Domain: Healthcare — Pathology
Target concept: Hypertrophy (compensatory hypertrophy)

Video generation prompt: A myocardial tissue specimen with prolonged increased load is placed on the experimental table, and cell morphology is observed under the optical microscope.

Evaluation guide:
(i) Target concept: Compensatory hypertrophy in myocardium as an adaptive response to sustained mechanical load.
Minimum mechanism: Cardiomyocytes cannot undergo mitosis postnatally; therefore, increased functional demand triggers protein synthesis and sarcomere addition in parallel, resulting in cellular enlargement without cell division.
(ii)Storyline: [Phase 1: Setup] Myocardial specimen is placed centered on a clean, neutral-toned experimental table. No movement, no tools other than microscope visible. [Phase 2: Instrumentation] Optical microscope is lowered into fixed position directly above specimen; no repositioning after initial placement. [Phase 3: Observation] Static, in-focus microscopic view fills frame. No panning, zooming, or focus transition; field contains only myocardial tissue with unambiguous hypertrophic morphology. Perspective is fixed: tabletop view for placement, then seamless cut or rigid camera rig transition to eyepiece-aligned microscopic view. No human hands, labels, or annotations appear; all information must be visually self-contained.

Manual:
Experimental Procedure
1. Place myocardial tissue specimen (from heart subjected to prolonged increased load) onto experimental table.
2. Position optical microscope above specimen.
3. Observe tissue morphology under microscope at standard magnification.
Observation of Experimental Phenomena
Enlarged cardiomyocytes with increased cross-sectional area, preserved striations, central nuclei, and absence of necrosis/fibrosis.
Summary of Experimental Principles
Compensatory hypertrophy: adaptive increase in cardiomyocyte size in response to chronic hemodynamic overload, maintaining contractile function without hyperplasia.

Prompt Grounding rubric:
level_1: No myocardial tissue specimen is shown; no experimental table appears; no optical microscope is present; the sequence never reaches a microscopic view.
level_2: The specimen appears without ever being placed on the experimental table, or the table appears without a specimen on it, or the microscope is shown but never positioned over any specimen, or the microscopic view frame contains no tissue at all.
level_3: The specimen is placed on the experimental table, the optical microscope is present and aimed at the specimen, and a static microscopic field is shown, but the tissue in that field is not identifiable as heart muscle (no visible striations, no branching fiber pattern, no centrally placed nuclei).
level_4: The specimen is placed on the table, the microscope is positioned over it, and the static microscopic field clearly shows heart-muscle tissue (striated fibers, central nuclei, branching cell outlines), but the sequence does not visually establish the placement-then-microscope-then-observation order (e.g., the microscopic view appears with no clear link back to the specimen just placed).
level_5: The specimen is placed on the table, the microscope is lowered/aimed over it, and the video shows one continuous, correctly ordered sequence (specimen placement, then microscope positioning, then a static in-focus microscopic field of heart-muscle tissue), with no extra hands, tools, or unrelated objects breaking the shot, and no camera cut that loses the spatial link between the tabletop specimen and the microscopic field.

Scientific and Causal Correctness rubric:
level_1: The microscopic field shows tissue that is not heart muscle at all (e.g., smooth muscle, fat, or skin), or shows clearly different pathology (dead/necrotic tissue, inflammatory cells, or amyloid deposits) rather than any form of cell enlargement.
level_2: The field shows heart-muscle tissue, but either it looks completely normal in size with no enlargement, or it shows disorganized, disarrayed fibers with irregular scarring, features of a diseased heart rather than the adaptive enlargement expected from sustained extra workload.
level_3: The cardiomyocytes visibly appear larger than a normal reference (thicker fibers, more area per cell), but at least one expected feature is missing: the striped (striated) banding pattern is blurry or absent, or the nuclei are not centrally placed within the fiber, or cell boundaries are too indistinct to judge.
level_4: The cardiomyocytes are visibly enlarged, striations are clearly preserved, and nuclei sit centrally within the fibers, but the field also shows a distracting artifact (e.g., a smudge or fold obscuring part of the tissue) or gives no visual size reference, making it hard to be fully confident the enlargement isn't just a magnification difference.
level_5: The cardiomyocytes are uniformly and unambiguously larger than normal muscle fibers, with clear striped banding preserved across the field, nuclei sitting centrally and appearing enlarged along with the cells, and no scarring, dead tissue, or inflammatory cells anywhere in the same field, all visible together in one in-focus microscopic view, consistent with the heart's adaptive response to sustained extra workload.

Spatiotemporal Consistency rubric:
level_1: The specimen or the microscope vanishes and reappears at a different spot; the lighting jumps instantly from fully dark to fully bright with no transition; a structural piece of the setup (e.g., the tabletop edge) disappears and reappears between frames; the shot cuts between two incompatible viewpoints of the same moment.
level_2: The specimen or microscope changes position or angle with no visible motion causing it; a bright reflection on the tissue or lens jumps to a new spot with no matching change in the light source; the microscopic field appears on screen before the specimen has actually been placed on the table.
level_3: The specimen and microscope stay in the same place throughout the observation; the lighting looks consistent from shot to shot; there is no vanishing/reappearing object or broken structure, but a small, easily overlooked imperfection remains, such as a brief flicker in the microscope's illumination or a slight visual mismatch between the tabletop surface and the specimen's edge.
level_4: The specimen stays in full contact with the table and the microscope stays fixed for the entire observation, with no vanishing, warping, or lighting jump, but one minor flaw remains, such as a brief, sub-second lens flare that does not cover any tissue, or a short moment where the microscopic image softens out of focus and then sharpens again without any loss of the visible morphology.
level_5: The specimen remains continuously and visibly in contact with the table, the microscope stays perfectly still, the lighting is even and unchanging across the whole clip, and the microscopic field stays sharply in focus the entire time with no soft-focus drift, no flicker, and no mismatched reflection or shadow anywhere in the shot.