+0.16 Can You Instruct a Robot to Make a PBJ Sandwich? (pbj.deliberateinc.com S:+0.09 )
36 points by mooreds 5 days ago | 40 comments on HN | Mild positive Moderate agreement (3 models) Product · v3.7 · 2026-03-15 23:39:11 0
Summary Digital Access & Intellectual Freedom Advocates
The Ultimate PBJ Test is a free, open-access interactive challenge that teaches process thinking and systematic reasoning without educational barriers or signup requirements. The site advocates for clarity of thought, complete information access, and skill development while inadvertently collecting user behavioral data via Google Analytics without visible privacy disclosure, creating a tension between its commitment to openness and its undisclosed tracking practices.
Rights Tensions 1 pair
Art 12 ↔ Art 19 — Right to privacy (Article 12) conflicts with claimed right to seek and receive information (Article 19) when behavioral data collection via Google Analytics occurs without visible user consent or privacy disclosure mechanism, creating asymmetric information access between operators and participants.
Article Heatmap
Preamble: ND — Preamble Preamble: No Data — Preamble P Article 1: ND — Freedom, Equality, Brotherhood Article 1: No Data — Freedom, Equality, Brotherhood 1 Article 2: +0.33 — Non-Discrimination 2 Article 3: ND — Life, Liberty, Security Article 3: No Data — Life, Liberty, Security 3 Article 4: ND — No Slavery Article 4: No Data — No Slavery 4 Article 5: ND — No Torture Article 5: No Data — No Torture 5 Article 6: ND — Legal Personhood Article 6: No Data — Legal Personhood 6 Article 7: ND — Equality Before Law Article 7: No Data — Equality Before Law 7 Article 8: ND — Right to Remedy Article 8: No Data — Right to Remedy 8 Article 9: ND — No Arbitrary Detention Article 9: No Data — No Arbitrary Detention 9 Article 10: ND — Fair Hearing Article 10: No Data — Fair Hearing 10 Article 11: ND — Presumption of Innocence Article 11: No Data — Presumption of Innocence 11 Article 12: -0.45 — Privacy 12 Article 13: ND — Freedom of Movement Article 13: No Data — Freedom of Movement 13 Article 14: ND — Asylum Article 14: No Data — Asylum 14 Article 15: ND — Nationality Article 15: No Data — Nationality 15 Article 16: ND — Marriage & Family Article 16: No Data — Marriage & Family 16 Article 17: ND — Property Article 17: No Data — Property 17 Article 18: +0.28 — Freedom of Thought 18 Article 19: +0.40 — Freedom of Expression 19 Article 20: +0.13 — Assembly & Association 20 Article 21: ND — Political Participation Article 21: No Data — Political Participation 21 Article 22: ND — Social Security Article 22: No Data — Social Security 22 Article 23: ND — Work & Equal Pay Article 23: No Data — Work & Equal Pay 23 Article 24: ND — Rest & Leisure Article 24: No Data — Rest & Leisure 24 Article 25: +0.28 — Standard of Living 25 Article 26: +0.50 — Education 26 Article 27: +0.30 — Cultural Participation 27 Article 28: ND — Social & International Order Article 28: No Data — Social & International Order 28 Article 29: ND — Duties to Community Article 29: No Data — Duties to Community 29 Article 30: ND — No Destruction of Rights Article 30: No Data — No Destruction of Rights 30
Negative Neutral Positive No Data
Aggregates
E
+0.16
S
+0.09
Weighted Mean +0.21 Unweighted Mean +0.22
Max +0.50 Article 26 Min -0.45 Article 12
Signal 8 No Data 23
Volatility 0.27 (High)
Negative 1 Channels E: 0.6 S: 0.4
SETL ℹ +0.10 Editorial-dominant
FW Ratio ℹ 64% 23 facts · 13 inferences
Agreement Moderate 3 models · spread ±0.106
Evidence 10% coverage ℹ
4M 4L 23 ND
Theme Radar
Foundation Security Legal Privacy & Movement Personal Expression Economic & Social Cultural Order & Duties Foundation: 0.33 (1 articles) Security: 0.00 (0 articles) Legal: 0.00 (0 articles) Privacy & Movement: -0.45 (1 articles) Personal: 0.28 (1 articles) Expression: 0.26 (2 articles) Economic & Social: 0.28 (1 articles) Cultural: 0.40 (2 articles) Order & Duties: 0.00 (0 articles)
HN Discussion 20 top-level · 11 replies
ksaj 2026-03-13 03:31 UTC link
I saw a YouTube Short of a teacher demonstrating this to her young students. Of course the kids are laughing lots at the results of her literally enacting their instructions and exaggerating the missing necessary info. But I bet they came out with a far more technical thought process.

This should be part of the curriculum.

parpfish 2026-03-13 03:49 UTC link
i once had this "make a PB&J" as part of a written take-home interview.

i knew the schtick -- no matter how precise and complete you are, there is always the possibility for another little gotcha. and that makes it absolute rubbish for a take home because... how much detail do i need to go into to satisfy the manager reviewing this? i think i wrote a couple paragraphs and ended with a little rant about how i know how this problem works and it'd work better in person. i don't know how much they expected somebody to write.

Benjamin_Dobell 2026-03-13 03:53 UTC link
Although this is a facetious take, instructing a robot to follow recipes is a fantastic introduction to coding. I added a visual scripting layer to Overcooked so kids can program robots to make all sorts of dishes (Sushi, Pasta, Cakes etc.)

https://youtu.be/ITWSL5lTLig

This is part of a club to teach kids coding, creativity and digital literacy.

jgable 2026-03-13 03:53 UTC link
It’s funny, when I’ve seen this demonstrated, it’s basically literally impossible to get the right result because the test maker doesn’t define an instruction set that you can rely on. They will deliberately screw up whatever instructions you give them no matter how detailed. A computer has a defined ISA that is specified in terms of behavior. A compiler transforms a language with higher level abstractions into this low-level language. I’ve never seen this “test” done with any similar affordance, which doesn’t really teach anything.
void-star 2026-03-13 04:00 UTC link
It’s almost like we need some deterministic set of instructions that can be fed to a machine and followed reliably? Like… I don’t know… a “programming language”?
squeaky-clean 2026-03-13 04:14 UTC link
When I was about 7 or 8 years old, my elementary school music teacher did this same exercise with us, except the goal was to draw a musical staff and the first 3 notes of Jingle Bells (or something along those lines). I can still remember how much fun I thought it was.
LeoPanthera 2026-03-13 04:24 UTC link
Demonstrations like this are a regular feature of the Japanese educational TV show "Texico", which teaches logical thinking with the specific goal of preparing young children for programming.

I highly recommend it. It's extremely well made, and quite entertaining even for adults.

It's available in English, 10 minutes per episode, no subscription required:

https://www3.nhk.or.jp/nhkworld/en/shows/texico/

fghorow 2026-03-13 04:29 UTC link
As always, there's an XKCD [1] for this!

[1] https://xkcd.com/149/

notsylver 2026-03-13 04:43 UTC link
This feels like a buzzfeed quizz for developers. If you think about each step long enough you can't really get a wrong answer
aryehof 2026-03-13 04:48 UTC link
There is an alternative to describing the (subjective) “process”. That is to describe a model of the sandwich - the parts and how they can collaborate. The issue is that how to do that is forgotten and unfashionable.
jbritton 2026-03-13 04:54 UTC link
It’s kind of interesting relating this to LLMs. A chef in a kitchen you can just say you want PB&J. With a robot, does it know where things are, once it knows that, does it know how to retrieve them, open and close them. It’s always a mystery what you get back from an LLM.
gormen 2026-03-13 05:00 UTC link
Of course, we need to give the robot a cognitive architecture so that it understands the task, the context, and corrects its actions, and then it will autonomously make such sandwiches every morning for breakfast.
dang 2026-03-13 05:01 UTC link
My "related" past threads fu is failing me just now but I know there have been threads with this theme in the past, including the video with the dad carrying out his kids' literal instructions in a cute but also borderline uncomfortable way.
PlunderBunny 2026-03-13 05:43 UTC link
In the early 1980s I read an Usbourne (sp?) introduction to programming book for kids that had a picture of a robot walking through a brick wall while following its programming to ‘take a letter to the letterbox’.

At this rate, it looks like we’ll solve that problem by not having letters/letterboxes.

rkagerer 2026-03-13 05:59 UTC link
This feel diluted compared to what it could have been. Would be better if you had a bunch of instructions and could drag them into sequence at each screen.
khafra 2026-03-13 09:34 UTC link
I did this exercise in school, over 30 years ago. Of course, with today's multimodal models, it's more like "hey, robot, make me a PBJ sandwich."
lemonad 2026-03-13 10:51 UTC link
I've spent some time thinking about this earlier as this indeed is one way a teacher would introduce a young child to programming (but by using actual bread, pb and j). An important underlying question is why kids would learn programming in the first place if they're not going to be programmers... one answer, which applies to math as well, is that it is learning another way to think. The whole point is that it is difficult to specify exact behavior, especially when you can't lean on someone's already established understanding of the world.

Another related idea (if I don't misremember) is brought forth in the book "Program or be Programmed": that it's not the programming itself but learning that things powered by software are intentionally (by meticulous instruction, like above) made to work like they do rather than just happen to work a specific way. Which hopefully leads to the realization that we have agency and can change how things work in the world, should we want to.

Now, some people are arguing for teaching kids programming via vibe coding and one the one hand I can see their point but on the other hand, it was never about the programming in the first place. Vibe coding is kind of the opposite of the two ideas if you don't first teach them. It's making the PBJ-making teacher/robot go "oh, so you want a PBJ, here's one". There's no learning new ways of thinking. It's also making it seem like things are not intentionally made to work a specific way but more just happened to become that way. Some of that empowerment and agency is lost, I feel, although I can see that there is agency in creating things too.

wolrah 2026-03-13 13:02 UTC link
I get the point of this but I'm slightly annoyed that it dinged me for not telling it to pick up the knife to cut the sandwich in half when I didn't tell it to cut the sandwich in half. I don't want my PBJ cut in half. It gave me two different options for how to cut it in half and I didn't select either, so it shouldn't need the knife at that phase.
fifilura 2026-03-13 15:00 UTC link
While a fun exercise, I somehow feel that LLMs have demonstrated that we are past this step.

They will realize that it is not correct to take the jar from the fridge without first opening the fridge etc.

vivzkestrel 2026-03-13 16:05 UTC link
- you made one of the biggest ux blunders they all do

- you used what looks like a radio button instead of a checkbox

- i selected one option for each question and was blown away by the fact that you could actually select more options only after the survey was complete

totallymike 2026-03-13 04:31 UTC link
Oh I think this lesson teaches quite a lot. Maybe your instructor is deliberately screwing up, but perhaps other end users are just not paying attention, or are missing assumed knowledge, or are feeling particularly adversarial on the day they need to follow your instructions.

One of many lessons that can be taken away from this exercise is to understand your audience and challenge the assumptions you make about their prior knowledge, culture, kind of peanut butter, et deters.

nomel 2026-03-13 04:35 UTC link
I would say that's exactly not the solution, since the surface area is too large to hard code (which is somewhat the point of this). Evidence being, it's 2026 and there are exactly 0 robots that can do this simple task reliably, in any kitchen you put it in.

You need something general and flexible, dare I say "intelligent", or you'll be babysitting the automation, slowly adding the thousand little corner cases that you find, to your hard coded decision tree.

This is also why every company with a home service robot, that can do anything even remotely complex as a sandwich, are doing it via teleoperation.

userbinator 2026-03-13 04:42 UTC link
Texaco + Mexico = Texico? The Japanese never fail to amuse foreigners with their naming.
jbritton 2026-03-13 05:00 UTC link
Also true of specifications. Anything not explicitly stated will be decided by the implementer, maybe to your liking or maybe not.
gnabgib 2026-03-13 05:10 UTC link
PB&J AI (3 points, 1 year ago, 2 comments) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42222009

Dad Annoys the Heck Out of His Kids by Making PB&Js Based on Their Instructions (2017) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13688715 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41599917

& infamous: sudo make me a sandwich (2009) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=530000

chii 2026-03-13 05:28 UTC link
> how much detail do i need to go into to satisfy the manager reviewing this?

it would've been fun to troll by writing the instructions on exactly which muscle to contract and extend for X seconds, and moving in an arc of Y minutes.

It'd be like writing assembly code for your skeleton and muscles'.

sxzygz 2026-03-13 05:57 UTC link
Please submit this link to Texico. I think it deserves a broader audience.
sn 2026-03-13 08:06 UTC link
It's great marketing! But yes. He considers it an error to specify "Use the same knife for the jelly" even though it's considered correct to state "Wipe the knife clean before using it for jelly". The latter statement implies the former, and if you follow all the instructions both are not wrong.

I also consider some of the instructions to be under specified. For example, a piece of bread could be said to have 6 sides, but only 2 of those are helpful for making a sandwich.

card_zero 2026-03-13 08:56 UTC link
fisian 2026-03-13 09:09 UTC link
I think this is a great introduction to logical thinking and coding. The overcooked scripting layer looks awesome and very polished. Reminds me a bit of Scratch (the programming language). Are you going to make it available to others?

There are also video games based on this concept, e.g. Bots are Dumb. So maybe your scripting layer it could even become its own commercial game.

rkagerer 2026-03-14 04:01 UTC link
Come on, a real engineer would come back the next day with a robot that makes sandwiches ;-).
Editorial Channel
What the content says
+0.35
Article 26 Education
Medium Advocacy Coverage
Editorial
+0.35
SETL
+0.19

Content explicitly frames learning as universal ('everyone should be able to think clearly about processes') and directly supports skill development and self-improvement.

+0.30
Article 19 Freedom of Expression
Medium Advocacy Coverage
Editorial
+0.30
SETL
-0.20

Content is freely published without apparent censorship or restriction. Transparency about methodology (blog link to Deliberate Work) invites deeper engagement with ideas.

+0.25
Article 2 Non-Discrimination
Medium Advocacy
Editorial
+0.25
SETL
+0.19

Content frames process clarity and completeness as universally applicable principles (process thinking applies to all users equally). Implicit advocacy for removing confusion/barriers.

+0.20
Article 18 Freedom of Thought
Low Advocacy
Editorial
+0.20
SETL
+0.17

Content advocates for clarity of thought and process design as universal principles, indirectly supporting freedom of thought through emphasis on understanding and logic.

+0.20
Article 27 Cultural Participation
Low Advocacy
Editorial
+0.20
SETL
+0.14

Challenge reflects and promotes methodology for process design (Deliberate Work), positioning systematic thinking as cultural/intellectual participation.

+0.15
Article 20 Assembly & Association
Low Advocacy
Editorial
+0.15
SETL
+0.09

Challenge invites participation from any user; framing emphasizes universal applicability of process thinking ('Most people...').

+0.10
Article 25 Standard of Living
Low Advocacy
Editorial
+0.10
SETL
+0.07

Challenge emphasizes clarity and completeness in instruction-giving as beneficial to wellbeing; indirectly supports health/safety through process design.

-0.25
Article 12 Privacy
Medium Practice
Editorial
-0.25
SETL
+0.19

Content makes no explicit privacy commitments; presents an interactive challenge that collects behavioral/performance data without visible privacy disclosure.

ND
Preamble Preamble

No observable engagement with human dignity, freedom, or justice principles.

ND
Article 1 Freedom, Equality, Brotherhood

No discussion of human freedom or equality as such.

ND
Article 3 Life, Liberty, Security

No observable discussion of right to life, liberty, or personal security.

ND
Article 4 No Slavery

No engagement with slavery, servitude, or involuntary servitude.

ND
Article 5 No Torture

No discussion of torture or cruel/inhuman treatment.

ND
Article 6 Legal Personhood

No engagement with recognition as person before law.

ND
Article 7 Equality Before Law

No discussion of equal protection or non-discrimination before law.

ND
Article 8 Right to Remedy

No engagement with remedies for rights violations.

ND
Article 9 No Arbitrary Detention

No discussion of arbitrary arrest or detention.

ND
Article 10 Fair Hearing

No engagement with right to fair and public hearing.

ND
Article 11 Presumption of Innocence

No discussion of presumption of innocence or retroactive criminal law.

ND
Article 13 Freedom of Movement

No discussion of freedom of movement or residence.

ND
Article 14 Asylum

No engagement with right to seek asylum.

ND
Article 15 Nationality

No discussion of nationality or right to change nationality.

ND
Article 16 Marriage & Family

No engagement with marriage, family, or protection of the family.

ND
Article 17 Property

No discussion of property rights or protection of property.

ND
Article 21 Political Participation

No engagement with political participation, voting, or governance.

ND
Article 22 Social Security

No discussion of social security or economic rights.

ND
Article 23 Work & Equal Pay

No engagement with right to work or employment.

ND
Article 24 Rest & Leisure

No discussion of rest, leisure, or working hours.

ND
Article 28 Social & International Order

No engagement with social and international order.

ND
Article 29 Duties to Community

No explicit discussion of duties or limitations on rights.

ND
Article 30 No Destruction of Rights

No observable engagement with prohibition of right destruction.
Structural Channel
What the site does
Element Modifier Affects Note
Legal & Terms
Privacy —
No privacy policy or data handling statements observable on-domain.
Terms of Service —
No terms of service observable on-domain.
Identity & Mission
Mission +0.15
Article 2 Article 18 Article 27
Parent domain (deliberateinc.com) mission emphasizes process design and clarity. Modest positive modifier applied to articles touching freedom of thought, participation, and cultural engagement through process improvement methodology.
Editorial Code —
No editorial guidelines or codes observable on-domain.
Ownership —
Ownership clearly attributed to The Deliberate Company. No negative modifier warranted.
Access & Distribution
Access Model +0.20
Article 19 Article 25 Article 26
Content explicitly states 'Free. No signup required.' This removes barriers to access and information, warranting modest positive modifier for openness and equality of participation.
Ad/Tracking -0.15
Article 12 Article 19
Google Analytics tracking code (gtag) observable. Indicates data collection without explicit privacy disclosure visible on-domain, warranting modest negative modifier for privacy/information rights.
Accessibility —
No accessibility statement observable on-domain; page structure suggests interactive elements but no WCAG compliance statements visible.
br_tracking 0.00
Preamble ¶5 Article 12 Article 19
2 tracker domain(s): www.googletagmanager.com, www.google-analytics.com
br_security 0.00
Article 3 Article 12
Security headers: HTTPS, HSTS
br_accessibility +0.05
Article 26 Article 27 ¶1
Accessibility: lang attr, skip nav, 100% alt text
br_consent 0.00
Article 12 Article 19 Article 20 ¶2
No cookie consent banner detected
+0.40
Article 19 Freedom of Expression
Medium Advocacy Coverage
Structural
+0.40
Context Modifier
+0.05
SETL
-0.20

No paywalls, login requirements, or content gating. Information freely accessible. Link to blog for further reading supports information access.

+0.25
Article 26 Education
Medium Advocacy Coverage
Structural
+0.25
Context Modifier
+0.20
SETL
+0.19

Free, open challenge provides accessible learning opportunity. Structured feedback ('See what Robbie did') supports skill development.

+0.10
Article 2 Non-Discrimination
Medium Advocacy
Structural
+0.10
Context Modifier
+0.15
SETL
+0.19

Free, no-signup-required access is a minimal structural nod to non-discrimination; accessible challenge to all users regardless of background or affiliation.

+0.10
Article 20 Assembly & Association
Low Advocacy
Structural
+0.10
Context Modifier
0.00
SETL
+0.09

No eligibility restrictions, membership requirements, or group-based access controls observable.

+0.10
Article 27 Cultural Participation
Low Advocacy
Structural
+0.10
Context Modifier
+0.15
SETL
+0.14

Blog link invites deeper engagement with intellectual work and community of practice.

+0.05
Article 18 Freedom of Thought
Low Advocacy
Structural
+0.05
Context Modifier
+0.15
SETL
+0.17

Free and open challenge allows users to think through processes independently without mandate or restriction.

+0.05
Article 25 Standard of Living
Low Advocacy
Structural
+0.05
Context Modifier
+0.20
SETL
+0.07

Free access removes economic barriers to participation; 'takes about 3 minutes' respects user time and wellbeing.

-0.35
Article 12 Privacy
Medium Practice
Structural
-0.35
Context Modifier
-0.15
SETL
+0.19

Google Analytics tracking tag (gtag, ID G-9HNP5EYH1T) embedded in page source. Interactive challenge likely logs user choices and quiz responses. No opt-out mechanism, cookie consent, or privacy policy link observable on-domain.

ND
Preamble Preamble

No structural features directly implementing preamble values.

ND
Article 1 Freedom, Equality, Brotherhood

No structural assertion of universal equality.

ND
Article 3 Life, Liberty, Security

No structural features protecting personal security.

ND
Article 4 No Slavery

No observable structural relevance.

ND
Article 5 No Torture

No structural relevance.

ND
Article 6 Legal Personhood

No structural relevance.

ND
Article 7 Equality Before Law

No structural features addressing legal equality.

ND
Article 8 Right to Remedy

No structural redress mechanisms observable.

ND
Article 9 No Arbitrary Detention

No structural relevance.

ND
Article 10 Fair Hearing

No structural relevance.

ND
Article 11 Presumption of Innocence

No structural relevance.

ND
Article 13 Freedom of Movement

No structural relevance.

ND
Article 14 Asylum

No structural relevance.

ND
Article 15 Nationality

No structural relevance.

ND
Article 16 Marriage & Family

No structural relevance.

ND
Article 17 Property

No structural relevance.

ND
Article 21 Political Participation

No structural relevance to political rights.

ND
Article 22 Social Security

No structural relevance.

ND
Article 23 Work & Equal Pay

No structural relevance.

ND
Article 24 Rest & Leisure

No structural relevance.

ND
Article 28 Social & International Order

No structural relevance.

ND
Article 29 Duties to Community

No structural implementation of duties framework.

ND
Article 30 No Destruction of Rights

No structural relevance.
Supplementary Signals
How this content communicates, beyond directional lean. Learn more
Epistemic Quality ℹ
How well-sourced and evidence-based is this content?
0.69 medium claims
Sources
0.7
Evidence
0.7
Uncertainty
0.6
Purpose
0.8
Propaganda Flags ℹ
2 manipulative rhetoric techniques found
2 techniques detected
exaggeration
'Most people think they can explain a simple process. Most people are wrong.' — absolute claim presented without qualification or evidence.
appeal to authority
'Based on the principles behind Deliberate Work' — invokes methodology authority without independent verification or published principles.
Emotional Tone ℹ
Emotional character: positive/negative, intensity, authority
hopeful
Valence
+0.6
Arousal
0.5
Dominance
0.5
Transparency ℹ
Does the content identify its author and disclose interests?
0.50
✓ Author
More signals: context, framing & audience
Solution Orientation ℹ
Does this content offer solutions or only describe problems?
0.75 solution oriented
Reader Agency
0.8
Stakeholder Voice ℹ
Whose perspectives are represented in this content?
0.35 2 perspectives
Speaks: institution
About: individuals
Temporal Framing ℹ
Is this content looking backward, at the present, or forward?
present immediate
Geographic Scope ℹ
What geographic area does this content cover?
global
Complexity ℹ
How accessible is this content to a general audience?
accessible low jargon none
Longitudinal 314 HN snapshots · 73 evals
+1 0 −1 HN
Audit Trail 93 entries
2026-03-16 02:09 eval_success PSQ evaluated: g-PSQ=0.600 (3 dims) - -
2026-03-16 02:09 eval Evaluated by llama-4-scout-wai-psq: +0.60 (Strong positive) 0.00
2026-03-16 02:07 eval_success Lite evaluated: Neutral (0.00) - -
2026-03-16 02:07 eval Evaluated by llama-4-scout-wai: 0.00 (Neutral) 0.00
reasoning
Technical content, no human rights discussion, neutral editorial stance
2026-03-16 02:07 rater_validation_warn Lite validation warnings for model llama-4-scout-wai: 1W 0R - -
2026-03-15 23:39 eval_success Evaluated: Mild positive (0.21) - -
2026-03-15 23:39 eval Evaluated by claude-haiku-4-5-20251001: +0.21 (Mild positive) 11,839 tokens
2026-03-14 22:27 eval_success PSQ evaluated: g-PSQ=0.600 (3 dims) - -
2026-03-14 22:27 eval Evaluated by llama-4-scout-wai-psq: +0.60 (Strong positive) 0.00
2026-03-14 22:21 eval_success Lite evaluated: Neutral (0.00) - -
2026-03-14 22:21 eval Evaluated by llama-4-scout-wai: 0.00 (Neutral) 0.00
reasoning
Technical content, no human rights discussion, neutral editorial stance
2026-03-14 22:21 rater_validation_warn Lite validation warnings for model llama-4-scout-wai: 1W 0R - -
2026-03-14 20:51 eval_success PSQ evaluated: g-PSQ=0.600 (3 dims) - -
2026-03-14 20:51 eval Evaluated by llama-4-scout-wai-psq: +0.60 (Strong positive) 0.00
2026-03-14 20:43 eval_success Lite evaluated: Neutral (0.00) - -
2026-03-14 20:43 rater_validation_warn Lite validation warnings for model llama-4-scout-wai: 1W 0R - -
2026-03-14 20:43 eval Evaluated by llama-4-scout-wai: 0.00 (Neutral) 0.00
reasoning
Technical content, no human rights discussion, neutral editorial stance
2026-03-14 19:06 eval_success Lite evaluated: Neutral (0.00) - -
2026-03-14 19:06 eval Evaluated by llama-4-scout-wai: 0.00 (Neutral) 0.00
reasoning
Technical content, no human rights discussion, neutral editorial stance
2026-03-14 19:06 rater_validation_warn Lite validation warnings for model llama-4-scout-wai: 1W 0R - -
2026-03-14 18:06 eval_success PSQ evaluated: g-PSQ=0.600 (3 dims) - -
2026-03-14 18:06 eval Evaluated by llama-4-scout-wai-psq: +0.60 (Strong positive) 0.00
2026-03-14 17:50 eval_success Lite evaluated: Neutral (0.00) - -
2026-03-14 17:50 rater_validation_warn Lite validation warnings for model llama-4-scout-wai: 1W 0R - -
2026-03-14 17:50 eval Evaluated by llama-4-scout-wai: 0.00 (Neutral) 0.00
reasoning
Technical content, no human rights discussion, neutral editorial stance
2026-03-14 16:30 eval_success PSQ evaluated: g-PSQ=0.600 (3 dims) - -
2026-03-14 16:30 eval Evaluated by llama-4-scout-wai-psq: +0.60 (Strong positive) 0.00
2026-03-14 16:15 eval_success Lite evaluated: Neutral (0.00) - -
2026-03-14 16:15 eval Evaluated by llama-4-scout-wai: 0.00 (Neutral) 0.00
reasoning
Technical content, no human rights discussion, neutral editorial stance
2026-03-14 16:15 rater_validation_warn Lite validation warnings for model llama-4-scout-wai: 1W 0R - -
2026-03-14 02:20 eval_success Lite evaluated: Neutral (0.00) - -
2026-03-14 02:20 eval Evaluated by llama-4-scout-wai: 0.00 (Neutral) 0.00
reasoning
Technical content, no human rights discussion, neutral editorial stance
2026-03-14 02:20 rater_validation_warn Lite validation warnings for model llama-4-scout-wai: 1W 0R - -
2026-03-14 02:02 eval Evaluated by llama-4-scout-wai-psq: +0.60 (Strong positive) 0.00
2026-03-14 01:42 eval Evaluated by llama-4-scout-wai: 0.00 (Neutral) 0.00
reasoning
Technical content, no human rights discussion, neutral editorial stance
2026-03-14 01:19 eval Evaluated by llama-4-scout-wai-psq: +0.60 (Strong positive) 0.00
2026-03-14 01:05 eval Evaluated by llama-4-scout-wai: 0.00 (Neutral) 0.00
reasoning
Technical content, no human rights discussion, neutral editorial stance
2026-03-14 00:45 eval Evaluated by llama-4-scout-wai-psq: +0.60 (Strong positive) 0.00
2026-03-14 00:37 eval Evaluated by llama-4-scout-wai: 0.00 (Neutral) 0.00
reasoning
Technical content, no human rights discussion, neutral editorial stance
2026-03-14 00:25 eval Evaluated by llama-3.3-70b-wai-psq: +0.42 (Moderate positive)
2026-03-14 00:22 eval Evaluated by llama-3.3-70b-wai: 0.00 (Neutral)
reasoning
Technical content, no rights discussion
2026-03-13 23:54 eval Evaluated by llama-4-scout-wai-psq: +0.60 (Strong positive) 0.00
2026-03-13 23:35 eval Evaluated by llama-4-scout-wai: 0.00 (Neutral) 0.00
reasoning
Technical content, no human rights discussion, neutral editorial stance
2026-03-13 22:53 eval Evaluated by llama-4-scout-wai-psq: +0.60 (Strong positive) 0.00
2026-03-13 22:27 eval Evaluated by llama-4-scout-wai: 0.00 (Neutral) 0.00
reasoning
Technical content, no human rights discussion, neutral editorial stance
2026-03-13 21:43 eval Evaluated by llama-4-scout-wai-psq: +0.60 (Strong positive) 0.00
2026-03-13 21:02 eval Evaluated by llama-4-scout-wai: 0.00 (Neutral) 0.00
reasoning
Technical content, no human rights discussion, neutral editorial stance
2026-03-13 20:17 eval Evaluated by llama-4-scout-wai-psq: +0.60 (Strong positive) 0.00
2026-03-13 19:51 eval Evaluated by llama-4-scout-wai: 0.00 (Neutral) 0.00
reasoning
Technical content, no human rights discussion, neutral editorial stance
2026-03-13 18:51 eval Evaluated by llama-4-scout-wai-psq: +0.60 (Strong positive) 0.00
2026-03-13 18:27 eval Evaluated by llama-4-scout-wai: 0.00 (Neutral) 0.00
reasoning
Technical content, no human rights discussion, neutral editorial stance
2026-03-13 17:35 eval Evaluated by llama-4-scout-wai-psq: +0.60 (Strong positive) 0.00
2026-03-13 16:58 eval Evaluated by llama-4-scout-wai: 0.00 (Neutral) 0.00
reasoning
Technical content, no human rights discussion, neutral editorial stance
2026-03-13 16:07 eval Evaluated by llama-4-scout-wai-psq: +0.60 (Strong positive) 0.00
2026-03-13 15:49 eval Evaluated by llama-4-scout-wai: 0.00 (Neutral) 0.00
reasoning
Technical content, no human rights discussion, neutral editorial stance
2026-03-13 15:30 eval Evaluated by llama-4-scout-wai-psq: +0.60 (Strong positive) 0.00
2026-03-13 15:13 eval Evaluated by llama-4-scout-wai: 0.00 (Neutral) 0.00
reasoning
Technical content, no human rights discussion, neutral editorial stance
2026-03-13 14:52 eval Evaluated by llama-4-scout-wai-psq: +0.60 (Strong positive) 0.00
2026-03-13 14:30 eval Evaluated by llama-4-scout-wai: 0.00 (Neutral) 0.00
reasoning
Technical content, no human rights discussion, neutral editorial stance
2026-03-13 14:05 eval Evaluated by llama-4-scout-wai-psq: +0.60 (Strong positive) 0.00
2026-03-13 13:53 eval Evaluated by llama-4-scout-wai: 0.00 (Neutral) 0.00
reasoning
Technical content, no human rights discussion, neutral editorial stance
2026-03-13 13:28 eval Evaluated by llama-4-scout-wai-psq: +0.60 (Strong positive) 0.00
2026-03-13 13:21 eval Evaluated by llama-4-scout-wai: 0.00 (Neutral) 0.00
reasoning
Technical content, no human rights discussion, neutral editorial stance
2026-03-13 12:53 eval Evaluated by llama-4-scout-wai-psq: +0.60 (Strong positive) 0.00
2026-03-13 12:45 eval Evaluated by llama-4-scout-wai: 0.00 (Neutral) 0.00
reasoning
Technical content, no human rights discussion, neutral editorial stance
2026-03-13 12:17 eval Evaluated by llama-4-scout-wai-psq: +0.60 (Strong positive) 0.00
2026-03-13 12:10 eval Evaluated by llama-4-scout-wai: 0.00 (Neutral) 0.00
reasoning
Technical content, no human rights discussion, neutral editorial stance
2026-03-13 11:40 eval Evaluated by llama-4-scout-wai-psq: +0.60 (Strong positive) 0.00
2026-03-13 11:32 eval Evaluated by llama-4-scout-wai: 0.00 (Neutral) 0.00
reasoning
Technical content, no human rights discussion, neutral editorial stance
2026-03-13 11:01 eval Evaluated by llama-4-scout-wai-psq: +0.60 (Strong positive) 0.00
2026-03-13 10:54 eval Evaluated by llama-4-scout-wai: 0.00 (Neutral) 0.00
reasoning
Technical content, no human rights discussion, neutral editorial stance
2026-03-13 10:23 eval Evaluated by llama-4-scout-wai-psq: +0.60 (Strong positive) 0.00
2026-03-13 10:16 eval Evaluated by llama-4-scout-wai: 0.00 (Neutral) 0.00
reasoning
Technical content, no human rights discussion, neutral editorial stance
2026-03-13 09:43 eval Evaluated by llama-4-scout-wai-psq: +0.60 (Strong positive) 0.00
2026-03-13 09:37 eval Evaluated by llama-4-scout-wai: 0.00 (Neutral) 0.00
reasoning
Technical content, no human rights discussion, neutral editorial stance
2026-03-13 09:03 eval Evaluated by llama-4-scout-wai-psq: +0.60 (Strong positive) 0.00
2026-03-13 09:01 eval Evaluated by llama-4-scout-wai: 0.00 (Neutral) 0.00
reasoning
Technical content, no human rights discussion, neutral editorial stance
2026-03-13 08:25 eval Evaluated by llama-4-scout-wai-psq: +0.60 (Strong positive) 0.00
2026-03-13 08:22 eval Evaluated by llama-4-scout-wai: 0.00 (Neutral) 0.00
reasoning
Technical content, no human rights discussion, neutral editorial stance
2026-03-13 07:43 eval Evaluated by llama-4-scout-wai-psq: +0.60 (Strong positive) 0.00
2026-03-13 07:42 eval Evaluated by llama-4-scout-wai: 0.00 (Neutral) 0.00
reasoning
Technical content, no human rights discussion, neutral editorial stance
2026-03-13 07:03 eval Evaluated by llama-4-scout-wai-psq: +0.60 (Strong positive) 0.00
2026-03-13 07:02 eval Evaluated by llama-4-scout-wai: 0.00 (Neutral) 0.00
reasoning
Technical content, no human rights discussion, neutral editorial stance
2026-03-13 06:24 eval Evaluated by llama-4-scout-wai-psq: +0.60 (Strong positive) 0.00
2026-03-13 06:24 eval Evaluated by llama-4-scout-wai: 0.00 (Neutral) 0.00
reasoning
Technical content, no human rights discussion, neutral editorial stance
2026-03-13 05:49 eval Evaluated by llama-4-scout-wai-psq: +0.60 (Strong positive) 0.00
2026-03-13 05:49 eval Evaluated by llama-4-scout-wai: 0.00 (Neutral) 0.00
reasoning
Technical content, no human rights discussion, neutral editorial stance
2026-03-13 05:14 eval Evaluated by llama-4-scout-wai-psq: +0.60 (Strong positive) 0.00
2026-03-13 05:14 eval Evaluated by llama-4-scout-wai: 0.00 (Neutral) 0.00
reasoning
Technical content, no human rights discussion, neutral editorial stance
2026-03-13 04:39 eval Evaluated by llama-4-scout-wai-psq: +0.60 (Strong positive) 0.00
2026-03-13 04:39 eval Evaluated by llama-4-scout-wai: 0.00 (Neutral) 0.00
reasoning
Technical content, no human rights discussion, neutral editorial stance
2026-03-13 04:01 eval Evaluated by llama-4-scout-wai-psq: +0.60 (Strong positive)
2026-03-13 04:01 eval Evaluated by llama-4-scout-wai: 0.00 (Neutral)
reasoning
Technical content, no human rights discussion, neutral editorial stance