DE vs D2C: Compiler & SOM Deep Dive

§ Matching Logic § Compiler § D2C vs DE § Conclusion #1 scidiagram_1769circuit_diagrams #2 scidiagram_0085charts #3 scidiagram_00573d #4 scidiagram_2682planar_geometry #5 scidiagram_5508graph_structures

SOM F1 匹配逻辑详解

SOM (Structured Object Model) 是从 LaTeX 编译产物中提取的语义结构。F1 指标通过 4 个独立维度评估 GT 与 Gen SOM 的匹配度。每个维度独立计算，不存在跨维度的元素配对。

整体流程

            Pipeline B (DVI Compilation)

            LaTeX Code → latex 引擎 → .dvi → semantic_spy.sty 注入语义标签 → dvisvgm → .svg

            → SOM 提取器 → Elements[] (每个元素包含: id, type, text, bbox, color, z_index)

            → F1 Evaluator → 4 维 F1 分数 → Overall F1 = macro average

4 个 F1 维度的匹配算法

Type F1

按细粒度类型计数匹配。不需要元素配对。

GT: {node:circle: 3, path:open: 2}
Gen: {node:circle: 2, path:open: 4}
TP = min(3,2) + min(2,4) = 4

排除容器元素 (picture, scope, axis)。细粒度类型: node:{shape}, path:{open/closed}, component:{type}

算法: Multiset Intersection

Text F1

贪心精确匹配文本内容。不考虑元素位置。

GT texts: ["1A", "u1", "0.5"]
Gen texts: ["2.5A", "u1"]
match "1A"→miss, "u1"→hit, "0.5"→miss
TP = 1

文本来源: TextElement.content, NodeElement.text_content, DataPoint 坐标值

算法: Greedy Exact Match

BBox F1

IoU 贪心匹配边界框。位置和大小都必须接近。

for gt_bbox in GT:
find gen_bbox where IoU ≥ 0.3
if found: TP++, remove gen_bbox
FP = len(Gen) - TP
FN = len(GT) - TP

IoU = Intersection Area / Union Area。阈值 0.3 比 CV 常用的 0.5 更宽松。

阈值: IoU ≥ 0.3

Color F1

按类型分组后，组内最优匹配（排列或贪心）。

GT path colors: [#ff0000, #0000ff]
Gen path colors: [#ff0001, #0000ff]
sim = Delta-E CIE76 in Lab space
total_sim = 0.98 + 1.0 = 1.98

相似度 = max(0, 1 - ΔE/100)。命名色精确匹配。≤6 个颜色用全排列，>6 用贪心。

算法: Permutation / Greedy

Overall F1 计算

Overall F1 = (Type F1 + Text F1 + BBox F1 + Color F1) / 4 (macro average)

如果某维度 GT 和 Gen 都为空，则该维度 F1 = 1.0（不惩罚）。如果只有 Gen 为空，F1 = 0（全部 miss）。

关键设计：4 个维度完全独立——Type 匹配上了不代表 BBox 也匹配上了。每个维度单独衡量一个方面的正确性。

LaTeX 编译器原理对比 (DVI vs PDF)

Pipeline B — DVI 编译 (SOM / F1)

latex -interaction=nonstopmode → .dvi → dvisvgm → .svg → SOM

latex 引擎（Knuth 原版）输出 DVI 格式，保留 \special{} 语义标签。

semantic_spy.sty 注入 \special{dvisvgm:raw <g class="tikz-node"...>}
dvisvgm 转 SVG 时保留这些标签 → SOM 提取器可识别每个元素

局限：不支持 PDF 原生图形操作、高复杂度 PostScript、现代字体包

Pipeline A — PDF 编译 (图片渲染)

latexmk -pdflatex → .pdf (回退 lualatex → xelatex) → pdftoppm → .png

三个 PDF 引擎按序回退：pdflatex → lualatex → xelatex

几乎所有语法正确的代码都能编译出图片
但 PDF 不保留 \special{} 语义标签 → 无法提取 SOM

优势：高兼容性。劣势：无语义信息。

DVI 失败但 PDF 成功的常见原因

高复杂度渲染（samples=40 + shader=interp = 1600 个插值点）— GT 用 samples=2 时 DVI 可以处理
复杂 PostScript 图形 — DVI 对 PS 的支持有限
tikzcd 等高级宏 — SVG 结构与 semantic_spy.sty 不兼容
代码不完整（缺少 \documentclass）— 预处理器补全后可能产生嵌套 document 环境

98.1% 的 GT 代码是 DVI 兼容的 — 如果模型准确重建了 GT 结构，DVI 应该能成功。

D2C vs DE 任务对比

D2C 和 DE 都提供了相同的 Prefix Code

经验证，D2C 和 DE 任务给模型的 prefix code 完全相同。两者的唯一区别是 DE 额外提供了编辑指令。

D2C: "Convert the diagram... starting exactly with the provided snippet below." + prefix

DE: 同上 + "applying the following modification: [编辑指令]"

信息	D2C	DE
参考图片	有	有
Prefix Code	有（与 DE 相同）	有（与 D2C 相同）
编辑指令	无	有（额外语义信息）
GT 源代码	无	无
评估 GT	原始 GT 源代码	修改后的 answer_code

DE 可能优于 D2C 的原因

语义提示："将电流源从 1A 改为 2.5A" → 告诉模型这是电流源
结构引导："转为笛卡尔图，角度映射到 X 轴" → 引导模型用离散点
简化方向："将渐变色改为纯红色" → 引导模型用更简单的 fill
不总是有帮助："移动节点坐标" → 无法修正语法错误

核心结论：DVI 失败 / F1=0 是否等于代码质量问题？

结论：绝大多数情况下是——模型生成了"视觉近似但结构错误"的代码

98.1% 的 GT 代码 DVI 兼容——准确重建 GT 结构则 DVI 应成功
D2C 模型选择了与 GT 不同的实现方式（连续函数 vs 离散点、过多采样点、错误语法）
PDF 的多重回退把结构问题"纸包火"了——图片看似相似，代码结构完全不同
F1 正确暴露了这些差异——DVI 失败 → Gen SOM = 0 → F1 = 0

Case	D2C F1	DVI	根本原因	判定
#1 1769 circuit	0.00	FAIL	无视 prefix + 组件错误	代码质量
#2 0085 charts	0.05	OK	DVI 成功但元素爆炸 (1656 vs 52)	结构错误
#3 0057 3d	0.00	FAIL	samples=40 vs GT 的 samples=2	规模过度
#4 2682 geometry	0.00	FAIL	through=(a) 缺花括号	语法 Bug
#5 5508 graph	0.00	FAIL	用 tikzcd 宏 vs GT 的手动 \draw（模型不会手动实现）	模型能力

#1 scidiagram_1769 circuit_diagrams Component Parameter Modification Code Quality Issue

D2C F1: 0.00 DE F1: 0.71

✎

DE Edit Instruction

Change the parameter of the current source from 1A to 2.5A.

Shared Prefix Code (D2C & DE both receive this)

\documentclass[border=5pt]{standalone}
\usepackage[siunitx, RPvoltages]{circuitikz}

GT Original

D2C Generated

DE Generated

DE Reference

Metrics Comparison

Metric	D2C	DE	Diff
SOM F1
F1 Overall	0.0000	0.7083	+0.7083
F1 Type	0.0000	0.7500	+0.7500
F1 Text	0.0000	1.0000	+1.0000
F1 BBox	0.0000	0.3333	+0.3333
F1 Color	0.0000	0.7500	+0.7500
Image Metrics
SSIM	0.4809	0.8153	+0.3344
LPIPS (lower=better)	0.6810	0.1152	-0.5657
CLIP	0.6909	0.9901	+0.2992
Code Metrics
CrystalBLEU	0.4573	0.2698	-0.1875

Compiler Analysis

DVI 编译： D2C FAIL | DE OK

D2C 问题：

D2C 模型无视 prefix 指令，输出不完整代码 + 用错组件。 D2C 和 DE 收到相同的 prefix（\documentclass + \usepackage[siunitx, RPvoltages]{circuitikz}），但 D2C 模型没有遵循"从 prefix 开始"的指令，直接输出了 \begin{document}，丢失了整个前导声明。而且代码体中用了 eV（欧洲电压源）而非 GT 中的 I（电流源）。

DVI 编译：缺少 \documentclass → 预处理器自动补全后产生嵌套 \begin{document} → DVI 失败 → Gen SOM = 0 → F1 = 0
PDF 编译：latexmk 容错能力更强，回退成功 → 生成图片（但组件类型是错的）

结论：明确的代码质量问题——模型既没遵循 prefix 指令，组件类型也选错了。

DE 优势：

DE 模型正确遵循了相同的 prefix。虽然没有使用 GT 中的 to[I,...] circuitikz 高级宏（改为手动画圆+线），但代码完整、DVI 编译成功，SOM 提取到 10 个元素，F1 = 0.71。
关键差异：DE 的编辑指令"将电流源参数从 1A 改为 2.5A"提供了额外语义信息，帮助模型理解这是电流源。

LaTeX Code (D2C / DE / GT Source / DE Answer)

\begin{document}
\begin{circuitikz}[european voltages, thick]
    \draw (0,0) to[eV, l=1\ampere, v_>=$u_1$] (2.5,0);
\end{circuitikz}
\end{document}

\documentclass[border=5pt]{standalone}
\usepackage[siunitx, RPvoltages]{circuitikz}
\usetikzlibrary{arrows.meta}

\begin{document}
\begin{tikzpicture}
  % Wires
  \draw (-1.5,0) -- (-0.6,0);
  \draw (0.6,0) -- (1.5,0);
  
  % Source component
  \draw[thick] (0,0) circle (0.6) (0,0.6) -- (0,-0.6);
  
  % Current parameter label
  \node at (0,0.95) {\Large 2.5A};
  
  % Voltage arrow and label
  \draw[-{Latex[length=3mm, width=2.5mm]}, thick] (-0.9,-0.15) arc (200:340:0.957cm);
  \node at (0,-1.2) {\Large $u_1$};
\end{tikzpicture}
\end{document}

\documentclass[border=5pt]{standalone}
\usepackage[siunitx, RPvoltages]{circuitikz}
\begin{document}

  \begin{circuitikz}

    \draw (0,0) to[I,l=1A, v_=$u_1$] (2,0);
  \end{circuitikz}
\end{document}

\documentclass[border=5pt]{standalone}
\usepackage[siunitx, RPvoltages]{circuitikz}
\begin{document}

  \begin{circuitikz}

    \draw (0,0) to[I,l=2.5A, v_=$u_1$] (2,0);
  \end{circuitikz}
\end{document}

SOM & F1 Details

D2C SOM Analysis

GT: 10 elements Gen: 0 elements DVI: FAIL

F1 = 0 (Gen SOM = 0, DVI compilation failed — no elements to match)

Full SOM Elements (GT: 10 / Gen: 0)

GT Elements (10)

ID	Type	Text	Color	BBox	Match
`scope-1`	scope	-	-	-67,-53 57x30	Unmatched
`picture-2`	picture	-	-	-67,-53 57x30	Unmatched
`path-001`	path	-	S:#000	-67,-41 57x18	Unmatched
`path-002`	path	-	S:#000	-50,-53 24x24	Unmatched
`node-3`	node	-	-	null	Unmatched
`node-8`	node	1A	-	-66,-48 11x7	Unmatched
`path-003`	path	-	-	-24,-38 4x5	Unmatched
`path-004`	path	-	S:#000	-24,-38 4x5	Unmatched
`node-24`	node	-	-	null	Unmatched
`node-26`	node	u1	-	-66,-45 9x6	Unmatched

Gen Elements (0)

No SOM elements (DVI compilation failed)

DE SOM Analysis

GT: 10 elements Gen: 10 elements DVI: OK

Type

0.7500

P:0.750 R:0.750

TP:6 FP:2 FN:2

Text

1.0000

P:1.000 R:1.000

TP:2 FP:0 FN:0

BBox

0.3333

P:0.300 R:0.375

TP:3 FP:7 FN:5

Color

0.7500

P:0.600 R:1.000

TP:3 FP:2 FN:0

Overall

0.7083

BBox Matched Pairs (3 matches, IoU ≥ 0.3)

GT Element	GT Type	Gen Element	Gen Type	IoU
scope-1	scope	scope-1	scope	0.417
picture-2	picture	picture-2	picture	0.417
path-001	path	path-003	path	0.346

Type Breakdown (5 types)

Type	GT	Gen	Matched (min)
node:currarrow	1	0	0
node:isourceshape	1	0	0
node:rectangle	2	2	2
path:closed	2	2	2
path:open	2	4	2
Total	8	8	6

Text Matching (2 matched, 0 GT unmatched, 0 Gen extra)

Full SOM Elements (GT: 10 / Gen: 10)

GT Elements (10)

ID	Type	Text	Color	BBox	Match
`scope-1`	scope	-	-	-67,-53 57x30	↔ scope-1 (IoU:0.42)
`picture-2`	picture	-	-	-67,-53 57x30	↔ picture-2 (IoU:0.42)
`path-001`	path	-	S:#000	-67,-41 57x18	↔ path-003 (IoU:0.35)
`path-002`	path	-	S:#000	-50,-53 24x24	Unmatched
`node-3`	node	-	-	null	Unmatched
`node-8`	node	2.5A	-	-66,-48 19x7	Unmatched
`path-003`	path	-	-	-24,-38 4x5	Unmatched
`path-004`	path	-	S:#000	-24,-38 4x5	Unmatched
`node-24`	node	-	-	null	Unmatched
`node-26`	node	u1	-	-66,-45 9x6	Unmatched

Gen Elements (10)

ID	Type	Text	Color	BBox	Match
`scope-1`	scope	-	-	-67,-49 85x39	Matched
`picture-2`	picture	-	-	-67,-49 85x39	Matched
`path-001`	path	-	S:#000	-67,-32 26x0	Extra
`path-002`	path	-	S:#000	-7,-32 26x0	Extra
`path-003`	path	-	S:#000	-41,-49 34x34	Matched
`node-1`	node	2.5A	-	-24,-42 27x10	Extra
`path-004`	path	-	S:#000	-50,-28 47x18	Extra
`path-005`	path	-	-	-5,-26 6x7	Extra
`path-006`	path	-	S:#000	-5,-26 6x7	Extra
`node-2`	node	u1	-	-24,-38 12x8	Extra

#2 scidiagram_0085 charts Structure Type Conversion Structural Mismatch

D2C F1: 0.05 DE F1: 0.60

✎

DE Edit Instruction

Convert this polar plot into a Cartesian line chart where the angles (0, 90, 180, 270) are mapped to the X-axis and the radial values (1) are mapped to the Y-axis.

Shared Prefix Code (D2C & DE both receive this)

\documentclass[tikz,border=5pt]{standalone}
\usepackage{pgfplots}
\pgfplotsset{compat=1.18}
\usepgfplotslibrary{polar}

GT Original

D2C Generated

DE Generated

DE Reference

Metrics Comparison

Metric	D2C	DE	Diff
SOM F1
F1 Overall	0.0502	0.6028	+0.5526
F1 Type	0.0549	0.9180	+0.8631
F1 Text	0.0734	0.4138	+0.3404
F1 BBox	0.0341	0.2222	+0.1881
F1 Color	0.0384	0.8571	+0.8187
Image Metrics
SSIM	0.6939	0.6773	-0.0166
LPIPS (lower=better)	0.1793	0.6093	+0.4299
CLIP	0.9777	0.9425	-0.0352
Code Metrics
CrystalBLEU	0.2609	0.5374	+0.2765

Compiler Analysis

DVI 编译： D2C OK (element explosion) | DE OK

D2C 问题：

D2C DVI 编译成功，但 SOM 元素爆炸（注意：这不是 DVI 失败案例）。 D2C 和 DE 收到相同的 prefix。D2C 模型选择用连续数学函数 {1/(abs(cos(x)) + abs(sin(x)))} 配合 samples=400 来画极坐标图形，而 GT 只用 4 个 \addplot coordinates {(0,1)(90,1)(180,1)(270,1)} 离散点。

DVI 编译：成功！但 SOM 提取到 1656 个元素（GT 只有 52 个）→ 元素爆炸
精确率崩溃：Precision 仅 0.028（1204 个 FP），虽然 Recall 0.97（35/36 TP）→ Type F1 仅 0.055

结论：这个 case 证明 DVI 编译成功不等于代码结构正确——模型选择了视觉上近似但结构完全不同的实现方式。

DE 优势：

DE 编辑指令"将极坐标图转为笛卡尔折线图，角度映射到 X 轴，半径值映射到 Y 轴"直接引导模型使用离散坐标点。模型生成了 \addplot coordinates {(0,1)(90,1)...}（仅 50 个 SOM 元素 vs GT 42），结构匹配度高，Type F1 = 0.92。
关键差异：编辑指令中"angles (0,90,180,270) mapped to X-axis"直接告诉模型用离散点。

LaTeX Code (D2C / DE / GT Source / DE Answer)

\documentclass[tikz,border=5pt]{standalone}
\usepackage{pgfplots}
\pgfplotsset{compat=1.18}
\usepgfplotslibrary{polar}

\begin{document}
\begin{tikzpicture}
\begin{polaraxis}[
    font=\Large,
    xmin=45, xmax=360,
    ymin=0, ymax=1.15,
    xtick={60,90,120,150,180,210,240,270,300,330,360},
    ytick={0.5, 1},
    yticklabels={},
    ytick style={draw=none},
    grid=major,
    major grid style={solid, lightgray},
    axis line style={solid, thick, black},
    tick style={solid, thick, black},
    xtick align=outside,
]
    % Plot the straight Cartesian segments in polar coordinates
    \addplot [
        blue,
        thick,
        domain=45:360,
        samples=400,
    ] {1/(abs(cos(x)) + abs(sin(x)))};
    
    % Add the markers at the vertices
    \addplot [
        blue,
        only marks,
        mark=*,
        mark size=2.5pt
    ] coordinates {
        (90,1) (180,1) (270,1) (360,1)
    };
    
    % Add custom labels for the radial axis
    \node[anchor=south east, inner sep=2pt] at (axis cs:180,0) {0};
    \node[anchor=north west, inner sep=3pt] at (axis cs:45,0.5) {0.5};
    \node[anchor=north west, inner sep=3pt] at (axis cs:45,1) {1};

\end{polaraxis}
\end{tikzpicture}
\end{document}

\documentclass[tikz,border=5pt]{standalone}
\usepackage{pgfplots}
\pgfplotsset{compat=1.18}
\usepgfplotslibrary{polar}

\begin{document}
\begin{tikzpicture}
\begin{axis}[
    width=10cm,
    height=6cm,
    xmin=0, xmax=360,
    ymin=0, ymax=1.2,
    xtick={0,90,180,270,360},
    ytick={0,0.5,1},
    xlabel={Angle},
    ylabel={Radius},
    grid=both
]
\addplot[blue, mark=*] coordinates {
    (0,1)
    (90,1)
    (180,1)
    (270,1)
    (360,1)
};
\end{axis}
\end{tikzpicture}
\end{document}

\documentclass[tikz,border=5pt]{standalone}

% Base package
\usepackage{pgfplots}
\pgfplotsset{compat=1.18}

% Required pgfplots library for polaraxis
\usepgfplotslibrary{polar}

\begin{document}
  \begin{tikzpicture}
    \begin{polaraxis}[
      xmin=45,
      xmax=360,
      ]
      \addplot coordinates {
      (0,1) (90,1) (180,1) (270,1)
    };
  \end{polaraxis}
\end{tikzpicture}
\end{document}

\documentclass[tikz,border=5pt]{standalone}

% Base package
\usepackage{pgfplots}
\pgfplotsset{compat=1.18}

% Required pgfplots library for polaraxis
\usepgfplotslibrary{polar}

\begin{document}
  \begin{tikzpicture}
    \begin{axis}
      \addplot coordinates {
      (0,1) (90,1) (180,1) (270,1)
    };
  \end{axis}
\end{tikzpicture}
\end{document}

SOM & F1 Details

D2C SOM Analysis

GT: 52 elements Gen: 1656 elements DVI: OK (element explosion)

Type

0.0549

P:0.028 R:0.972

TP:35 FP:1204 FN:1

Text

0.0734

P:0.038 R:0.889

TP:16 FP:402 FN:2

BBox

0.0341

P:0.018 R:0.569

TP:29 FP:1622 FN:22

Color

0.0384

P:0.020 R:0.998

TP:16 FP:799 FN:0

Overall

0.0502

BBox Matched Pairs (20 matches, IoU ≥ 0.3)

GT Element	GT Type	Gen Element	Gen Type	IoU
scope-1	scope	scope-1	scope	0.918
picture-2	picture	picture-2	picture	0.918
scope-3	scope	scope-3	scope	0.918
picture-4	picture	picture-4	picture	0.918
scope-5	scope	scope-5	scope	0.918
scope-6	scope	scope-6	scope	0.967
path-001	path	path-001	path	0.967
scope-7	scope	scope-7	scope	0.915
path-002	path	path-002	path	0.915
scope-8	scope	scope-8	scope	0.918
path-003	path	path-003	path	0.918
path-005	path	path-004	path	0.967
path-006	path	path-005	path	0.909
node-1	node	node-14	node	0.425
node-2	node	node-16	node	0.391
node-3	node	node-1	node	0.466
node-4	node	node-2	node	0.466
node-5	node	node-6	node	0.316
node-6	node	node-7	node	0.308
node-7	node	node-8	node	0.312

Type Breakdown (5 types)

Type	GT	Gen	Matched (min)
data_point	4	404	4
data_series:unknown	2	4	2
node:rectangle	14	16	14
path:closed	8	808	8
path:open	8	7	7
Total	36	1239	35

Text Matching (16 matched, 2 GT unmatched, 402 Gen extra)

Full SOM Elements (GT: 52 / Gen: 1656)

GT Elements (52)

52 elements (element explosion). Type distribution:

Type	Count
path	16
node	14
scope	13
data_point	4
picture	2
data_series	2
axis	1

Gen Elements (1656)

1656 elements (element explosion). Type distribution:

Type	Count
path	815
scope	414
data_point	404
node	16
data_series	4
picture	2
axis	1

DE SOM Analysis

GT: 42 elements Gen: 50 elements DVI: OK

Type

0.9180

P:0.849 R:1.000

TP:28 FP:5 FN:0

Text

0.4138

P:0.400 R:0.429

TP:6 FP:9 FN:8

BBox

0.2222

P:0.204 R:0.244

TP:10 FP:39 FN:31

Color

0.8571

P:0.750 R:1.000

TP:12 FP:4 FN:0

Overall

0.6028

BBox Matched Pairs (10 matches, IoU ≥ 0.3)

GT Element	GT Type	Gen Element	Gen Type	IoU
scope-1	scope	scope-1	scope	0.542
picture-2	picture	picture-2	picture	0.542
scope-3	scope	scope-3	scope	0.542
picture-4	picture	picture-4	picture	0.542
scope-5	scope	scope-5	scope	0.540
scope-6	scope	scope-6	scope	0.492
path-001	path	path-001	path	0.492
scope-7	scope	scope-7	scope	0.637
path-002	path	path-002	path	0.637
path-003	path	scope-8	scope	0.540

Type Breakdown (5 types)

Type	GT	Gen	Matched (min)
data_point	4	5	4
data_series:unknown	2	2	2
node:rectangle	10	10	10
path:closed	9	11	9
path:open	3	5	3
Total	28	33	28

Text Matching (6 matched, 8 GT unmatched, 9 Gen extra)

Full SOM Elements (GT: 42 / Gen: 50)

GT Elements (42)

ID	Type	Text	Color	BBox	Match
`scope-1`	scope	-	-	-47,-60 194x161	↔ scope-1 (IoU:0.54)
`picture-2`	picture	-	-	-47,-60 194x161	↔ picture-2 (IoU:0.54)
`axis-1`	axis	-	-	null	Unmatched
`scope-3`	scope	-	-	-47,-60 194x161	↔ scope-3 (IoU:0.54)
`picture-4`	picture	-	-	-47,-60 194x161	↔ picture-4 (IoU:0.54)
`scope-5`	scope	-	-	-47,-60 194x161	↔ scope-5 (IoU:0.54)
`scope-6`	scope	-	-	-31,-60 150x161	↔ scope-6 (IoU:0.49)
`path-001`	path	-	S:#808080	-31,-60 150x161	↔ path-001 (IoU:0.49)
`scope-7`	scope	-	-	-47,-60 194x121	↔ scope-7 (IoU:0.64)
`path-002`	path	-	S:#808080	-47,-60 194x121	↔ path-002 (IoU:0.64)
`path-003`	path	-	S:#000	-47,-60 194x161	↔ scope-8 (IoU:0.54)
`node-1`	node	0	-	-11,0 4x7	Unmatched
`node-2`	node	50	-	-11,0 9x7	Unmatched
`node-3`	node	100	-	-11,0 14x7	Unmatched
`node-4`	node	150	-	-11,0 14x7	Unmatched
`node-5`	node	200	-	-11,0 14x7	Unmatched
`node-6`	node	250	-	-11,0 14x7	Unmatched
`node-7`	node	0:9	-	-11,0 12x7	Unmatched
`node-8`	node	1	-	-11,0 3x7	Unmatched
`node-9`	node	1:1	-	-11,0 11x7	Unmatched
`node-10`	node	1:2	-	-11,0 11x7	Unmatched
`series-1`	data_series	-	-	-31,20 162x0	Unmatched
`scope-8`	scope	-	-	-31,20 162x0	Unmatched
`path-004`	path	-	S:#00f	-31,20 162x0	Unmatched
`series-2`	data_series	-	-	-33,18 166x4	Unmatched
`scope-9`	scope	-	-	-33,18 166x4	Unmatched
`scope-10`	scope	-	-	-33,18 4x4	Unmatched
`pt-2-1`	data_point	-	-	-33,18 4x4	Unmatched
`path-005`	path	-	F:#00f	-33,18 4x4	Unmatched
`path-006`	path	-	S:#00c	-33,18 4x4	Unmatched
`scope-11`	scope	-	-	21,18 4x4	Unmatched
`pt-2-2`	data_point	-	-	21,18 4x4	Unmatched
`path-007`	path	-	F:#00f	21,18 4x4	Unmatched
`path-008`	path	-	S:#00c	21,18 4x4	Unmatched
`scope-12`	scope	-	-	75,18 4x4	Unmatched
`pt-2-3`	data_point	-	-	75,18 4x4	Unmatched
`path-009`	path	-	F:#00f	75,18 4x4	Unmatched
`path-010`	path	-	S:#00c	75,18 4x4	Unmatched
`scope-13`	scope	-	-	129,18 4x4	Unmatched
`pt-2-4`	data_point	-	-	129,18 4x4	Unmatched
`path-011`	path	-	F:#00f	129,18 4x4	Unmatched
`path-012`	path	-	S:#00c	129,18 4x4	Unmatched

Gen Elements (50)

ID	Type	Text	Color	BBox	Match
`scope-1`	scope	-	-	-36,-67 243x125	Matched
`picture-2`	picture	-	-	-36,-67 243x125	Matched
`axis-1`	axis	-	-	null	Extra
`scope-3`	scope	-	-	-36,-67 243x125	Matched
`picture-4`	picture	-	-	-36,-67 243x125	Matched
`scope-5`	scope	-	-	-34,-67 239x125	Matched
`scope-6`	scope	-	-	-34,-67 239x125	Matched
`path-001`	path	-	S:#bfbfbf	-34,-67 239x125	Matched
`scope-7`	scope	-	-	-34,-46 239x104	Matched
`path-002`	path	-	S:#bfbfbf	-34,-46 239x104	Matched
`scope-8`	scope	-	-	-34,-67 239x125	Matched
`path-003`	path	-	S:#808080	-34,-67 239x125	Extra
`scope-9`	scope	-	-	-34,-46 239x104	Extra
`path-004`	path	-	S:#808080	-34,-46 239x104	Extra
`path-005`	path	-	S:#000	-34,-67 239x125	Extra
`node-1`	node	0	-	0,23 4x7	Extra
`node-2`	node	90	-	0,23 9x7	Extra
`node-3`	node	180	-	0,23 14x7	Extra
`node-4`	node	270	-	0,23 14x7	Extra
`node-5`	node	360	-	0,23 14x7	Extra
`node-6`	node	0	-	0,23 4x7	Extra
`node-7`	node	0:5	-	0,23 12x7	Extra
`node-8`	node	1	-	0,23 3x7	Extra
`series-1`	data_series	-	-	-34,-46 239x0	Extra
`scope-10`	scope	-	-	-34,-46 239x0	Extra
`path-006`	path	-	S:#00f	-34,-46 239x0	Extra
`series-2`	data_series	-	-	-36,-48 243x4	Extra
`scope-11`	scope	-	-	-36,-48 243x4	Extra
`scope-12`	scope	-	-	-36,-48 4x4	Extra
`pt-2-1`	data_point	-	-	-36,-48 4x4	Extra
`path-007`	path	-	F:#00f	-36,-48 4x4	Extra
`path-008`	path	-	S:#00c	-36,-48 4x4	Extra
`scope-13`	scope	-	-	24,-48 4x4	Extra
`pt-2-2`	data_point	-	-	24,-48 4x4	Extra
`path-009`	path	-	F:#00f	24,-48 4x4	Extra
`path-010`	path	-	S:#00c	24,-48 4x4	Extra
`scope-14`	scope	-	-	84,-48 4x4	Extra
`pt-2-3`	data_point	-	-	84,-48 4x4	Extra
`path-011`	path	-	F:#00f	84,-48 4x4	Extra
`path-012`	path	-	S:#00c	84,-48 4x4	Extra
`scope-15`	scope	-	-	143,-48 4x4	Extra
`pt-2-4`	data_point	-	-	143,-48 4x4	Extra
`path-013`	path	-	F:#00f	143,-48 4x4	Extra
`path-014`	path	-	S:#00c	143,-48 4x4	Extra
`scope-16`	scope	-	-	203,-48 4x4	Extra
`pt-2-5`	data_point	-	-	203,-48 4x4	Extra
`path-015`	path	-	F:#00f	203,-48 4x4	Extra
`path-016`	path	-	S:#00c	203,-48 4x4	Extra
`node-9`	node	Angle	-	-0,22 25x9	Extra
`node-10`	node	Radius	-	-0,23 29x7	Extra

#3 scidiagram_0057 3d Element Color Change Scale Mismatch

D2C F1: 0.00 DE F1: 0.81

✎

DE Edit Instruction

Change the fill color of the 3D surface plot from the existing multi-color gradient to a solid red.

Shared Prefix Code (D2C & DE both receive this)

\documentclass[tikz,border=5pt]{standalone}
\usepackage{pgfplots}
\pgfplotsset{compat=1.18}
\usepgfplotslibrary{patchplots}

GT Original

D2C Generated

DE Generated

DE Reference

Metrics Comparison

Metric	D2C	DE	Diff
SOM F1
F1 Overall	0.0000	0.8073	+0.8073
F1 Type	0.0000	1.0000	+1.0000
F1 Text	0.0000	1.0000	+1.0000
F1 BBox	0.0000	0.5735	+0.5735
F1 Color	0.0000	0.6558	+0.6558
Image Metrics
SSIM	0.6137	0.4988	-0.1149
LPIPS (lower=better)	0.3609	0.5694	+0.2085
CLIP	0.9532	0.9491	-0.0041
Code Metrics
CrystalBLEU	0.2507	0.3732	+0.1225

Compiler Analysis

DVI 编译： D2C FAIL | DE OK

D2C 问题：

D2C 用 samples=40 产生 1600 个采样点，DVI 无法处理。 D2C 和 DE 收到相同的 prefix（含 patchplots 库）。注意：GT 也使用了 shader=interp，但 GT 用 samples=2（仅 2×2=4 个点做 bilinear patch），DVI 能正常处理。 D2C 模型却用 samples=40（40×40=1600 个采样点）+ 自定义 colormap，复杂度远超 DVI 引擎承受范围。

DVI 编译：1600 个插值着色点的 PostScript 超出 DVI 引擎处理能力 → 失败 → Gen SOM = 0
PDF 编译：pdflatex 原生支持 PDF 图形操作 → 成功渲染
对比：GT 用 samples=2, shader=interp（4 个点）→ DVI 成功，GT SOM = 36 个元素

结论：shader=interp 本身不是问题（GT 也用了），问题在于 samples=40 导致的规模爆炸。模型没有理解 GT 用 4 个角点做 bilinear patch 的简洁方式。

DE 优势：

DE 编辑指令"将 3D 表面的渐变色改为纯红色"引导模型使用 fill=red（不需要 shader），并用 patch type=bilinear + 4 个显式坐标点，与 GT 的 bilinear patch 结构高度一致。 DVI 编译成功，SOM 69 个元素完全匹配 GT → Type F1 = 1.0，Overall F1 = 0.81。
关键差异：编辑指令引导模型放弃渐变着色 → 代码更简洁、DVI 兼容。

LaTeX Code (D2C / DE / GT Source / DE Answer)

\documentclass[tikz,border=5pt]{standalone}
\usepackage{pgfplots}
\pgfplotsset{compat=1.18}
\usepgfplotslibrary{patchplots}

\begin{document}
\begin{tikzpicture}
\begin{axis}[
    title={Bilinear from $2 \times 2$ matrix input},
    title style={font=\Large, pad=15pt},
    view={35}{30},
    xmin=-5, xmax=5,
    ymin=-5, ymax=5,
    zmin=-25, zmax=25,
    xtick={-4,-2,0,2,4},
    ytick={-5,0,5},
    ztick={-20,0,20},
    ticklabel style={font=\large},
    colormap={custom}{
        color(0cm)=(blue!80!black);
        color(1cm)=(yellow);
        color(2cm)=(orange);
        color(3cm)=(red)
    },
    mesh/ordering=y varies
]

\addplot3[
    surf,
    samples=40,
    shader=interp,
    domain=-5:5,
    y domain=-5:5
] {0.75*x*y - 1.25*x + 1.25*y + 6.25};

\node[above=2pt, font=\Large] at (axis cs:-5, 5, 0) {(0)};
\node[above=2pt, font=\Large] at (axis cs:5, 5, 25) {(1)};
\node[above=2pt, font=\Large] at (axis cs:-5, -5, 25) {(2)};
\node[below=2pt, font=\Large] at (axis cs:5, -5, -25) {(3)};

\end{axis}
\end{tikzpicture}
\end{document}

\documentclass[tikz,border=5pt]{standalone}
\usepackage{pgfplots}
\pgfplotsset{compat=1.18}
\usepgfplotslibrary{patchplots}

\begin{document}
\begin{tikzpicture}
\begin{axis}[
    title={Bilinear from $2 \times 2$ matrix input},
    view={35}{30},
    xlabel={},
    ylabel={},
    zlabel={},
    xmin=-5, xmax=5,
    ymin=-5, ymax=5,
    zmin=-20, zmax=20,
    xtick={-4,-2,0,2,4},
    ytick={-5,0,5},
    ztick={-20,0,20},
    tick style={color=black},
    ticklabel style={font=\large},
    title style={font=\Large},
]
\addplot3 [
    patch,
    patch type=bilinear,
    fill=red,
    nodes near coords={(\coordindex)},
    every node near coord/.append style={font=\Large, text=black}
] coordinates {
    (-5,-5,0)
    (5,5,20)
    (-5,5,20)
    (5,-5,-20)
};
\end{axis}
\end{tikzpicture}
\end{document}

\documentclass[tikz,border=5pt]{standalone}

% Base packages
\usepackage{pgfplots}
\pgfplotsset{compat=1.18}

% pgfplots libraries
% patchplots is required for 'patch type=bilinear'
\usepgfplotslibrary{patchplots}

\begin{document}
  \begin{tikzpicture}
    \begin{axis}[
      nodes near coords={(\coordindex)},
      title=Bilinear from $2\times 2$ matrix input,
      ]
      % note that surf implies 'patch type=rectangle'
      \addplot3 [
      surf,
      shader=interp,
      samples=2,
      patch type=bilinear,
      ] {x*y};
    \end{axis}
  \end{tikzpicture}
\end{document}

\documentclass[tikz,border=5pt]{standalone}

% Base packages
\usepackage{pgfplots}
\pgfplotsset{compat=1.18}

% pgfplots libraries
% patchplots is required for 'patch type=bilinear'
\usepgfplotslibrary{patchplots}

\begin{document}
  \begin{tikzpicture}
    \begin{axis}[
      nodes near coords={(\coordindex)},
      title=Bilinear from $2\times 2$ matrix input,
      ]
      % note that surf implies 'patch type=rectangle'
      \addplot3 [
      patch,
      fill=red,
      draw=red,
      samples=2,
      patch type=bilinear,
      ] {x*y};
    \end{axis}
  \end{tikzpicture}
\end{document}

SOM & F1 Details

D2C SOM Analysis

GT: 36 elements Gen: 0 elements DVI: FAIL

F1 = 0 (Gen SOM = 0, DVI compilation failed — no elements to match)

Full SOM Elements (GT: 36 / Gen: 0)

GT Elements (36)

ID	Type	Text	Color	BBox	Match
`path-001`	path	-	S:#808080	43,23 168x66	Unmatched
`path-002`	path	-	S:#808080	30,21 194x70	Unmatched
`path-003`	path	-	S:#000	30,21 132x22	Unmatched
`path-004`	path	-	S:#000	91,69 132x22	Unmatched
`path-005`	path	-	S:#000	30,43 62x48	Unmatched
`path-006`	path	-	S:#000	162,21 62x48	Unmatched
`path-007`	path	-	-	33,32 6x0	Unmatched
`path-008`	path	-	-	40,30 4x7	Unmatched
`path-009`	path	-	-	60,28 6x0	Unmatched
`path-010`	path	-	-	67,26 4x7	Unmatched
`path-011`	path	-	-	90,21 4x7	Unmatched
`path-012`	path	-	-	117,17 4x7	Unmatched
`path-013`	path	-	-	143,13 4x7	Unmatched
`path-014`	path	-	-	164,11 6x0	Unmatched
`path-015`	path	-	-	172,9 4x7	Unmatched
`path-016`	path	-	-	197,34 4x7	Unmatched
`path-017`	path	-	-	228,58 4x7	Unmatched
`path-018`	path	-	S:#808080	101,160 109x20	Unmatched
`path-019`	path	-	S:#808080	30,134 66x48	Unmatched
`path-020`	path	-	S:#000	91,160 132x22	Unmatched
`path-021`	path	-	S:#000	30,134 62x48	Unmatched
`path-022`	path	-	S:#808080	30,43 62x139	Unmatched
`path-023`	path	-	S:#808080	30,58 62x109	Unmatched
`path-024`	path	-	S:#000	30,43 0x91	Unmatched
`path-025`	path	-	S:#000	91,91 0x91	Unmatched
`path-026`	path	-	-	9,55 6x0	Unmatched
`path-027`	path	-	-	16,52 9x7	Unmatched
`path-028`	path	-	-	21,84 4x7	Unmatched
`path-029`	path	-	-	16,114 9x7	Unmatched
`path-030`	path	-	S:#808080	162,21 62x52	Unmatched
`path-031`	path	-	S:#808080	220,81 3x64	Unmatched
`path-032`	path	-	S:#000	224,69 0x91	Unmatched
`path-033`	path	-	S:#808080	43,23 106x22	Unmatched
`path-034`	path	-	S:#808080	30,58 4x62	Unmatched
`path-035`	path	-	S:#808080	104,71 106x109	Unmatched
`path-036`	path	-	S:#808080	91,84 132x83	Unmatched

Gen Elements (0)

No SOM elements (DVI compilation failed)

DE SOM Analysis

GT: 69 elements Gen: 69 elements DVI: OK

Type

1.0000

P:1.000 R:1.000

TP:49 FP:0 FN:0

Text

1.0000

P:1.000 R:1.000

TP:16 FP:0 FN:0

BBox

0.5735

P:0.574 R:0.574

TP:39 FP:29 FN:29

Color

0.6558

P:0.656 R:0.656

TP:20 FP:11 FN:11

Overall

0.8073

BBox Matched Pairs (20 matches, IoU ≥ 0.3)

GT Element	GT Type	Gen Element	Gen Type	IoU
scope-1	scope	scope-1	scope	0.799
picture-2	picture	picture-2	picture	0.799
scope-3	scope	scope-3	scope	0.799
picture-4	picture	picture-4	picture	0.799
scope-5	scope	scope-5	scope	0.922
scope-6	scope	scope-6	scope	0.880
path-001	path	path-001	path	0.880
scope-7	scope	scope-7	scope	0.890
path-002	path	path-002	path	0.890
path-003	path	path-003	path	0.671
path-004	path	path-004	path	0.549
path-005	path	path-005	path	0.640
path-006	path	path-006	path	0.599
scope-8	scope	scope-8	scope	0.437
path-007	path	path-007	path	0.437
scope-9	scope	scope-9	scope	0.658
path-008	path	path-008	path	0.658
path-009	path	path-009	path	0.475
path-010	path	path-010	path	0.640
scope-10	scope	scope-10	scope	0.674

Type Breakdown (4 types)

Type	GT	Gen	Matched (min)
data_series:unknown	2	2	2
node:rectangle	16	16	16
path:closed	10	10	10
path:open	21	21	21
Total	49	49	49

Text Matching (16 matched, 0 GT unmatched, 0 Gen extra)

Full SOM Elements (GT: 69 / Gen: 69)

GT Elements (69)

69 elements (element explosion). Type distribution:

Type	Count
path	31
scope	17
node	16
picture	2
data_series	2
axis	1

Gen Elements (69)

69 elements (element explosion). Type distribution:

Type	Count
path	31
scope	17
node	16
picture	2
data_series	2
axis	1

#4 scidiagram_2682 planar_geometry Element Position Move Code Quality Issue

D2C F1: 0.00 DE F1: 0.00

✎

DE Edit Instruction

Move the node 'a' from the coordinates (2, 1.5) to the new position (2.5, 1.5).

Shared Prefix Code (D2C & DE both receive this)

\documentclass[border=5pt]{standalone}
\usepackage{tikz}
\usetikzlibrary{through}

GT Original

D2C Generated

DE Generated

DE Reference

Metrics Comparison

Metric	D2C	DE	Diff
SOM F1
F1 Overall	0.0000	0.0000	0.0000
F1 Type	0.0000	0.0000	0.0000
F1 Text	0.0000	0.0000	0.0000
F1 BBox	0.0000	0.0000	0.0000
F1 Color	0.0000	0.0000	0.0000
Image Metrics
SSIM	0.6639	0.6419	-0.0219
LPIPS (lower=better)	0.4385	0.5540	+0.1155
CLIP	0.8793	0.8955	+0.0163
Code Metrics
CrystalBLEU	0.5113	0.5667	+0.0554

Compiler Analysis

DVI 编译： D2C FAIL | DE FAIL

D2C 问题：

D2C 和 DE 犯了相同的语法错误。两者收到相同的 prefix（含 \usetikzlibrary{through}）。 GT 用 \node[draw]at(1,1)[circle through={(a)}]{$c$}（注意花括号 {(a)}），但 D2C 和 DE 都写了 through=(a)（缺少花括号），导致 TikZ through 库无法正确解析坐标引用，圆形未被绘制。

D2C 写法：\node[draw, thick, circle, through=(a)] at (c) {}
DE 写法：\node[draw, thick, circle, through=(a)] at (c) {}
GT 写法：\node[draw]at(1,1)[circle through={(a)}]{$c$}

结论：这是明确的代码 bug——两者都缺少花括号，导致关键图形元素缺失。

DE 优势：

D2C 和 DE 的 F1 都是 0，因为两者犯了相同的语法错误。 DE 的编辑指令是"将节点 'a' 从 (2,1.5) 移动到 (2.5,1.5)"——这只涉及坐标修改，无法帮助模型修正 through 的花括号语法。
结论：编辑指令无法弥补模型对 TikZ 语法细节的误解。

LaTeX Code (D2C / DE / GT Source / DE Answer)

\documentclass[border=5pt]{standalone}
\usepackage{tikz}
\usetikzlibrary{through}

\begin{document}
\begin{tikzpicture}
  \draw[gray] (0,0) grid (3,2);
  \coordinate (c) at (1,1);
  \coordinate (a) at (2,1.5);
  \node[draw, thick, circle, through=(a)] at (c) {};
  \node at (c) {\Large $c$};
  \node at (a) {\Large $a$};
\end{tikzpicture}
\end{document}

\documentclass[border=5pt]{standalone}
\usepackage{tikz}
\usetikzlibrary{through}

\begin{document}
\begin{tikzpicture}
  \draw[step=1cm,gray,very thin] (0,0) grid (3,2);
  \node (c) at (1,1) {\Large $c$};
  \node (a) at (2.5,1.5) {\Large $a$};
  \node[draw, thick, circle, through=(a)] at (c) {};
\end{tikzpicture}
\end{document}

\documentclass[border=5pt]{standalone}
\usepackage{tikz}
\usetikzlibrary{through}
\begin{document}

  \begin{tikzpicture}

    \draw[help lines](0,0)grid(3,2);
    \node(a)at(2,1.5){$a$};
    \node[draw]at(1,1)[circle through={(a)}]{$c$};
  \end{tikzpicture}
\end{document}

\documentclass[border=5pt]{standalone}
\usepackage{tikz}
\usetikzlibrary{through}
\begin{document}

  \begin{tikzpicture}

    \draw[help lines](0,0)grid(3,2);
    \node(a)at(2.5,1.5){$a$};
    \node[draw]at(1,1)[circle through={(a)}]{$c$};
  \end{tikzpicture}
\end{document}

SOM & F1 Details

D2C SOM Analysis

GT: 6 elements Gen: 0 elements DVI: FAIL

F1 = 0 (Gen SOM = 0, DVI compilation failed — no elements to match)

Full SOM Elements (GT: 6 / Gen: 0)

GT Elements (6)

ID	Type	Text	Color	BBox	Match
`scope-1`	scope	-	-	-67,-67 88x63	Unmatched
`picture-2`	picture	-	-	-67,-67 88x63	Unmatched
`path-001`	path	-	S:#808080	-64,-64 85x57	Unmatched
`node-1`	node	a	-	-63,-11 5x4	Unmatched
`path-002`	path	-	S:#000	-67,-67 63x63	Unmatched
`node-2`	node	c	-	-63,-11 4x4	Unmatched

Gen Elements (0)

No SOM elements (DVI compilation failed)

DE SOM Analysis

GT: 6 elements Gen: 0 elements DVI: FAIL

F1 = 0 (Gen SOM = 0, DVI compilation failed — no elements to match)

Full SOM Elements (GT: 6 / Gen: 0)

GT Elements (6)

ID	Type	Text	Color	BBox	Match
`scope-1`	scope	-	-	-67,-67 102x90	Unmatched
`picture-2`	picture	-	-	-67,-67 102x90	Unmatched
`path-001`	path	-	S:#808080	-50,-50 85x57	Unmatched
`node-1`	node	a	-	-50,2 5x4	Unmatched
`path-002`	path	-	S:#000	-67,-67 90x90	Unmatched
`node-2`	node	c	-	-50,2 4x4	Unmatched

Gen Elements (0)

No SOM elements (DVI compilation failed)

#5 scidiagram_5508 graph_structures Conditional Filtering Code Quality Issue

D2C F1: 0.00 DE F1: 0.00

✎

DE Edit Instruction

Filter the diagram to only show the nodes and arrows on the left side with x-coordinates less than or equal to -1, removing all other elements.

Shared Prefix Code (D2C & DE both receive this)

\documentclass[tikz,border=5pt]{standalone}
\usepackage[latin1]{inputenc}
\usepackage{amsmath}
\usepackage{amssymb}
\usepackage{tikz}
\usepackage{tikz-cd}
\usepackage{xcolor}
\usetikzlibrary{matrix,arrows,backgrounds,shapes.misc,shapes.geometric,patterns,calc,positioning,shapes,decorations.pathmorphing}

GT Original

D2C Generated

DE Generated

DE Reference

Metrics Comparison

Metric	D2C	DE	Diff
SOM F1
F1 Overall	0.0000	0.0000	0.0000
F1 Type	0.0000	0.0000	0.0000
F1 Text	0.0000	0.0000	0.0000
F1 BBox	0.0000	0.0000	0.0000
F1 Color	0.0000	0.0000	0.0000
Image Metrics
SSIM	0.6290	0.6499	+0.0209
LPIPS (lower=better)	0.3469	0.6707	+0.3238
CLIP	0.9515	0.9712	+0.0197
Code Metrics
CrystalBLEU	0.0392	0.3842	+0.3451

Compiler Analysis

DVI 编译： D2C FAIL | DE FAIL

D2C 问题：

D2C 和 DE 都用了 tikzcd 宏，但 GT 用的是手动 \draw。两者收到相同的 prefix（包含 \usepackage{tikz-cd} 和多个 TikZ 库）。虽然 prefix 中有 tikz-cd，但 GT 代码实际用的是 \begin{tikzpicture} + 手动 \draw 命令逐条绘制节点和箭头—— 这说明正确的实现方式就是手动 TikZ，而不是高级宏。模型选择 \begin{tikzcd} 是"偷懒"的做法，无法精确控制节点位置和箭头样式。

D2C：用 \begin{tikzcd} 高级宏（859 字符，3×5 节点矩阵）
DE：用 \begin{tikzcd} 简化版（440 字符，仅左侧 2 个节点）
GT source：手动 \draw（~80 行，每条箭头单独定位和绘制）
DE answer：手动 \draw（仅保留左侧节点和箭头）

结论：模型不会用手动 TikZ 精确重建图结构，转而使用高级宏生成视觉近似但结构完全不同的代码。这是明确的模型能力不足。

DE 优势：

两者 F1 都是 0。但 DE 的 CrystalBLEU (0.38) 远高于 D2C (0.04)，因为 DE 代码更短、与 GT answer_code 的 preamble 重合度更高。
注意：prefix 中虽然包含 tikz-cd，但 GT 并不使用它——手动 \draw 才是正确的实现方式，模型没有这个能力。

LaTeX Code (D2C / DE / GT Source / DE Answer)

\documentclass[tikz,border=5pt]{standalone}
\usepackage[latin1]{inputenc}
\usepackage{amsmath}
\usepackage{amssymb}
\usepackage{tikz}
\usepackage{tikz-cd}
\usepackage{xcolor}
\usetikzlibrary{matrix,arrows,backgrounds,shapes.misc,shapes.geometric,patterns,calc,positioning,shapes,decorations.pathmorphing}

\begin{document}
\begin{tikzcd}[row sep=4em, column sep=5em]
& & K \arrow[dd, "0"'] \arrow[rr, "0"] & & K \arrow[dl, "{\begin{bmatrix} 1 \\ 0 \end{bmatrix}}"] \\
K & K^2 \arrow[l, "{\begin{bmatrix} 1 & 0 \end{bmatrix}}"'] \arrow[ur, "{\begin{bmatrix} 0 & 1 \end{bmatrix}}"] & & K^2 \arrow[ul, "{\begin{bmatrix} 0 & 1 \end{bmatrix}}"'] \arrow[dr, "{\begin{bmatrix} 0 & 1 \end{bmatrix}}"] & \\
& & K \arrow[ul, "{\begin{bmatrix} 1 \\ 0 \end{bmatrix}}"] \arrow[ur, "{\begin{bmatrix} 1 \\ 0 \end{bmatrix}}"] & & K \arrow[ll, "0"]
\end{tikzcd}
\end{document}

\documentclass[tikz,border=5pt]{standalone}
\usepackage[latin1]{inputenc}
\usepackage{amsmath}
\usepackage{amssymb}
\usepackage{tikz}
\usepackage{tikz-cd}
\usepackage{xcolor}
\usetikzlibrary{matrix,arrows,backgrounds,shapes.misc,shapes.geometric,patterns,calc,positioning,shapes,decorations.pathmorphing}

\begin{document}
\begin{tikzcd}[column sep=4em]
K & K^2 \arrow[l, "{\begin{bmatrix} 1 & 0 \end{bmatrix}}"]
\end{tikzcd}
\end{document}

\documentclass[tikz,border=5pt]{standalone}
\usepackage[latin1]{inputenc}
\usepackage{amsmath}
\usepackage{amssymb}
\usepackage{tikz}
\usepackage{tikz-cd}
\usepackage{xcolor}
\usetikzlibrary{matrix,arrows,backgrounds,shapes.misc,shapes.geometric,patterns,calc,positioning,shapes,decorations.pathmorphing}
\begin{document}

  \begin{tikzpicture}[scale=1]
    % configuracion

    \draw  (-4,0)node{$K$};
    \draw  (-2.5,0)node{$K^{2}$};
    \draw  (-1,1.15)node{$K$};
    \draw  (-1,-1.15)node{$K$};
    \draw  (0.5,0)node{$K^{2}$};
    \draw  (2,1.15)node{$K$};
    \draw  (2,-1.15)node{$K$};

    %triangulacion
    \draw[->][line width=0.5pt] (-2.72,0) -- (-3.85,0)
    node[pos=0.5,above] {{\tiny $ \begin{bmatrix}
    1&0\\
  \end{bmatrix} $}};

  \draw[->][line width=0.5pt] (-2.27,0.18) -- (-1.15,1)
  node[pos=0.5,left] {{\tiny $ \begin{bmatrix}
  0&1\\
\end{bmatrix} $}};

\draw[->][line width=0.5pt] (-1.15,-1.1) -- (-2.35,-0.1)
node[pos=0.5,below] {{\tiny $ \begin{bmatrix}
1\\
0
\end{bmatrix} $}};

\draw[->][line width=0.5pt] (-1,0.95) -- (-1,-0.95)
node[pos=0.5,left] {$0$};

\draw[->][line width=0.5pt] (0.3,0.15) -- (-0.85,1)
node[pos=0.5,right] {{\tiny $ \begin{bmatrix}
0&1\\
\end{bmatrix} $}};

\draw[->][line width=0.5pt] (-0.855,-1.05) -- (0.27,-0.15)
node[pos=0.5,above] {{\tiny $ \begin{bmatrix}
1\\
0
\end{bmatrix} $}};

\draw[->][line width=0.5pt] (-0.85,1.15) -- (1.85,1.15)
node[pos=0.5,above] {$0$};

\draw[<-][line width=0.5pt] (-0.85,-1.15) -- (1.85,-1.15)
node[pos=0.5,below] {$0$};

\draw[->][line width=0.5pt] (1.85,1) -- (0.72,0.17)
node[pos=0.35,below]  {{\tiny $ \begin{bmatrix}
1\\
0
\end{bmatrix} $}};

\draw[->][line width=0.5pt]  (0.65,-0.1) -- (1.85,-1)
node[pos=0.65,right]{{\tiny $ \begin{bmatrix}
0&1\\
\end{bmatrix} $}};

\end{tikzpicture}

\end{document}

\documentclass[tikz,border=5pt]{standalone}
\usepackage[latin1]{inputenc}
\usepackage{amsmath}
\usepackage{amssymb}
\usepackage{tikz}
\usepackage{tikz-cd}
\usepackage{xcolor}
\usetikzlibrary{matrix,arrows,backgrounds,shapes.misc,shapes.geometric,patterns,calc,positioning,shapes,decorations.pathmorphing}
\begin{document}

  \begin{tikzpicture}[scale=1]
    % nodes on the left side (x < -1)
    \draw  (-4,0)node{$K$};
    \draw  (-2.5,0)node{$K^{2}$};

    % Arrow from K^2 to K (left)
    \draw[->][line width=0.5pt] (-2.72,0) -- (-3.85,0)
    node[pos=0.5,above] {{\tiny $ \begin{bmatrix}
    1&0\\
  \end{bmatrix} $}};

\end{tikzpicture}

\end{document}

SOM & F1 Details

D2C SOM Analysis

GT: 39 elements Gen: 0 elements DVI: FAIL

F1 = 0 (Gen SOM = 0, DVI compilation failed — no elements to match)

Full SOM Elements (GT: 39 / Gen: 0)

GT Elements (39)

ID	Type	Text	Color	BBox	Match
`scope-1`	scope	-	-	-55,-56 161x70	Unmatched
`picture-2`	picture	-	-	-55,-56 161x70	Unmatched
`node-1`	node	K	-	55,-28 8x7	Unmatched
`node-2`	node	K2	-	55,-29 12x8	Unmatched
`node-3`	node	K	-	55,-28 8x7	Unmatched
`node-4`	node	K	-	55,-28 8x7	Unmatched
`node-5`	node	K2	-	55,-29 12x8	Unmatched
`node-6`	node	K	-	55,-28 8x7	Unmatched
`node-7`	node	K	-	55,-28 8x7	Unmatched
`path-001`	path	-	S:#000	-54,-21 32x0	Unmatched
`path-002`	path	-	S:#000	-55,-24 2x5	Unmatched
`node-8`	node	10	-	56,-25 19x6	Unmatched
`path-003`	path	-	S:#000	-10,-49 31x23	Unmatched
`path-004`	path	-	S:#000	18,-50 3x4	Unmatched
`node-9`	node	01	-	56,-25 19x6	Unmatched
`path-005`	path	-	S:#000	-12,-18 34x28	Unmatched
`path-006`	path	-	S:#000	-12,-19 3x4	Unmatched
`node-10`	node	10	-	56,-28 7x12	Unmatched
`path-007`	path	-	S:#000	26,-48 0x53	Unmatched
`path-008`	path	-	S:#000	23,3 5x2	Unmatched
`node-11`	node	0	-	55,-28 4x7	Unmatched
`path-009`	path	-	S:#000	31,-49 32x24	Unmatched
`path-010`	path	-	S:#000	30,-50 3x4	Unmatched
`node-12`	node	01	-	56,-25 19x6	Unmatched
`path-011`	path	-	S:#000	30,-16 32x25	Unmatched
`path-012`	path	-	S:#000	58,-17 3x4	Unmatched
`node-13`	node	10	-	56,-28 7x12	Unmatched
`path-013`	path	-	S:#000	30,-54 76x0	Unmatched
`path-014`	path	-	S:#000	104,-56 2x5	Unmatched
`node-14`	node	0	-	55,-28 4x7	Unmatched
`path-015`	path	-	S:#000	31,12 76x0	Unmatched
`path-016`	path	-	S:#000	30,9 2x5	Unmatched
`node-15`	node	0	-	55,-28 4x7	Unmatched
`path-017`	path	-	S:#000	75,-50 32x23	Unmatched
`path-018`	path	-	S:#000	75,-29 3x4	Unmatched
`node-16`	node	10	-	56,-28 7x12	Unmatched
`path-019`	path	-	S:#000	73,-18 34x25	Unmatched
`path-020`	path	-	S:#000	103,4 3x4	Unmatched
`node-17`	node	01	-	56,-25 19x6	Unmatched

Gen Elements (0)

No SOM elements (DVI compilation failed)

DE SOM Analysis

GT: 7 elements Gen: 0 elements DVI: FAIL

F1 = 0 (Gen SOM = 0, DVI compilation failed — no elements to match)

Full SOM Elements (GT: 7 / Gen: 0)

GT Elements (7)

ID	Type	Text	Color	BBox	Match
`scope-1`	scope	-	-	-55,-62 129x11	Unmatched
`picture-2`	picture	-	-	-55,-62 129x11	Unmatched
`node-1`	node	K	-	55,-61 8x7	Unmatched
`node-2`	node	K2	-	55,-62 12x8	Unmatched
`path-001`	path	-	S:#000	-54,-54 32x0	Unmatched
`path-002`	path	-	S:#000	-55,-57 2x5	Unmatched
`node-3`	node	10	-	56,-58 19x6	Unmatched

Gen Elements (0)

No SOM elements (DVI compilation failed)