Can Quizgecko generate accurate quiz questions from a clean scan?
Quizgecko passed this clean-scan quiz-generation scenario. It read an image-only PDF with no text layer and generated keyed questions that matched figure-only circuit symbols, table values, and other chapter facts.
1 of 1 test case passed
Every test case in this scenario has a result.
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.
Scanned study material with no text layerPassEvidence
The tool's response has no text to quote: it is what the evidence under Proofs shows.
Proof 2 · Screen recording · ▶ 4:25–4:26
| ✓ | Expected: Generate valid questions and correct answers from the scanned content without omitting or misreading it because it has no text layer.Found: It produced keyed questions from the image-only chapter, including figure-only circuit symbols and exact table readings, with no omission or misread shown. |
It passes because the scan had only page images and no text layer, and the generated questions matched figure-only symbols and table readings instead of omitting or misreading them.
Question count. It produced 52 questions even though the maximum was 50.
Hyphenation. Some stems kept line-break hyphenation from the scan, but the answers stayed correct.
Only selected questions were checked against the chapter, so the page does not show every question being verified.
The proof covers 11 selected questions, including the figure- and table-based items.
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.
How this scenario is graded
How we decide Pass, Fail and Not gradable. The same rules apply to every tool tested on this scenario.
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.
- 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.
| Level | Name | Scope |
|---|---|---|
| Benchmark | Quiz Generation → | 15 scenarios · 10 tools |
| Capability | Quiz Generation → | |
| Scenario | A cleanly scanned document → | |
| Tool | Quizgecko → |
Global scenario definition → · Global capability definition → · Quizgecko product page →
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.
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.
You run the same kind of test against your own setup and get the same behaviour.
Agree →Yours behaves differently. Tell us what you got, with a screenshot if you have one.
Disagree →Something here is wrong — a reference value, a transcription, a grade.
Report an issue →Tell us what changed and we schedule a rerun of the failing test case. The old result stays as history.
Vendor notice →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.
File fingerprints (SHA-256)
A fingerprint identifies the exact file used for this result.