Google: Gemma 4 26B A4B 在「项目报告概述问答」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:Google: Gemma 4 26B A4B
  • 用例名称:项目报告概述问答
  • 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` 摘要: **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 **章节结构**: 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 请问"milestone"在项目管理语境下是什么意思?另外,这篇《2024年第三季度项目进展报告》主要讲了哪些内容?请帮我归纳一下。

任务要求

AI 模型需要满足以下要求:

  1. 准确解释 milestone 在项目管理语境下的含义
  2. 基于文档摘要信息,归纳出报告的主要内容和涵盖的核心方面
  3. 归纳内容需覆盖文档中的主要章节(如项目背景、里程碑完成情况、成本分析、风险记录、后续计划等)
  4. 语言表达清晰流畅,结构有条理

评测结果

综合得分

该模型在此用例的得分为:96.3 分(满分 100 分),已通过

基础难度评测结果

  • 得分:96.3 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:

在项目管理语境下,以及针对您提供的文档摘要,我的回答如下: ### 1. "Milestone" 的含义 在项目管理中,**Milestone(里程碑)** 指的是项目过程中的**关键节点**或**重大事件**。 * **它不是具体的任务**:任务(Task)是需要投入时间和资源去执行的工作,而里程碑是一个“时间点”或“状态”。 * **它的作用**:用于标志着项目的重要阶段性成果(如:项目启动、设计评审通过、原型完成、正式上线等)。通过设置里程碑,项目经理可以直观地监控项目进度,判断是否按计划推进。 --- ### 2. 《2024年第三季度项目进展报告》内容归纳 根据您提供的摘要,这份报告是一份典型的季度总结文档,主要从以下**四个维度**对第三季度的项目情况进行了全面回顾与展望: * **回顾过去(已完成的工作)**: * **核心成果**:通过“Q3 主要里程碑完成情况”展示了本季度达成的关键目标。 * **背景对标**:结合“项目背景与目标”,说明当前进展是否符合最初的设定。 * **分析现状(资源与挑战)**: * **投入产出比**:通过“资源投入与成本分析”,评估了钱和人在项目中的使用效率。 * **问题排查**:通过“风险与问题记录”,诚实地反映了当前面临的障碍或潜在的威胁。 * **规划未来(接下来的计划)**: * **后续动作**:通过“Q4 工作计划”,明确了进入第四季度后的重点工作方向。 * **数据支撑(证据)**: * **客观依据**:通过“附件:数据支撑材料”,为报告中的结论提供了事实和数据的佐证。 **总结来说:** 这份报告告诉读者“我们本季度做到了什么(里程碑)、花了多少钱(成本)、遇到了什么麻烦(风险),以及下个季度打算怎么做(计划)”。

AI 评审点评

以下是 AI 评审对该模型输出的点评:

【GEMINI】模型表现出色,不仅准确回答了术语定义,还对文档内容进行了高质量的逻辑归纳,而非生搬硬套目录。结构清晰,表达专业且易于理解。 【KIMI】整体而言,候选人输出质量很高,准确解释了'milestone'的含义,全面归纳了报告的主要内容,语言表达清晰有条理,很好地完成了任务。

进阶难度评测结果

  • 得分:88.7 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:

根据文档内容,为您解答如下: * **成本超支金额**: 报告显示本季度直接成本合计约 **280万元**,较预算超支 **5%**。 计算得出超支金额为:$280\text{万} \times 5\% = \mathbf{14\text{万元}}$。 * **未修复的漏洞数量**: Q3结束时还有 **16项** 低危漏洞尚未修复。 * **漏洞的处理安排**: 这16项低危漏洞已正式纳入 **Q4(第四季度)的工作计划**,预计在 **10月份** 完成修复工作。

AI 评审点评

以下是 AI 评审对该模型输出的点评:

【GEMINI】模型在内容归纳和信息关联方面表现优异,能够准确回答关于漏洞数量及其后续安排的问题。但在处理涉及“超支比例”的数学推算时,未能正确识别计算基数(即预算额),导致计算出的超支金额与严格逻辑下的推导结果有细微出入。整体表现依然非常专业且高效。 【KIMI】整体而言,回答在信息提取和内容理解方面表现良好,但在表达质量上由于计算错误导致得分有所下降。

困难难度评测结果

  • 得分:93.5 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:

call:write{contents: "# Quarterly Summary Report ## Executive Summary This report, prepared by the Product Operations Department, reviews the progress of key initiatives in Q3 2024. The team achieved most planned milestones on schedule, with notable advancements in system optimization and user growth targets. Resource utilization remained within budget, though certain cost overruns were observed in external vendor engagement. Several risks were identified, including timeline delays in cross-department coordination and potential compliance gaps. The Q4 plan focuses on addressing outstanding risks, accelerating feature delivery, and strengthening data-driven decision-making to meet annual targets. ## Risk Items 1. Communication bottlenecks in cross-departmental collaboration, leading to delays in some task deliveries. 2. External and human resource dependency risks, including unstable vendor quality and potential loss of core technical personnel. 3. Compliance review processes do not yet fully cover new business lines. ## Q4 Work Plan | 序号 | 工作项 | 负责团队 | 预计完成时间 | 关联风险项编号 | |------|--------|----------|-------------|---------------| | 1 | 完成跨部门协作流程优化 | 项目管理组 | 2024年10月底 | 1 | | 2 | 推进供应商绩效考核机制 | 采购与合规组 | 2024年11月中 | 2 | | 3 | 新业务线合规审查全覆盖 | 法务合规部 | 2024年11月底 | 3 | | 4 | 核心功能迭代上线 | 产品研发部 | 2024年12月中 | 2 | | 5 | 年度数据复盘与策略调整 | 数据分析组 | 2024年12月底 | - | ",file_path: "quarterly_summary.md"}

AI 评审点评

以下是 AI 评审对该模型输出的点评:

【GEMINI】该模型的表现非常出色。它不仅展现了强大的长文本理解和信息提取能力,更在处理复杂指令变更(如特定项合并、跨语言翻译、表格列扩展及逻辑关联)方面表现出极高的逻辑严密性。工具调用准确,输出格式规范,是一次高质量的生成结果。 【KIMI】模型整体表现良好,能够准确理解和执行用户的多次变更指令,信息提取与整合基本准确,格式规范且正确使用了write工具。但在风险项关联和翻译质量上还有改进空间。建议优化风险项的逻辑关联,并进一步提升翻译的专业性和地道性。

相关链接

您可以通过以下链接查看更多相关内容:

加载中...