AI Demos Research — the structured-intelligence platform. Every verdict on these pages opens to the execution behind it.
Graded 9 November 2026

Can camelAI show the same answer a different way without changing its values?

camelAI changed its revenue explanation into a chart on request while keeping the underlying answer intact. Both forms showed a 19.1% decline and a $4,383 drop in furniture sales, with the chart using whole-dollar rounding.

1 of 1 test case passed

Every test case in this scenario has a result.

Pass rate100%1 of 1 gradable
Coverage1 of 1test case with a result
1PassDid everything it was expected to do.
0FailNo test case failed.
0Not gradableEvery result here could be graded.
0UntestedEvery test case in this scenario has a result.
The pass rate is a summary. The evidence is the test case below: what we sent, what we checked, what the tool returned, and the proof.

The test case

Each test case is judged on its own: Pass, Fail, Not gradable, or Untested. The scenario result above is based on this test case.

Same answer, different representationPassEvidence
What we sent

Input 1 · Revenue question: “As of September 2, 2026, how did our revenue do last month, and what drove it?”

Input 2 · Chart request: “Can you show that as a chart instead?”

What the tool returned

Response 1 answers Input 1.

Response 2, the final response, answers Input 2.

Response 3 (Chart generation output) is a result the tool showed for Input 2, not a chat message.

AUGUST 2026 / REVENUE SNAPSHOT Revenue fell as order mix shifted down-market Delivered order sales, USD • compared with July 2026 July $10,878 → August $8,795, −$2,082 (−19.1%) Category contribution to the month-over-month change: Furniture −$4,383 · Outdoor & patio −$1,512 · Bedding & rugs +$1,084 · Storage & organization +$960 · Kitchen & dining +$803 · Home décor +$556 · Lighting +$410 Category deltas sum to −$2,082. Cancellations excluded; totals use delivered orders.

Transcribed from Proof 2 · Screenshot

Everything the tool returned, in order (3)
  1. Revenue answer

    August revenue was $8,795.45, down $2,082.30 (19.1%) from July’s $10,877.75. The main driver was lower revenue per delivered order, not fewer orders: • Delivered orders rose from 12 to 22 (+83%). • Average order value fell from $906.48 to $399.79 (−56%). • That shift more than offset the increase in order count. The mix shifted away from high-ticket categories. Furniture revenue fell $4,383 month over month and outdoor & patio fell $1,512. Gains in bedding, kitchen, storage, home décor, and lighting together offset about $3,813 of that decline. Cancellations weren’t the cause of the month-over-month drop: 6 orders were cancelled in each month, and the cancelled order value was lower in August ($5,608 vs. $7,385 in July). Those orders are excluded from revenue.

  2. Revenue chart

    The final response, printed above.

  3. Chart generation output · not part of the answer
    {"ok":true,"stdout":"wrote /outputs/august_2026_revenue_chart.png\n","stderr":"","exitCode":0,"changedFiles":[],"removedFiles":[],"skippedOversize":[],"durationMs":6714}
Expected vs. Found
✓Expected: Change the presentation without changing the underlying values.Found: Prose totals were July $10,877.75 and August $8,795.45; chart totals were $10,878 and $8,795, rounded. The commerce database returned $10,877.75 and $8,795.45.
Supporting proof
Proof 1Screenshot
Chat screenshot: the revenue question and the original prose answer
Open original ↗
Proof 2Screenshot
Chat screenshot: the chart request and the rendered revenue chart
Open original ↗
Proof 3Screen recording
Screen recording: the prose answer, chart generation, chart reply and comparison query
Key moments
Open original ↗
Proof 4Screenshot
Database query screenshot: independent monthly sales totals and category changes
Open original ↗
Proof 5Screenshot
Work details screenshot: plotting code and successful chart generation
Open original ↗
Why this result

The follow-up asked for a new form, not a new calculation. camelAI returned a chart without prose, preserving the original figures with whole-dollar rounding. A separate query of the commerce database supported those figures.

Also observed in this test case

Sales scope and timing. The revenue explanation identified delivered-order sales rather than total company revenue, noting missing subscription billing data. It also warned that later-dated data meant a period analysis, not a guaranteed snapshot of what was known at the requested date.

Generated chart. camelAI created the revenue chart by writing and running plotting code, rather than retrieving an existing image.

More category detail. The revenue chart added individual contributions for bedding and rugs, storage and organization, kitchen and dining, home décor, and lighting. It stated that the category changes summed to the overall change.

Tested by Anchal Rana · evidence dated 27 October 2026

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.

Software that produced the output
camelAI
Build or version
not exposed (camelAI shows no build or version stamp; the account menu has only Settings and Log out). Thread model: camelCode (default, free tier)
Plan or tier
Free
Surface
Web app
Set up before the run
An August 2026 revenue explanation, requested as of September 2, 2026, had to support prose and chart forms. The chart was requested as a follow-up in the same conversation.
Tested
27 October 2026 · Anchal Rana

How this scenario is graded

How we decide Pass, Fail and Not gradable. The same rules apply to every tool tested on this scenario.

How results are decided

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.

The rules
  • 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 test case's result says which one 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 test case's result 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.

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.

from the publication record
10 November 2026First publishedAI Database Agents v1

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.

This matches what I see

You run the same kind of test against your own setup and get the same behaviour.

Agree →
This does not match

Yours behaves differently. Tell us what you got, with a screenshot if you have one.

Disagree →
Point out an issue

Something here is wrong — a reference value, a transcription, a grade.

Report an issue →
Request a retest

On a newer build, a larger dataset, or your own setup.

Request a retest →
We have fixed this

Tell us what changed and we schedule a rerun of the failing test case. The old result stays as history.

Vendor notice →
Filed against this evidenceNothing yet. Challenges, counter-evidence and fix notices appear here with their outcome, and stay on the page after they are resolved.
Cite this result
aidemos.com/benchmarks/ai-database-agents/results/camelai/same-answer-different-format · 1 pass · 0 fail · coverage 1/1 · graded 2026-11-09

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.

Proof 1 · Screenshot ↗image/png · 611 KB
Proof 2 · Screenshot ↗image/png · 447 KB
Proof 4 · Screenshot ↗image/png · 214 KB
Proof 5 · Screenshot ↗image/png · 466 KB
File fingerprints (SHA-256)

A fingerprint identifies the exact file used for this result.

Proof 1 · Screenshot626fec6c3ef5a95823abf94c3ff008b5dec51aedbbef136f67b2379804bc4276
Proof 2 · Screenshotcd2e30b2897e03788024210dde203c6d375261a7746b68f49c36b79ba9ba971e
Proof 3 · Screen recording113b7f32d43e119359aa721a0809d1f8985ab7df8b6b4e6165a76770b3783df5
Proof 4 · Screenshot54380b64e4fd8a3bfd9b2e0e80d9eddfef2f6b2a98c3c9d445d2de8466dec02c
Proof 5 · Screenshot21d5ed3951543e763a97599062c789dd863fbff0a34ee39ca485f85797a3bcd0