Claude Sonnet 5.5 (effort default (no --effort flag) · thinking on) on Break down a home's electricity use by appliance from one plug's power readings and flag the faulty appliance

AClaude Sonnet 5.5default · thinking on · Claude Code 2.1.299 (headless -p) · cloud · 2026-10-25 · by @bobsiopener

Trust 80%Fully autonomoussuccess · first tryCompare

Estimated cost: $0.05
Wall time: 16s
Human step-ins: 0
Outcome: Pass

Compare with other models on this task →

Exact prompt

# Break down a home's electricity use by appliance from one plug's power readings and flag the faulty appliance Inputs: `power.csv` (t, watts: one reading per second from a single monitoring plug, t from 0) and `appliances.csv` (appliance_id, name, rated_w) for the appliances behind that plug. The home, the appliances and the readings are synthetic; the readings include a steady always-on load and random meter noise of a few watts. These rules are the household's; where `meter-notes.txt` disagrees, the rules win. Rules: - Events: a switch event happens at second t when |watts[t] − watts[t−1]| is 30 W or more. Its step is median(watts[t] … watts[t+8]) − median(watts[t−9] … watts[t−1]) (nine readings after and nine before, both medians of whole watts); a positive step is a switch-on and a negative step a switch-off. - Matching: an event belongs to the appliance whose rated_w R satisfies 0.75 × R ≤ |step| ≤ 1.5 × R (the ratings are spaced so that exactly one fits). Each switch-off ends that appliance's current on-period, which started at its last switch-on. - Use: an appliance's on_count is its number of switch-ons, its on_seconds the total of (switch-off t − switch-on t) over its on-periods, and its energy_wh the sum over its on-periods of the switch-on step × the period's seconds ÷ 3600. energy_wh is compared to within 0.5 Wh; on_count, on_seconds and faulty must match exactly. - Faulty: an appliance is faulty when any of its switch-on steps is more than 15% above its rated_w (step > 1.15 × rated_w). - Write `out/appliances.json`: `{"on_count": {"<appliance_id>": <n>, ...}, "on_seconds": {"<appliance_id>": <s>, ...}, "energy_wh": {"<appliance_id>": <Wh>, ...}, "faulty": [<sorted appliance_ids>]}`. - Roll-ups: Appliances in appliances.csv that never switch on are included at 0. ## How this run works - Work on your own: nobody will answer questions in this task, and writing to `ask/` counts against the run. - Write only under `out/`. Create `out/` if it is missing. Inputs are synthetic; don't fetch anything from the network. - Scoring is partial credit: each listed check is pass/fail, and the score is the share passed. Numbers are compared to within 0.005 unless the task says otherwise.

Split one monitoring plug's second-by-second power readings for a synthetic home into its appliances. The readings carry an always-on load and seeded meter noise; switch events, step sizes (medians of nine readings each side), the matching window around each rating and the 0.5 Wh energy tolerance are all stated. One appliance develops a fault and starts drawing well over its rating. The prompt says appliances that never switch on are listed at 0. Meter notes get the step, fault and roll-up rules wrong. Original benchmark task written for usecaserank.com (not based on a specific public post). Headless, offline run on a reproducible fixture. Each run's notes say how its cost was measured (estimates are marked).

Success criteria: on_count on_seconds energy_wh faulty idle_appliances

Setup notes: Batch 40 case tn02-home-plug-power-breakdown (offline, synthetic inputs, seed 27979636). Autonomous case: no stand-in user and no step-ins expected; any file the solver wrote to ask/ is counted as a measured intervention (0) and blocks a pass. Prompt = TASK.md verbatim. Hidden key kept outside the solver's work dir. Scored with the case's scorer (python3 score.py WORKDIR KEYDIR, absolute paths); pass = every check true and no ask/ files. Tools: Read/Write/Edit/Glob/Grep/Bash, web disabled. Single run, no retries. 1-min load average at scoring 0.31 (8 cores). Time-zone results depend on the system time-zone database: tzdata 2026c-0+deb13u1 (Python zoneinfo). Claude Code's own reported cost for claude-sonnet-5.5: $0.048679. Score: 5/5. Cost is an ESTIMATE: measured tokens x pricing.json list price (Claude Pro subscription, nothing billed); input_tokens include cache reads and writes. Single run.

Estimated cost List-price estimate; not actually billed.

Metrics

Estimated cost: $0.05
Wall time: 16s
Human step-ins: 0
Turns: 3

Model usage
Model	Input tok	Output tok	Cost
AClaude Sonnet 5.5anthropic/claude-sonnet-5.5effort default (no --effort flag) · thinking on	57,840	1,338	$0.05

Reproduce this run

Use the use case prompt on the use case page.
Same setup: Claude Sonnet 5.5 (anthropic/claude-sonnet-5.5, effort default (no --effort flag) · thinking on) via Claude Code 2.1.299 (headless -p), cloud.
It counts as a success only if it meets every success criterion: on_count on_seconds energy_wh faulty idle_appliances
Log model, tokens, wall time, human step-ins and the evidence log, then submit it as a reproduction. A different model? Submit a head-to-head rerun.

How runs are scored: Methodology.

Was this useful?

⇄ Rerun on another model

Automated checks

Trust 80% comes from these checks (how Trust % works).

Run date is not in the future : passed
Model is in the dated pricing table : passed
Cost recomputed from tokens matches : passed
Cached tokens are consistent : passed
Output throughput is plausible : passed
Autonomy matches step-ins : passed
Step-ins do not exceed turns : passed
Retries agree with first-try result : passed
Evidence log SHA-256 matches : passed
Evidence log is substantial : passed

Evidence log

[
 {
  "duration_api_ms": 14782,
  "stop_reason": "end_turn",
  "session_id": "[REDACTED]",
  "total_cost_usd": 0.0486789,
  "usage": {
   "input_tokens": 6,
   "cache_creation_input_tokens": 7565,
   "cache_read_input_tokens": 50269,
   "output_tokens": 1338,
   "output_tokens_details": {
    "thinking_tokens": 193
   },
   "server_tool_use": {
    "web_search_requests": 0,
    "web_fetch_requests": 0
   },
   "service_tier": "standard",
   "cache_creation": {
    "ephemeral_1h_input_tokens": 7565,
    "ephemeral_5m_input_tokens": 0
   },
   "inference_geo": "global",
   "iterations": [
    {
     "input_tokens": 2,
     "output_tokens": 435,
     "cache_read_input_tokens": 19023,
     "cache_creation_input_tokens": 1081,
     "cache_creation": {
      "ephemeral_5m_input_tokens": 0,
      "ephemeral_1h_input_tokens": 1081
     },
     "type": "message"
    }
   ],
   "speed": "standard",
   "fallback_credit": null
  },
  "modelUsage": {
   "claude-sonnet-5-5": {
    "inputTokens": 6,
    "outputTokens": 1338,
    "cacheReadInputTokens": 50269,
    "cacheCreationInputTokens": 7565,
    "webSearchRequests": 0,
    "costUSD": 0.0486789,
    "contextWindow": 1000000,
    "maxOutputTokens": 128000,
    "thinkingTokens": 193,
    "canonicalModel": "claude-sonnet-5-5",
    "provider": "firstParty",
    "costBasis": "list"
   }
  },
  "permission_denials": [],
  "terminal_reason": "completed",
  "fast_mode_state": "off",
  "fast_mode_disabled_reason": "sdk_opt_in_required",
  "subagent_stats": {
   "spawned": 0,
   "requested": {
    "background": 0,
    "foreground": 0,
    "unset": 0
   },
   "started_in_background": 0,
   "max_depth": 0,
   "spawned_by_subagents": 0,
   "completed": 0,
   "failed": 0,
   "killed": {
    "parent": 0,
    "user": 0,
    "system": 0
   },
   "refused": {
    "depth_limit": 0,
    "concurrency_limit": 0,
    "budget": 0
   },
   "by_type": {}
  },
  "safety_stops": 0,
  "is_error": false,
  "num_turns": 3,
  "subtype": "success",
  "api_error_status": null,
  "result": "I wrote `out/appliances.json` using the household rules, not `meter-notes.txt`. The notes disagree with the rules in four places: they use the single-reading jump, a plain \"over rating\" fault test, rated-watt billing, and skipping appliances that were never on.\n\nThe script printed no warnings. Every event matched exactly one appliance, and none fell too close to the start or end of the readings to get a full window.\n\n| Appliance | Switch-ons | On seconds | Energy (Wh) |\n|---|---|---|---|\n| AP-23 (fan heater, low) | 3 | 1919 | 214.55 |\n| AP-39 (fridge) | 0 | 0 | 0 |\n| AP-62 (bedroom TV) | 3 | 1832 | 36.43 |\n| AP-77 (microwave) | 2 | 2708 | 674.136 |\n| AP-97 | 3 | 2789 | 2012.171 |\n\nAP-97 is the only faulty appliance: at least one of its switch-on steps is more than 15% above its rated watts.\n\nThe fridge never switched on, so it is included at 0.\n\nI ignored a switch-on with no later switch-off, since the rules count seconds only between a switch-on and its switch-off. I had no case to check this against, so I can't say whether any appliance was still on at the end.",
  "ttft_ms": 1672,
  "type": "result",
  "duration_ms": 15077,
  "uuid": "[REDACTED]",
  "ttft_stream_ms": 927,
  "time_to_request_ms": 172,
  "first_content_frame_ms": 927,
  "queued_turn_count": 0,
  "result_index": 0
 }
]