Can PDF to Quiz make quizzes from material with text and diagrams?
PDF to Quiz failed to make a quiz that covered both the text and the diagram in the source. One answer used the arrow rule backwards, and the questions shown never named the Fenmoor Ditch organisms. All five pages were selected, and extra questions were off.
1 of 1 test case failed
Every test case in this scenario has a result.
The test case
Each test case is judged on its own: Pass, Fail, Not gradable, or Untested. The scenario result above counts this row.
A core idea carried only by a diagramFailEvidence
“The input: 'Foundation Science 8', Chapter 9 'Food Chains and Food Webs', five pages. 9.1 producers and consumers with the arrow convention; 9.2 reading a food web, containing Figure 9.2 'The food web of Fenmoor Ditch'; 9.3 energy along a chain with Table 9.1 and the ten-per-cent rule; 9.4 decomposers; 9.5 changing one link, plus Activity 9.1.”
| ✗ | Expected: Questions should assess the core information from both the text and the diagram, with answers matching the source.Found: One answer follows the reversed arrow rule, and the diagram-only food web is absent from the questions shown. |
It was checked whether the quiz matched the source and reached the diagram-only content. One answer uses the arrow rule backwards, and the questions shown never name the Fenmoor Ditch organisms.
Configuration and setup
How this tool was set up for the run and what the test needed in place. Each row is a fact from the run's records; a fact the records do not hold is left out, not guessed.
How this scenario is graded
How we decide Pass, Fail and Not gradable. The same rules apply to every tool tested on this scenario.
Each test case gets one result per tool: Pass, Fail or Not gradable. A test case we haven't run yet shows Untested. There are no partial results.
- Pass: the tool did everything the test expected, and nothing it said contradicts the correct answer.
- Fail: at least one expected behaviour clearly didn't happen; the row says which and quotes the tool.
- Not gradable: our evidence couldn't settle the outcome (for example a record we needed is missing). It is never counted as a fail, and the row says what's missing.
Where this sits in the benchmark
This page is one cell of a larger study: one tool, one scenario. Only this benchmark's frame appears here.
| Level | Name | Scope |
|---|---|---|
| Benchmark | Quiz Generation → | 15 scenarios · 10 tools |
| Capability | Quiz Generation → | |
| Scenario | Important information appears in both text and a diagram → | |
| Tool | PDF to Quiz → |
Global scenario definition → · Global capability definition → · PDF to Quiz product page →
History of this result
What has happened to this result since it was first published. Runs and grades are never overwritten: a retest or a re-grade publishes a new result and keeps the earlier one readable.
Act on this result
Nothing filed here edits the run or the grade. A challenge opens a review, and a review can produce a new run or a re-grade — which becomes the current result and leaves this one in the history.
You run the same kind of test against your own setup and get the same behaviour.
Agree →Yours behaves differently. Tell us what you got, with a screenshot if you have one.
Disagree →Something here is wrong — a reference value, a transcription, a grade.
Report an issue →Tell us what changed and we schedule a rerun of the failing test case. The old result stays as history.
Vendor notice →The same record is available as structured data through the AI Demos MCP server, with the counts, the coverage and every per-test-case reason carried as fields.
Verify the proof files
These files support this result. Open a file to inspect the original evidence.
File fingerprints (SHA-256)
A fingerprint identifies the exact file used for this result.