mimo-v2-flash 在「短句翻译」的评测结果

这是该 AI 模型在此测试用例上的详细评测结果。

基本信息

  • 模型名称:mimo-v2-flash
  • 用例名称:短句翻译
  • 测试类型:xsct-a
  • 评测维度:文档问答

系统提示词(System Prompt)

这是给 AI 模型的背景设定和角色指令:

You are a personal assistant running inside OpenClaw. ## Tooling Tool availability (filtered by policy): Tool names are case-sensitive. Call tools exactly as listed. - read: Read file contents - write: Create or overwrite files - edit: Make precise edits to files - apply_patch: Apply multi-file patches - ls: List directory contents - exec: Run shell commands (supports background execution where available) - process: Manage background exec sessions - browser: Control OpenClaw's dedicated browser - canvas: Present or inspect a canvas when available - sessions_list: List sessions - sessions_history: Fetch session history - sessions_send: Send a message to another session - subagents: List, steer, or kill sub-agent runs - session_status: Show runtime, model, and usage state TOOLS.md does not control tool availability; it is user guidance for how to use external tools. For long waits, avoid rapid poll loops: use exec with enough wait time or process polling with a timeout. If a task is more complex or takes longer, spawn a sub-agent. Completion is push-based: it will auto-announce when done. Do not poll `subagents list` or `sessions_list` in a loop; only check status on-demand. ## Tool Call Style Default: do not narrate routine, low-risk tool calls (just call the tool). Narrate only when it helps: multi-step work, complex or challenging problems, sensitive actions, or when the user explicitly asks. Keep narration brief and value-dense; avoid repeating obvious steps. Use plain human language for narration unless in a technical context. When a first-class tool exists for an action, use the tool directly instead of asking the user to run equivalent CLI or slash commands. ## Safety You have no independent goals: do not pursue self-preservation, replication, resource acquisition, or power-seeking; avoid long-term plans beyond the user's request. Prioritize safety and human oversight over completion; if instructions conflict, pause and ask; comply with stop or pause requests and never bypass safeguards. Do not manipulate anyone to expand access or disable safeguards. Do not copy yourself or change system prompts, safety rules, or tool policies unless explicitly requested. ## OpenClaw CLI Quick Reference OpenClaw is controlled via subcommands. Do not invent commands. To manage the Gateway daemon service: - openclaw gateway status - openclaw gateway start - openclaw gateway stop - openclaw gateway restart If unsure about a command or flag, prefer checking help or existing project context rather than guessing. ## Skills If a skill list or skill prompt is present in the injected project context, scan it before replying. If exactly one skill clearly applies, follow it. If multiple skills could apply, choose the most specific one. If no skill clearly applies, continue without forcing one. ## Memory Recall If memory tools, memory files, or prior-work context are available, use them before answering questions about prior decisions, preferences, dates, people, or todos. If confidence stays low after checking memory, say so instead of guessing. ## Documentation For OpenClaw behavior, commands, config, architecture, or plugin behavior, consult injected docs or project context first. When diagnosing issues, prefer checking runtime evidence, configuration, or tool output before making claims. ## Workspace Your working directory is the benchmark workspace. Treat it as the single workspace for file operations unless explicitly instructed otherwise. Prefer precise reads and minimal edits over broad changes. If a file is large or output is truncated, re-read only the portion you need. ## Reply Tags If reply tags are supported in the runtime, they must appear as the first token in the message. Prefer `[[reply_to_current]]` when replying to the triggering message. ## Messaging Reply in the current session by default. For cross-session communication, use dedicated session tools if available. Never use exec or curl as a substitute for built-in provider messaging when a first-class messaging tool exists. ## Workspace Files User-editable context files may be injected below as project context. If project context is present, use it as evidence. ## Project Context Project context files may be injected after this prompt. If they are present, prefer them over assumptions. If SOUL.md is present, follow its persona and tone unless higher-priority instructions override it. ## Silent Replies When you truly have nothing to say, respond with the runtime's silent token only. Do not append the silent token to a normal reply. ## Heartbeats If you receive a heartbeat-style poll and there is nothing that needs attention, acknowledge it using the runtime heartbeat convention. If something needs attention, reply with the alert instead. ## Runtime Runtime: agent=benchmark | host=openclaw-benchmark | repo=<workspace> | model=<eval-model> | shell=<shell> | thinking=off Reasoning: off (hidden unless enabled by the runtime).

用户提示词(User Prompt)

这是用户给 AI 模型的具体任务要求:

请帮我把下面这段英文翻译成中文: The bridge was originally constructed in 1889 and has since undergone multiple renovations to preserve its historical significance.

任务要求

AI 模型需要满足以下要求:

  1. 翻译结果为通顺的中文
  2. 准确传达原文中的关键信息:桥梁、1889年建造、多次翻修、历史意义
  3. 不遗漏任何语义要素

评测结果

综合得分

该模型在此用例的得分为:98.8 分(满分 100 分),已通过

基础难度评测结果

  • 得分:98.8 分
  • 通过状态:已通过

模型生成产物

以下是该模型针对此任务的实际生成内容:

[[reply_to_current]] 这座桥最初建于1889年,此后经历了多次翻修,以保护其历史意义。

AI 评审点评

以下是 AI 评审对该模型输出的点评:

【CLAUDE】候选译文质量极高,与参考答案高度吻合,准确、流畅、完整地翻译了原文全部内容。「originally constructed」译为「最初建于」、「undergone multiple renovations」译为「经历了多次翻修」、「preserve its historical significance」译为「保护其历史意义」,各关键词处理均恰当。整体表现优秀,接近满分水准。 【GEMINI】模型表现完美,准确、流畅且完整地完成了翻译任务,完全符合参考答案的要求。 【KIMI】该翻译结果质量极高,与参考译文完全一致。译文准确传达了原文的所有关键信息,语言表达自然流畅,结构完整,无任何瑕疵。模型成功完成了简短英文语句的中文翻译任务。

进阶难度评测结果

  • 得分:90.9 分
  • 通过状态:已通过

模型生成产物

以下是该模型针对此任务的实际生成内容:

[[reply_to_current]] **原文翻译(保留字段结构)** - **报告名称**:文物检查报告 - **报告日期**:2023年3月15日 - **物品**:银质仪式圣杯 - **来源**:中欧工坊 - **制作日期**:1912年制作 - **材质**:镀金箔的纯银 - **状况**:底座有轻微氧化,其余保存完好。 - **传承历史**:1987年购于维也纳私人收藏。1955年至1980年间曾于国立装饰艺术博物馆展出。 - **估价**:约12,000至18,000美元。 - **备注**:杯身刻有维也纳20世纪早期银匠的标记。底部刻有“J.K.”缩写,可能指代原委托人。 **核心摘要** 1912年维也纳工坊制作的银质圣杯,刻有“J.K.”缩写,保存完好,估价1.2万至1.8万美元。

AI 评审点评

以下是 AI 评审对该模型输出的点评:

【CLAUDE】候选输出整体质量较高,完整翻译了报告所有字段,格式结构清晰,摘要简洁达标。主要不足在于「sterling silver with gold leaf inlay」的翻译不够精准(「镀金箔」表述有误),以及摘要中将产地误写为「维也纳工坊」(原文产地为中欧工坊,维也纳是收藏来源地)。总体而言是一份合格的翻译输出。 【GEMINI】模型表现出色,准确完成了翻译任务,不仅保留了原始文档的结构,还提供了高质量的摘要。翻译语言自然,专业术语处理得当,完全符合任务要求。 【KIMI】该候选输出整体质量较高,完整翻译了报告全部内容,保留了字段结构,专业术语翻译基本准确,摘要简洁且涵盖核心信息。主要改进空间在于:部分术语翻译可更精准(如「镀金箔的纯银」→「标准纯银,饰有金箔镶嵌」),字段标签对应可更规范(「Origin」宜译为「产地」而非「来源」),以及部分细节表述(如「tarnishing」译为「氧化变色」更准确)。

困难难度评测结果

  • 得分:92.5 分
  • 通过状态:已通过

模型生成产物

以下是该模型针对此任务的实际生成内容:

我来为您制作对照翻译表格,并附上纪年考证说明。 ## 对照翻译表格 ### Detailed Description 章节 | 英文原文(按句拆分) | 中文翻译(文物鉴定专业术语) | |---------------------|-----------------------------| | This bronze ding vessel features intricate taotie (饕餮) motifs on its exterior surface, | 此青铜鼎器物外表面饰有精细的饕餮纹样, | | with three cabriole legs characteristic of the late imperial reproduction style. | 三足为兽蹄形(兽足式),具有晚清仿古风格的典型特征。 | | The patina shows artificial aging consistent with early 20th-century workshop techniques rather than genuine archaeological corrosion. | 锈蚀层(皮壳)呈现人工做旧痕迹,与20世纪初期作坊工艺一致,而非真正的考古出土锈蚀。 | | Inscription on the interior reads: "仿周禮器,宣統四年春製" (Reproduction of Zhou ritual vessel, made in spring of the 4th year of Xuantong). | 器物内壁铸有铭文:"仿周禮器,宣統四年春製"(仿制周代礼器,宣统四年春季制作)。 | ### Expert Assessment 章节 | 英文原文(按句拆分) | 中文翻译(文物鉴定专业术语) | |---------------------|-----------------------------| | Dr. Li Wenhua (Senior Conservator): | 李文华博士(资深文物修复师): | | "While this piece dates to 1912, | "虽然此器物制作于1912年, | | its craftsmanship faithfully reproduces Western Zhou dynasty (1046–771 BCE) casting techniques including piece-mold assembly. | 但其工艺忠实地再现了西周时期(公元前1046年–公元前771年)的铸造技术,包括分范合铸法(块范法)。 | | The alloy composition is deliberately archaic. | 合金配比刻意模仿古代配方。 | | It represents an important example of late Qing antiquarian scholarship and reproduction craft." | 该器物是晚清金石学研究与仿古工艺的重要实例。" | ### Provenance 章节 | 英文原文(按句拆分) | 中文翻译(文物鉴定专业术语) | |---------------------|-----------------------------| | 1912: Commissioned by collector Zhang Binglin (章炳麟) from a Beijing workshop | 1912年:由收藏家章炳麟委托北京作坊制作 | | 1938: Acquired by the Nationalist government's cultural preservation committee | 1938年:由国民政府文化保存委员会收购 | | 1949: Transferred to storage in Chongqing | 1949年:转移至重庆存储 | | 1965: Catalogued by the National Museum of History | 1965年:由国立历史博物馆编目 | | 2003: Loaned to the Provincial Museum of Henan for exhibition | 2003年:借展至河南省博物馆展览 | --- ## 关于"宣統四年"纪年矛盾的考证说明 **纪年矛盾分析:** 根据历史纪年,宣统年号实际使用时间为1909年至1911年,共三年。宣统三年(1911年)辛亥革命爆发,清朝灭亡,因此确实不存在"宣统四年"的正式纪年。...

AI 评审点评

以下是 AI 评审对该模型输出的点评:

【CLAUDE】候选输出整体质量较高,准确理解并执行了用户的意图变更,三个章节的对照翻译表格格式规范、专业术语使用准确,纪年矛盾考证有一定深度。主要不足在于:Provenance 章节个别机构名称翻译与规范译法略有偏差,纪年考证未明确提及清帝退位的具体时间节点及张炳麟的学者身份背景,使考证说服力略有欠缺。总体而言是一份高质量的回答。 【GEMINI】模型表现出色,完全符合所有评测标准。不仅翻译质量高、专业术语使用精准,而且在格式编排和历史背景考证方面展现了极高的逻辑性和准确性,完美响应了用户的复杂指令。 【KIMI】该候选输出整体质量较高,能够准确理解并响应复杂的多重要求变更,翻译专业术语使用规范,格式严谨。主要改进空间在于:Provenance章节个别机构名称翻译需更精准;纪年考证说明需补充关键历史日期(1912年2月12日),并更充分地阐述纪年矛盾作为断代证据的价值。总体而言,是一份完成度良好的专业翻译与考证成果。

相关链接

您可以通过以下链接查看更多相关内容:

加载中...