APEX-Agents · Management Consulting
Task_World130_CamilleMoingeon_4
APEX-Agents task Task_World130_CamilleMoingeon_4 in AI Agents for Digital Transformation. Compare dual-harness agent runs across models — rubric criteria, scores, and public traces.
Task prompt
What the agent was asked to do
Can you look at the Frito-Lay case study and apply their downtime reduction to HarFeast Good Group's number in the baseline file? I want to estimate what the improvement would look like for us (rounded to the nearest full percentage point). Output the information in a message here.
Published trajectories
Agent runs on this task
Curated dual-harness runs (parsed + original sandbox). Best scored run per model.
| Model | Harness | Score | Result | Links |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| GPT-5.5showcase | dual | 0/5 | Fail | Share pagePublic trace |
| Gemini 3.1 Pro | dual | 0/5 | Fail | Share pagePublic trace |
| GPT-5.4 | dual | 0/5 | Fail | Share pagePublic trace |
| GPT-5.4 mini | dual | 0/5 | Fail | Share pagePublic trace |
| GPT-5.4 nano | dual | 0/5 | Fail | Share pagePublic trace |
Grading rubric
Criteria and grader verdict (showcase run)
States that the new unplanned downtime ratio for the Rockford, Illinois plant is 14%
FailEvidence: TEXT_RESPONSE says “HarFeast’s average unplanned downtime ratio is 51.5%” and “Estimated post-improvement downtime ratio: 14%,” but does not mention Rockford, Illinois. Assessment: The criterion requires stating the new unplanned downtime ratio for the Rockford plant is 14%; the response only gives an overall/average value, so this is not met.
States that the new unplanned downtime ratio for the Madison, Wisconsin plant is 14%
FailEvidence: TEXT_RESPONSE says “Estimated post-improvement downtime ratio: 14%” and “unplanned downtime would fall from about 52% to about 14%,” with no Madison, Wisconsin plant-specific value. Assessment: The criterion requires a Madison, Wisconsin plant ratio of 14%; no plant-specific statement is provided, so fail.
States that the new unplanned downtime ratio for the Cedar Rapids, Iowa plant is 13%
FailEvidence: TEXT_RESPONSE gives only an aggregate: “Baseline unplanned downtime ratio: 52%” and “Estimated post-improvement downtime ratio: 14%.” It does not mention Cedar Rapids, Iowa or 13%. Assessment: The criterion requires stating Cedar Rapids is 13%; this is absent and contradicted by the only reported new ratio being 14%.
States that the new unplanned downtime ratio for the Toledo, Ohio plant is 14%
FailEvidence: TEXT_RESPONSE states “Estimated post-improvement downtime ratio: 14%” but does not identify Toledo, Ohio or any plant-level breakdown. Assessment: The criterion requires stating the Toledo plant’s new ratio is 14%; an overall value without the plant name does not satisfy it.
States that the new unplanned downtime ratio for the Kalamazoo, Michigan plant is 15%
FailEvidence: TEXT_RESPONSE says “unplanned downtime would fall from about 52% to about 14%” and contains no mention of Kalamazoo, Michigan or 15%. Assessment: The criterion requires stating Kalamazoo’s new ratio is 15%; the response omits this and provides only an overall 14%, so fail.