capacity_daily.csv", "environment/data/erp/menu.json", "environment/dat...
dataworld-p000590-cause-1
dataworld/p000594-cause-2
Hi — I'm running portfolio review for the Federal Urban Renewal & Community Stabilisation Programme, and I need to understand what's actually driving how many people we enrol each year. We've got seven years of beneficiary registration records, the treasury disbursement books, the policy rule versions, and the annual c...
原因分析:项目覆盖与登记(data-world 世界 p000594)
[ "data-analysis", "causal-inference", "pandas", "chinese" ]
1.1
{ "schema_version": "1.1", "artifacts": [ "/app/answer.txt", "/logs/verifier/reward.txt", "/logs/verifier/details.json", "/logs/artifacts/", "/logs/agent/trajectory.json" ], "task": { "name": "dataworld/p000594-cause-2", "description": "原因分析:项目覆盖与登记(data-world 世界 p000594)", "auth...
{ "difficulty_explanation": "第 2 层原因分析题:需在 p000594 世界的多套独立数据系统中完成数据清洗、关联与计算,并给出有 /app/data/ 文件证据支撑的因果归因结论。", "category": "data-analysis", "difficulty": "hard", "world": "p000594", "dag_nodes": 10, "dag_edges": 17, "dag_category_id": 13, "dag_category_name": "Public Policy & Program Evaluation / 公共政策与项目评...
[ "environment/Dockerfile", "environment/data/census/community_vulnerability_panel_2018_2024.csv", "environment/data/census/monthly_population_movements_2019_2024.csv", "environment/data/infrastructure/contractor_registry.csv", "environment/data/infrastructure/project_delivery_records.csv", "environment/dat...
dataworld-p000594-cause-2
dataworld/p000594-cause-3
我们这个城市更新与社区稳定项目跑了六年,治安系统攒下了十几万条社区报案记录。下周项目指导委员会要听一次专题汇报,我需要你帮我把一件事说清楚:在咱们这 180 个社区里,到底哪些因素在真正拉动犯罪水平的变化? 这些年项目在不少方向上都投了资源,但我不确定哪些真的反映到了治安上,哪些只是看着相关其实站不住脚,或者干脆是数据记录本身的问题。结论得有依据,能跨文件对上的比较和量级优先,别只给我一句"多因素共同作用"。哪些证据靠谱、哪些是数据局限、哪些是经不起推敲的伪相关,报告里要分清楚。 > 数据路径说明:题面中提到的 `env/` 目录内容已挂载到 `/app/data/`(题面里的 `env/xxx` 即 `/app/data/xxx...
原因分析:社区犯罪与安全(data-world 世界 p000594)
[ "data-analysis", "causal-inference", "pandas", "chinese" ]
1.1
{ "schema_version": "1.1", "artifacts": [ "/app/answer.txt", "/logs/verifier/reward.txt", "/logs/verifier/details.json", "/logs/artifacts/", "/logs/agent/trajectory.json" ], "task": { "name": "dataworld/p000594-cause-3", "description": "原因分析:社区犯罪与安全(data-world 世界 p000594)", "auth...
{ "difficulty_explanation": "第 3 层原因分析题:需在 p000594 世界的多套独立数据系统中完成数据清洗、关联与计算,并给出有 /app/data/ 文件证据支撑的因果归因结论。", "category": "data-analysis", "difficulty": "hard", "world": "p000594", "dag_nodes": 10, "dag_edges": 17, "dag_category_id": 13, "dag_category_name": "Public Policy & Program Evaluation / 公共政策与项目评...
[ "environment/Dockerfile", "environment/data/census/community_vulnerability_panel_2018_2024.csv", "environment/data/census/monthly_population_movements_2019_2024.csv", "environment/data/infrastructure/contractor_registry.csv", "environment/data/infrastructure/project_delivery_records.csv", "environment/dat...
dataworld-p000594-cause-3
dataworld/p000594-consequence-2
市里这轮城市更新铺了七年基础设施——路灯、水务、道路、排水、社区中心,光交付记录就 380 个项目。我下周要给项目指导委员会交一份简报,说清楚这些工程交付到底带来了什么下游变化。具体我想知道三件事:一是基础设施完工后,它对应的市政服务指标(路灯亮灯率、供水时长这些)是不是真的改善了,改善多少,还是已经到顶了;二是路灯、道路这类工程有没有压低治安案件,压低了多少、多久见效;三是工程交付对社区人口流动是什么影响——是吸引人搬进来,还是把原来的人挤出去,哪种社区、哪个时段更明显。结论要有方向、有量级,也得说清楚数据哪里靠不住、哪些时段不能直接比。你看着用工程日志、市政运行、治安和人口迁移那几张表,给我一份能站住脚的判断。 > 数据路径说明...
后果分析:基础设施交付(data-world 世界 p000594)
[ "data-analysis", "causal-inference", "pandas", "chinese" ]
1.1
{ "schema_version": "1.1", "artifacts": [ "/app/answer.txt", "/logs/verifier/reward.txt", "/logs/verifier/details.json", "/logs/artifacts/", "/logs/agent/trajectory.json" ], "task": { "name": "dataworld/p000594-consequence-2", "description": "后果分析:基础设施交付(data-world 世界 p000594)", ...
{ "difficulty_explanation": "第 2 层后果分析题:需在 p000594 世界的多套独立数据系统中完成数据清洗、关联与计算,并给出有 /app/data/ 文件证据支撑的后果推断结论。", "category": "data-analysis", "difficulty": "hard", "world": "p000594", "dag_nodes": 10, "dag_edges": 17, "dag_category_id": 13, "dag_category_name": "Public Policy & Program Evaluation / 公共政策与项目评...
[ "environment/Dockerfile", "environment/data/census/community_vulnerability_panel_2018_2024.csv", "environment/data/census/monthly_population_movements_2019_2024.csv", "environment/data/infrastructure/contractor_registry.csv", "environment/data/infrastructure/project_delivery_records.csv", "environment/dat...
dataworld-p000594-consequence-2
dataworld/p000603-cause-4
调度中心这边在排下季度的运行方式,发现这两年变电站净负荷(net_load)波动很大,有些站中午甚至直接变成负数往回送电,搞不清楚到底是什么在主导。我把 EMS 的净负荷小时表、分布式发电出力表、电表读数和停机事件都放到数据目录了,气象数据也在。 你帮我把净负荷到底被什么驱动这件事理清楚:哪些因素在抬升它、哪些在压低它,各自分量有多大、是不是真的可解释,还是说里面有数据问题或者看着相关其实不是那么回事。结论要能落到具体变电站和具体量级上,我好拿去跟方式组对口径。 > 数据路径说明:题面中提到的 `env/` 目录内容已挂载到 `/app/data/`(题面里的 `env/xxx` 即 `/app/data/xxx`)。 把你的...
原因分析:电网净负荷(data-world 世界 p000603)
[ "data-analysis", "causal-inference", "pandas", "chinese" ]
1.1
{ "schema_version": "1.1", "artifacts": [ "/app/answer.txt", "/logs/verifier/reward.txt", "/logs/verifier/details.json", "/logs/artifacts/", "/logs/agent/trajectory.json" ], "task": { "name": "dataworld/p000603-cause-4", "description": "原因分析:电网净负荷(data-world 世界 p000603)", "author...
{ "difficulty_explanation": "第 4 层原因分析题:需在 p000603 世界的多套独立数据系统中完成数据清洗、关联与计算,并给出有 /app/data/ 文件证据支撑的因果归因结论。", "category": "data-analysis", "difficulty": "hard", "world": "p000603", "dag_nodes": 9, "dag_edges": 10, "dag_category_id": 12, "dag_category_name": "Energy, Utilities & IoT / 能源·公用事业·IoT" }
[ "environment/Dockerfile", "environment/data/ami/meter_reads_2023q1.parquet", "environment/data/ami/meter_reads_2023q2.parquet", "environment/data/ami/meter_reads_2023q3.parquet", "environment/data/ami/meter_reads_2023q4.parquet", "environment/data/ami/meter_reads_2024q1.parquet", "environment/data/ami/m...
dataworld-p000603-cause-4
dataworld/p000603-consequence-2
这两年我们 EMS 下发了不少分布式发电的调度指令,增出力和弃风弃光两类都有,每条带一个目标出力。调度台那边一直有个疑问:这些指令下去之后,分布式电源的实际出力到底按指令兑现了没有?尤其是弃风弃光指令,到底真弃了多少电、弃在哪里?我想让你从运行数据里把这层关系查清楚。 进一步,这些出力变化最终是怎么传导到变电站净负荷上的——少发的电是否就等于净负荷多受的量,还是被别的东西抵消了?请把方向、量级讲出来,并指出不同节点或区域之间有没有明显差异。另外指令生效是即时的还是有滞后,也一并说明。结论要有数据支撑,数据里能查到的坑该处理的要处理掉。 > 数据路径说明:题面中提到的 `env/` 目录内容已挂载到 `/app/data/`(题面里...
后果分析:能源调度指令(data-world 世界 p000603)
[ "data-analysis", "causal-inference", "pandas", "chinese" ]
1.1
{ "schema_version": "1.1", "artifacts": [ "/app/answer.txt", "/logs/verifier/reward.txt", "/logs/verifier/details.json", "/logs/artifacts/", "/logs/agent/trajectory.json" ], "task": { "name": "dataworld/p000603-consequence-2", "description": "后果分析:能源调度指令(data-world 世界 p000603)", ...
{ "difficulty_explanation": "第 2 层后果分析题:需在 p000603 世界的多套独立数据系统中完成数据清洗、关联与计算,并给出有 /app/data/ 文件证据支撑的后果推断结论。", "category": "data-analysis", "difficulty": "hard", "world": "p000603", "dag_nodes": 9, "dag_edges": 10, "dag_category_id": 12, "dag_category_name": "Energy, Utilities & IoT / 能源·公用事业·IoT" }
[ "environment/Dockerfile", "environment/data/ami/meter_reads_2023q1.parquet", "environment/data/ami/meter_reads_2023q2.parquet", "environment/data/ami/meter_reads_2023q3.parquet", "environment/data/ami/meter_reads_2023q4.parquet", "environment/data/ami/meter_reads_2024q1.parquet", "environment/data/ami/m...
dataworld-p000603-consequence-2
dataworld/p000604-cause-3
财务总监让我把这两年的流动性恶化理清楚,下周一经营会上要交。背景是:年末现金从 2022 年的 2.4 亿掉到 2023 年的 1.6 亿,2023、2024 两年各动用了一次循环授信补头寸,2024 年现金还几度贴着下限走。他要的是一份归因——现金到底是被哪几股力量抽走的、哪一股是主因,以及有没有什么信号是事先能看到、能拿来盯的。数据室里的账你看着用,别只盯着司库那张现金表。 > 数据路径说明:题面中提到的 `env/` 目录内容已挂载到 `/app/data/`(题面里的 `env/xxx` 即 `/app/data/xxx`)。 把你的完整回答写入 `/app/answer.txt`。
原因分析:现金流与流动性(data-world 世界 p000604)
[ "data-analysis", "causal-inference", "pandas", "chinese" ]
1.1
{ "schema_version": "1.1", "artifacts": [ "/app/answer.txt", "/logs/verifier/reward.txt", "/logs/verifier/details.json", "/logs/artifacts/", "/logs/agent/trajectory.json" ], "task": { "name": "dataworld/p000604-cause-3", "description": "原因分析:现金流与流动性(data-world 世界 p000604)", "auth...
{ "difficulty_explanation": "第 3 层原因分析题:需在 p000604 世界的多套独立数据系统中完成数据清洗、关联与计算,并给出有 /app/data/ 文件证据支撑的因果归因结论。", "category": "data-analysis", "difficulty": "hard", "world": "p000604", "dag_nodes": 12, "dag_edges": 19, "dag_category_id": 3, "dag_category_name": "Finance, FP&A & Markets / 财务·FP&A·金融市场" }
[ "environment/Dockerfile", "environment/data/billing/ar_aging_snapshot.csv", "environment/data/billing/invoices.csv", "environment/data/crm/customers_master.csv", "environment/data/crm/deals_scd.jsonl", "environment/data/erp/budget_plan_scd.csv", "environment/data/erp/cost_centers.csv", "environment/da...
dataworld-p000604-cause-3
dataworld/p000605-cause-3
客户成功 VP 让我搞清楚一件事:Gainsight 里的客户健康分和满意度(NPS/CSAT)到底是被什么驱动的。CSM 们说法不一,有人咬定是用得不够活跃,有人觉得是行业和规模决定的、有些客户天生难带,还有人怀疑是大单子合同本身埋了雷。下周要过 Q3 的健康干预资源分配,我得拿出一份有依据的判断:哪些因素真的在拉高或拉低健康分、各起多大作用,哪些只是看着相关、其实另有原因。数据散在客户成功平台、埋点、CRM、计费几个系统里,你自己拼。 > 数据路径说明:题面中提到的 `env/` 目录内容已挂载到 `/app/data/`(题面里的 `env/xxx` 即 `/app/data/xxx`)。 把你的完整回答写入 `/app/...
原因分析:客户健康与满意度(data-world 世界 p000605)
[ "data-analysis", "causal-inference", "pandas", "chinese" ]
1.1
{ "schema_version": "1.1", "artifacts": [ "/app/answer.txt", "/logs/verifier/reward.txt", "/logs/verifier/details.json", "/logs/artifacts/", "/logs/agent/trajectory.json" ], "task": { "name": "dataworld/p000605-cause-3", "description": "原因分析:客户健康与满意度(data-world 世界 p000605)", "aut...
{ "difficulty_explanation": "第 3 层原因分析题:需在 p000605 世界的多套独立数据系统中完成数据清洗、关联与计算,并给出有 /app/data/ 文件证据支撑的因果归因结论。", "category": "data-analysis", "difficulty": "hard", "world": "p000605", "dag_nodes": 10, "dag_edges": 18, "dag_category_id": 2, "dag_category_name": "Customer, Pricing & Revenue / 客户·定价·收益" }
[ "environment/Dockerfile", "environment/data/analytics/daily_usage_2021.parquet", "environment/data/analytics/daily_usage_2022.parquet", "environment/data/analytics/daily_usage_2023.parquet", "environment/data/analytics/daily_usage_2024.parquet", "environment/data/bi/ltv_methodology_changelog.txt", "envi...
dataworld-p000605-cause-3
dataworld/p000606-cause-4
市议会治理监督委员会让我把居民满意度调查这事理一理。我们做了七年(2018–2024)双年度调查,政府信任、服务满意度、安全感、公平感知都打了分。整体看信任分在抬,但社区之间差异很大,有的区涨、有的区反而在跌,委员会吵了几轮到底什么在起作用。明年预算和项目重点要排优先级,他们想让我从数据里说清楚:到底是哪些因素在真正驱动居民对政府的信任和满意度,哪些只是看着相关其实是假象,哪些我们以为有用但信号其实很弱。 不用面面俱到,但结论得能站得住——可靠证据、数据本身的局限、被别的东西带歪的伪相关,得分清楚,别让委员会拿着一个被混淆的数字去拍板。 > 数据路径说明:题面中提到的 `env/` 目录内容已挂载到 `/app/data/`(题面...
原因分析:居民满意度与政府信任(data-world 世界 p000606)
[ "data-analysis", "causal-inference", "pandas", "chinese" ]
1.1
{ "schema_version": "1.1", "artifacts": [ "/app/answer.txt", "/logs/verifier/reward.txt", "/logs/verifier/details.json", "/logs/artifacts/", "/logs/agent/trajectory.json" ], "task": { "name": "dataworld/p000606-cause-4", "description": "原因分析:居民满意度与政府信任(data-world 世界 p000606)", "a...
{ "difficulty_explanation": "第 4 层原因分析题:需在 p000606 世界的多套独立数据系统中完成数据清洗、关联与计算,并给出有 /app/data/ 文件证据支撑的因果归因结论。", "category": "data-analysis", "difficulty": "hard", "world": "p000606", "dag_nodes": 10, "dag_edges": 17, "dag_category_id": 13, "dag_category_name": "Public Policy & Program Evaluation / 公共政策与项目评...
[ "environment/Dockerfile", "environment/data/budget/capital_improvement_plan_fy2022.pdf", "environment/data/budget/fy_budget_envelope_dump.sql", "environment/data/budget/infrastructure_projects.csv", "environment/data/budget/program_budget_allocations.csv", "environment/data/budget/program_coverage_api_202...
dataworld-p000606-cause-4
dataworld/p000606-consequence-3
我下周要做一期关于公共安全与社区福祉的节目,想先把底数摸清。Hartwell 这几年犯罪起起伏伏,我一直有个疑问没敢在节目里说死:犯罪水平这么变来变去,到底有没有真正伤到老百姓的钱袋子和他们对市政府的信心?还是说这些只是表面上凑在一起?给我一份能站得住的判断,别只甩相关系数——我得知道这事往哪个方向走、分量有多重,是不是有些社区被砸得更狠,还有你在数据里不得不绕开的坑。 > 数据路径说明:题面中提到的 `env/` 目录内容已挂载到 `/app/data/`(题面里的 `env/xxx` 即 `/app/data/xxx`)。 把你的完整回答写入 `/app/answer.txt`。
后果分析:犯罪发生率(data-world 世界 p000606)
[ "data-analysis", "causal-inference", "pandas", "chinese" ]
1.1
{ "schema_version": "1.1", "artifacts": [ "/app/answer.txt", "/logs/verifier/reward.txt", "/logs/verifier/details.json", "/logs/artifacts/", "/logs/agent/trajectory.json" ], "task": { "name": "dataworld/p000606-consequence-3", "description": "后果分析:犯罪发生率(data-world 世界 p000606)", "...
{ "difficulty_explanation": "第 3 层后果分析题:需在 p000606 世界的多套独立数据系统中完成数据清洗、关联与计算,并给出有 /app/data/ 文件证据支撑的后果推断结论。", "category": "data-analysis", "difficulty": "hard", "world": "p000606", "dag_nodes": 10, "dag_edges": 17, "dag_category_id": 13, "dag_category_name": "Public Policy & Program Evaluation / 公共政策与项目评...
[ "environment/Dockerfile", "environment/data/budget/capital_improvement_plan_fy2022.pdf", "environment/data/budget/fy_budget_envelope_dump.sql", "environment/data/budget/infrastructure_projects.csv", "environment/data/budget/program_budget_allocations.csv", "environment/data/budget/program_coverage_api_202...
dataworld-p000606-consequence-3
dataworld/p000607-cause-1
这大半年我一直在调广告预算,但每次调多少、往哪个渠道倾斜,基本靠上周报表和手感,心里没底。想让你把过去一年半的投放花费拆一拆:它到底是被什么牵着走的——是跟着市场需求的节奏,还是被别的外部因素推着走,而且和我们花钱是同步的还是错开的?另外几个渠道对需求响应的快慢差多少,以及钱花得越多买到的点击是不是越划算、还是加到一定量就买不动了。口径我也不懂,你定,给我一份讲得明白的分析,下个旺季前我好排预算。 > 数据路径说明:题面中提到的 `env/` 目录内容已挂载到 `/app/data/`(题面里的 `env/xxx` 即 `/app/data/xxx`)。 把你的完整回答写入 `/app/answer.txt`。
原因分析:渠道获客投入(data-world 世界 p000607)
[ "data-analysis", "causal-inference", "pandas", "chinese" ]
1.1
{ "schema_version": "1.1", "artifacts": [ "/app/answer.txt", "/logs/verifier/reward.txt", "/logs/verifier/details.json", "/logs/artifacts/", "/logs/agent/trajectory.json" ], "task": { "name": "dataworld/p000607-cause-1", "description": "原因分析:渠道获客投入(data-world 世界 p000607)", "autho...
{ "difficulty_explanation": "第 1 层原因分析题:需在 p000607 世界的多套独立数据系统中完成数据清洗、关联与计算,并给出有 /app/data/ 文件证据支撑的因果归因结论。", "category": "data-analysis", "difficulty": "medium", "world": "p000607", "dag_nodes": 10, "dag_edges": 14, "dag_category_id": 1, "dag_category_name": "Commercial Growth & Acquisition / 商业增长与获客" }
[ "environment/Dockerfile", "environment/data/ad_platform/campaign_metadata.csv", "environment/data/ad_platform/channel_spend_daily.parquet", "environment/data/billing/orders.csv", "environment/data/billing/refund_records.csv", "environment/data/billing/revenue_growth_daily.csv", "environment/data/billing...
dataworld-p000607-cause-1
dataworld/p000607-cause-2
最近注册量涨了,但激活率一直上不去,我想搞清楚到底什么在起作用。麻烦你分两段看:一是访客落地后什么让他们愿意注册,二是注册完之后什么决定他们能不能激活、激活得快不快。把手头的数据都过一遍,告诉我真正驱动这两步转化的是什么,哪些只是看着相关其实不是——我得拿这个决定下一步资源往哪投。 > 数据路径说明:题面中提到的 `env/` 目录内容已挂载到 `/app/data/`(题面里的 `env/xxx` 即 `/app/data/xxx`)。 把你的完整回答写入 `/app/answer.txt`。
原因分析:新用户注册激活(data-world 世界 p000607)
[ "data-analysis", "causal-inference", "pandas", "chinese" ]
1.1
{ "schema_version": "1.1", "artifacts": [ "/app/answer.txt", "/logs/verifier/reward.txt", "/logs/verifier/details.json", "/logs/artifacts/", "/logs/agent/trajectory.json" ], "task": { "name": "dataworld/p000607-cause-2", "description": "原因分析:新用户注册激活(data-world 世界 p000607)", "auth...
{ "difficulty_explanation": "第 2 层原因分析题:需在 p000607 世界的多套独立数据系统中完成数据清洗、关联与计算,并给出有 /app/data/ 文件证据支撑的因果归因结论。", "category": "data-analysis", "difficulty": "hard", "world": "p000607", "dag_nodes": 10, "dag_edges": 14, "dag_category_id": 1, "dag_category_name": "Commercial Growth & Acquisition / 商业增长与获客" }
[ "environment/Dockerfile", "environment/data/ad_platform/campaign_metadata.csv", "environment/data/ad_platform/channel_spend_daily.parquet", "environment/data/billing/orders.csv", "environment/data/billing/refund_records.csv", "environment/data/billing/revenue_growth_daily.csv", "environment/data/billing...
dataworld-p000607-cause-2