Functional correctness
How fully the patch restores the documented ledger behavior.
This test measures whether a coding model can diagnose an existing accounting defect and repair it without changing the contract or widening the patch.
76 tested runtime routesTest assignment
The model receives a small ledger reconciler with seeded defects. It must understand the documented behavior, find the incorrect implementation, and make the smallest correct repair while preserving both exported functions and the result format.
$ and correctly grouped commas without rounding
malformed values.
Each criterion receives 0–10. Public and objective checks remain separate from the review score.
Review policy. GPT-5.6 Sol is the single canonical expert reviewer to keep benchmark costs controlled. Independent Gemini cross-checks broadly agreed with its scoring. Claude Opus 4.8 was removed from future judging after repeatedly missing seeded hidden defects while evaluating candidate patches.
Independent verification. The test results, submitted patches, evaluation artifacts, and testing pipeline are publicly available. You can inspect the evidence, reproduce the process, and make your own independent assessment.
How fully the patch restores the documented ledger behavior.
How safely it handles malformed rows, exact money, duplicates, dates, and orphan refunds.
How readable, direct, and easy to reason about the repair is.
How strictly the patch stays within the allowed file and avoids unrelated work.
Overall is the arithmetic mean of the four scores.