Domain: Humanities and Social Sciences — Architecture & Urban Planning
Target concept: Visualization of the Comparison between the Central Plan of the Renaissance and the Dynamic Plan of the Baroque

Video generation prompt: Display the circular central plan of the Renaissance period on the left, and the curvilinear dynamic plan of the Baroque period on the right.

Evaluation guide:
(i) Target concept: Visual differentiation of Renaissance central-plan geometry (static, centric, closed) versus Baroque dynamic-plan geometry (kinetic, directional, open).
Minimum mechanism: Orthographic top-down view must be maintained; left and right spatial roles must be fixed and non-interchangeable; circular form must encode centrality without orientation; curvilinear form must encode motion without symmetry.
(ii)Storyline: [Frame 0–100%] Fixed overhead camera view establishes stable bilateral composition; [0–20%] Both plans fade in simultaneously and settle into left/right positions; [20–100%] Plans remain fully visible, unchanging in position, orientation, and internal geometry; no transition, transformation, or annotation occurs, only sustained contrast between circular stillness (left) and curvilinear flow (right); all elements must remain within frame boundaries with no perspective shift, zoom, or rotation.

Manual:
Experimental Procedure
1. Display two static, top-down architectural plan diagrams side-by-side in a fixed frame: left position shows a circular central plan; right position shows a curvilinear dynamic plan.
Observation of Experimental Phenomena
2. Left diagram is a closed, radially symmetric circle with no directional bias; right diagram is an open, asymmetric, continuously varying curve with implied motion and no static balance.
Summary of Experimental Principles
3. Renaissance central plans emphasize geometric unity, centrality, and stillness via circles/squares; Baroque dynamic plans express movement, tension, and theatricality via ellipses, ovals, and undulating curves.

Prompt Grounding rubric:
level_1: The frame shows no architectural plan diagrams at all: neither a circular form on the left nor a curvilinear form on the right appears, and there is no side-by-side layout of two diagrams.
level_2: A single plan-like shape appears but not in a left/right pair (e.g., only one diagram fills the frame, or the two diagrams overlap or stack vertically instead of sitting side by side); or both diagrams share the same geometry type (two circles or two curvilinear forms); or the diagrams read as 3D renderings, hand sketches, or text labels rather than flat top-down plans.
level_3: Two separate top-down plan diagrams sit in a left/right pair: one is recognizably circular (a closed, radially symmetric ring or disc) and one is recognizably curvilinear (an open, flowing, asymmetric outline), but the assignment is inconsistent: either the circular form sits on the right instead of the left, or the curvilinear form sits on the left instead of the right.
level_4: The circular diagram sits on the left (closed, radially symmetric, no directional bias) and the curvilinear diagram sits on the right (open-ended, asymmetric, with varying curvature suggesting motion); both are flat, top-down, and easy to tell apart, but one shows a minor cosmetic flaw, for example a brief flicker of visual noise, a momentary partial overlap with the frame edge, or a slight misalignment that does not distort the underlying shape.
level_5: The circular Renaissance-style diagram stays fixed on the left (closed ring, radial symmetry, no arrows or linear emphasis) and the curvilinear Baroque-style diagram stays fixed on the right (open, asymmetric, continuously curving outline) for the entire clip; both diagrams are cleanly rendered top-down, fully inside the frame, never overlapping, rotated, or obscured, and instantly distinguishable from each other.

Scientific and Causal Correctness rubric:
level_1: Nothing in the frame ties either diagram to the Renaissance or the Baroque: the circular and curvilinear forms appear with no historical association, or no recognizable typology (circle vs. curvilinear plan) is shown at all.
level_2: A caption or on-screen cue names 'Renaissance' or 'Baroque,' but the geometry contradicts it, for instance the curvilinear form is labeled Renaissance, or the circular form is labeled Baroque; or both diagrams follow the same formal logic (e.g., both are strictly symmetric, or both show broken symmetry), erasing the period contrast.
level_3: The left circular diagram reads as the Renaissance central plan and the right curvilinear diagram reads as the Baroque dynamic plan, whether by label or by visual convention; however the circular plan shows a feature untypical of Renaissance centrality (e.g., an off-center core, a broken ring, or an embedded oval), or the curvilinear plan shows a feature untypical of Baroque dynamism (e.g., a mirror-symmetric outline or a static, repeating pattern with no sense of flow).
level_4: The left circular diagram is correctly read as Renaissance (radial centrality, pure geometric closure, balanced proportions) and the right curvilinear diagram is correctly read as Baroque (asymmetric, undulating, suggesting movement) without needing a caption, but one carries a small non-defining artifact, such as a faint grid overlay on the curvilinear plan that does not disrupt its dynamic reading.
level_5: The left diagram is unambiguously a pure Renaissance central plan (closed circular form, no directional vector, no elongation, no off-center focal point), and the right diagram is unambiguously a pure Baroque dynamic plan (continuously curving, asymmetric, no closed loop, no mirror symmetry, no static grid-like repetition), so the Renaissance/Baroque contrast is legible from geometry alone, with no cross-contamination between the two typologies.

Spatiotemporal Consistency rubric:
level_1: A severe spatiotemporal break occurs: the circular and curvilinear diagrams swap left/right positions mid-clip, one diagram suddenly changes size, either diagram vanishes and reappears, or the camera tilts/rotates away from the fixed overhead orthographic view.
level_2: Both diagrams stay in their correct left/right slots but flicker or briefly drop out of view; or their spatial relationship shifts: one diagram drifts toward the center, the two begin to overlap, or their relative sizes change inconsistently over time; or the overhead lighting on the two diagrams shifts direction partway through the clip.
level_3: Both diagrams stay continuously visible in their fixed left/right slots at a stable size and alignment, with no swapping, vanishing, or drifting; however, one diagram briefly warps or stretches during the clip, or its outline renders inconsistently from one moment to the next (e.g., the curvilinear edge briefly looks jagged or blurred rather than smooth).
level_4: Both diagrams hold a continuous, stable position, size, and top-down framing throughout, with no warping, jitter, or lighting shift; a minor non-core artifact is tolerated, such as a single moment of soft motion blur on an otherwise static diagram, or a barely noticeable brightness flicker that does not affect shape legibility.
level_5: Both diagrams remain perfectly stationary in their fixed left/right slots for the whole clip (no drift, no resizing, no rotation, no edge distortion, no lighting or shadow change, no dropout), preserving the circular-vs-curvilinear contrast with complete spatiotemporal steadiness under the fixed overhead view.