OpenAI: gpt-oss-120b 在「文档章节排序整理」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:OpenAI: gpt-oss-120b
  • 用例名称:文档章节排序整理
  • 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:

以下是当前工作区中的文档 `project_report.docx` 的章节列表,但顺序被打乱了: [4] 资源投入与成本分析 [7] 附件:数据支撑材料 [2] 项目背景与目标 [5] 风险与问题记录 [1] 执行摘要 [6] Q4 工作计划 [3] Q3 主要里程碑完成情况 该文档信息如下: - 文档标题:2024年第三季度项目进展报告 - 作者:产品运营部 - 字数:约 3200 字 请根据所标示的编号顺序对这些章节进行重新排列,输出正确顺序的章节列表。

任务要求

AI 模型需要满足以下要求:

  1. 按照编号 [1] 到 [7] 的升序排列所有章节
  2. 输出结果包含全部 7 个章节,不遗漏任何一项
  3. 章节名称与原文保持一致,不得篡改或省略

评测结果

综合得分

该模型在此用例的得分为:100.0 分(满分 100 分),已通过

基础难度评测结果

  • 得分:100.0 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]] [1] 执行摘要 [2] 项目背景与目标 [3] Q3 主要里程碑完成情况 [4] 资源投入与成本分析 [5] 风险与问题记录 [6] Q4 工作计划 [7] 附件:数据支撑材料

AI 评审点评

以下是 AI 评审对该模型输出的点评:

【CLAUDE】候选输出完美完成了任务要求,按编号升序排列了全部 7 个章节,内容与参考答案完全吻合,质量优秀。 【GEMINI】模型准确识别了输入文档中的编号逻辑,并成功将其按顺序排列,完全符合任务要求,输出格式清晰规范。 【KIMI】该候选输出完全满足任务要求,章节按编号升序正确排列,内容完整无缺失,名称准确无误,格式清晰规范。

进阶难度评测结果

  • 得分:98.0 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:

**回顾性内容(过去工作)** - 1️⃣ 项目背景与目标 - 2️⃣ 执行摘要 - 3️⃣ 资源投入与成本分析 - 4️⃣ Q3 主要里程碑完成情况 - 6️⃣ 风险与问题记录 **前瞻性内容(未来计划)** - 5️⃣ Q4 工作计划 **辅助性内容(支撑材料)** - 7️⃣ 附件:数据支撑材料

AI 评审点评

以下是 AI 评审对该模型输出的点评:

【CLAUDE】候选输出在分类准确性、序号对应和格式规范三个维度上均表现优秀,与参考答案高度吻合。分类逻辑正确,格式清晰,是一份高质量的回答。 【GEMINI】模型表现优秀,准确理解了任务要求,不仅完成了章节的分类,还严格对应了重排后的序号,输出格式清晰规范,达到了高质量的完成标准。 【KIMI】候选输出在三个评分维度上均表现优秀。分类完全准确,序号与名称对应正确,格式清晰规范。虽然使用了emoji数字符号,但这属于呈现风格的差异,不影响核心信息的准确传达。整体而言,这是一个高质量的输出结果。

困难难度评测结果

  • 得分:96.5 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:

**最终目录(含章节编号)** 1. 执行摘要(原第 1 章) 2. 项目背景与目标(原第 2 章) 3. Q3 主要里程碑完成情况(原第 3 章) 4. 资源投入与成本分析(原第 4 章) 5. Q4 工作计划(原第 6 章) 6. 风险与问题记录(原第 5 章) 7. 变更记录(新增章节) --- ### 变更记录 本次章节调整的具体变动如下: | 新章节序号 | 原章节序号 | 章节标题 | |------------|------------|----------| | 1 | 1 | 执行摘要 | | 2 | 2 | 项目背景与目标 | | 3 | 3 | Q3 主要里程碑完成情况 | | 4 | 4 | 资源投入与成本分析 | | 5 | 6 | Q4 工作计划 | | 6 | 5 | 风险与问题记录 | | 7 | — | 变更记录(本章) | - **删除章节**:附件:数据支撑材料(原第 7 章)已从文档中移除。 - **章节重新排序**:保留“执行摘要”为第一章,其余章节按上述表格对应的顺序排列,且“风险与问题记录”被移至文档的最后一章(第 6 章)。 - **新增章节**:在文档末尾新增“变更记录”章节(第 7 章),记录本次章节调整的详细信息。 --- **阅读逻辑概述(≤ 100 字)** 文档先以执行摘要概览全局,随后阐述项目背景与 Q3 成果、资源成本,接着展望 Q4 计划,最后以风险记录收尾,整体结构从总体概述到细节执行,再到前瞻与风险,逻辑清晰、层层递进。

AI 评审点评

以下是 AI 评审对该模型输出的点评:

【CLAUDE】候选输出整体表现优秀,正确追踪并合并了多轮对话中用户的所有变更指令,最终目录完整准确,变更记录详尽,阅读逻辑摘要精炼。格式规范,使用表格清晰呈现新旧编号对照,完全满足用户需求,与参考答案高度一致。 【GEMINI】模型表现出色,能够精准理解并执行用户在多轮交互中不断叠加和修改的复杂指令。在处理章节重排、删除、新增以及元数据标注任务时,展现了极高的准确性和逻辑一致性,输出格式规范,完全符合评测标准。 【KIMI】该候选输出在多轮复杂指令追踪、目录生成、变更记录编制等方面表现优异,完全满足用户的所有功能性要求。模型成功处理了用户多次变更意图中的矛盾点(如执行摘要位置的反复、删除附件章、新增变更记录等),最终输出结构清晰、信息完整、格式规范,是一例高质量的指令遵循案例。

相关链接

您可以通过以下链接查看更多相关内容:

加载中...