Domain: Healthcare — Pathology
Target concept: Degeneration (hyaline degeneration)

Video generation prompt: A liver tissue specimen after poisoning is placed on the experimental table, and the morphology of hepatocytes is observed under a light microscope.

Evaluation guide:
(i) Target concept: Hyaline degeneration in hepatocytes as a direct morphological consequence of toxic liver injury.
Minimum mechanism: Hepatocyte exposure to poison → intracellular accumulation of homogeneous, non-granular, eosinophilic proteinaceous material → loss of normal cytoplasmic granularity while preserving cell outline and nucleus position.
(ii)Storyline: [Phase 1] Liver tissue specimen is placed on table (visible hand/object interaction, stable rest state). [Phase 2] Microscope is positioned adjacent to specimen (fixed spatial relationship established, no repositioning mid-sequence). [Phase 3] Microscopic viewfield appears, centered on hepatocytes (no cutaway; view emerges from ocular perspective or is diegetic). [Phase 4] Within viewfield, side-by-side comparison emerges: normal hepatocytes (polygonal, granular pink cytoplasm, central round nucleus) adjacent to degenerated hepatocytes (same shape and nucleus position, but cytoplasm replaced by smooth, non-granular, intensely eosinophilic material). [Phase 5] No competing pathologies visible; hyaline material is exclusively intracytoplasmic and non-vacuolar; all transitions are temporally sequential and spatially anchored to the same fixed viewpoint.

Manual:
Experimental Procedure
1. Place liver tissue specimen on experimental table.
2. Position light microscope adjacent to specimen.
3. Observe hepatocyte morphology under microscope.
Observation of Experimental Phenomena
Hepatocytes show homogeneous, glassy, eosinophilic (pink-red) cytoplasmic material replacing normal granular cytoplasm; unaffected hepatocytes retain polygonal shape and central nuclei.
Summary of Experimental Principles
Hyaline degeneration is a pathological process where abnormal proteins accumulate intracytoplasmically, appearing as homogeneous, glassy, eosinophilic material in H&E-stained sections—commonly induced by toxic injury to hepatocytes.

Prompt Grounding rubric:
level_1: No liver tissue specimen is shown, no experimental table is visible, no light microscope appears, or no placement/observation action is depicted at all; none of the prompt's setup elements are present.
level_2: An object resembling tissue or a table appears, but the specimen is not identifiable as liver (e.g., it reads as kidney, muscle, or an unlabeled mass); or the microscope is missing or pointed away from the specimen; or no placement action is shown; or the viewer's eye/observation gesture is directed somewhere other than the specimen.
level_3: A liver-like tissue specimen is placed on an experimental table, a light microscope is present in the same scene, the placement action is depicted (the specimen moves onto or already rests on the table), and an observation action is shown (an eye at the eyepiece or a viewfield in frame), but the microscope's position relative to the specimen is inconsistent, e.g., its objective is not aligned above where the specimen sits.
level_4: The liver tissue specimen sits correctly on the experimental table, the microscope is adjacent with its objective aligned over the specimen, the placement action is clearly shown, the observation action is unambiguous (eye at eyepiece, or a viewfield centered on the tissue appears after placement), and no extraneous props or out-of-order steps intrude.
level_5: All conditions for score 4 are met, and additionally: the specimen is identifiable as liver tissue by a visible label or by consistent anatomical texture across the scene; the microscope shows a calibration gesture (a hand turning the focus knob or selecting an objective) before the viewfield stabilizes; the observation action begins only once placement is fully complete, with no overlap between handling and viewing.

Scientific and Causal Correctness rubric:
level_1: No hepatocyte-level detail is shown at all, or the tissue in view looks normal, necrotic, or fatty rather than showing any homogeneous eosinophilic material; nothing in the field points to hyaline degeneration.
level_2: A cellular field is shown but it does not read as hepatocytes (e.g., it looks like generic epithelium); or the abnormal material shown is vacuolated rather than the smooth, glassy material of hyaline change; or the field is stained in cool blue-purple tones rather than the pink-red expected for this eosinophilic material; or there is no visible contrast between normal and affected cells.
level_3: Polygonal hepatocytes with central nuclei and granular cytoplasm are visible, and some of these cells instead show homogeneous, glassy, pink-red cytoplasm with no visible granules or vacuoles, but the border between affected and unaffected cells is indistinct, or an unrelated feature (a fat droplet, a shrunken dark nucleus) is also present that doesn't belong in a pure hyaline-change picture.
level_4: All conditions for score 3 are met, and additionally: the glassy pink-red material stays confined inside the hepatocyte cell membranes rather than spilling into the surrounding stroma or sinusoids; affected cells keep their polygonal outline; there is no ballooning, no dark clumped inclusions, and no bile pigment visible alongside the hyaline change.
level_5: All conditions for score 4 are met, and additionally: the glassy material has a smooth, even, non-granular texture with no vacuoles anywhere within it; hepatocytes without hyaline change look identical to each other apart from the presence of the material; the pink-red staining is even across all affected cells with no blur or smear that would obscure the texture.

Spatiotemporal Consistency rubric:
level_1: The specimen's position on the table changes abruptly between frames with no visible hand or motion carrying it there; the microscope disappears from the frame and reappears elsewhere; the scene's overall brightness swings from bright to dark and back within a couple of frames with no dimming action shown; the tissue specimen splits apart into disconnected fragments and then reforms as a whole; or the video freezes on a single frame for an extended stretch with no follow-through motion.
level_2: The specimen shifts slightly on the table without any visible contact or motion causing it; the microscope's focus or angle changes between frames with no adjustment gesture shown; the viewfield blinks on and off rather than transitioning cleanly; the tissue's edge looks jagged or smeared for a moment during an otherwise still shot.
level_3: One brief inconsistency occurs (for example, the specimen's position shifts slightly and quickly during the placement motion, or the scene's brightness dips briefly right as the specimen is set down), but there is no structural break, no vanishing object, and motion during placement and observation otherwise looks continuous.
level_4: No inconsistency occurs during placement, alignment, or observation; the scene's brightness and the color of the light stay the same from the first frame to the last; any shadow cast by a hand or the microscope body stays anchored to the object casting it; the specimen and microscope hold their shape and position whenever the scene is still.
level_5: All conditions for score 4 are met, and additionally: the camera's framing never pans, tilts, or zooms; whatever is in sharper or softer focus stays consistent with the same depth relationships throughout; a hand placing the specimen moves in a single natural arc rather than jumping or floating; no frame shows doubled edges or a smeared/frozen image; the placement action is always shown completing before the observation action begins, never after.