Skip to content

Post-stratified results for a two-wave customer survey with repeat respondents and mixed income units

Exact prompt

# Weighted results for a two-wave customer survey Inputs: `responses.csv`, `waves.json` (per wave: the unit of the income column), `population.json` (each region's share of the customer base). Rules: - One person may have answered more than once. Emails are case-insensitive and may carry stray spaces. Keep only each person's latest submission by actual time; submitted_at carries different UTC offsets. - Drop respondents (after de-duplication) whose age is blank or under 18. - In q1-q3, the code 99 means "don't know": leave it out of that question only. - Income is in the unit given for the response's wave in waves.json: "USD" or "kUSD" (thousands of USD). Report income in USD. - Weight for every kept respondent in region g = population share of g / (kept respondents in g / all kept respondents). - Weighted mean = sum(weight x value) / sum(weight) over the kept respondents who have a valid value. Round q means half-up to 3 decimals and income half-up to 2 decimals. Write `out/survey.json`: `{"n": <kept respondents>, "region_n": {"<region>": <int>, ...}, "weighted_means": {"q1": <n>, "q2": <n>, "q3": <n>}, "weighted_mean_income_usd": <n>}`. q means are checked to within 0.0005. ## 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.

Clean about 2,500-3,500 survey responses and compute region-weighted means for three questions and income. Repeat respondents must be matched case- and space-insensitively and only their latest submission kept, comparing timestamps with mixed UTC offsets. Minors are dropped, 'don't know' codes are excluded per question, and one wave reports income in thousands. Means near rounding ties are redrawn. 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: dedup_kept_count region_counts q1_mean q2_q3_means income_units_and_weights

Best model for this task so far: Claude Haiku 5.5 (effort default (no --effort flag) · thinking on) (success, $0.0054, 18s).

Run this on another model

All runs (4)

100% pass rate across 4 eligible runs: 4 pass, 0 partial, 0 fail. Partial and failed runs are listed below with everything else.ⓘ

Runs for this use case
ModelCostTimeStep-insⓘAutonomyOutcomeTrustⓘDateCompare
GGemma 4 31B Instruct (Venice)thinking on$0.042m0Fully autonomouspassTrust 80%2026-10-30
AClaude Opus 5.5default · thinking on$0.1327s0Fully autonomouspassTrust 80%2026-10-20
AClaude Haiku 5.5default · thinking on$0.005418s0Fully autonomouspassTrust 80%2026-10-20
AClaude Sonnet 5.5default · thinking on$0.0514s0Fully autonomouspassTrust 80%2026-10-20

Embed this result

A live badge for this use case. It links back here and updates as new runs are published.

UseCaseRank badge for Post-stratified results for a two-wave customer survey with repeat respondents and mixed income units

Get new runs and ranking changes weekly

Which models got better or cheaper on real tasks like this one.