Domain: Engineering — Geotechnical Engineering
Target concept: Comparison Experiment of Bearing Capacity between Pile Foundation and Non-pile Foundation under Seismic Loading

Video generation prompt: Two sandboxes were used. Three model piles were placed in sandbox A and filled with sandy soil, while sandbox B was filled with sandy soil only. Equal weights were applied on the top of both sandboxes and they were fixed on a shaking table. Subsequently, the vibration was initiated, and the settlement of the load was observed and compared between sandbox A and sandbox B.

Evaluation guide:
(i) Target concept: Seismic bearing capacity enhancement via pile foundation reinforcement in cohesionless soil.
Minimum mechanism: Sandy soil must behave as a cohesionless granular medium; piles must be rigidly embedded to mobilize skin friction and end-bearing; shaking must induce inertial loading without triggering liquefaction; differential settlement arises solely from load path depth and soil confinement, not material failure.
(ii)Storyline: [Frame 0–2] Static shot: Two sandboxes side-by-side, both filled with sandy soil, load placed on each; sandbox A has three visible vertical piles fully embedded. [Frame 3–4] Shaking initiates: table moves horizontally, both sandboxes respond synchronously. [Frame 5–8] Settlement emerges: load on sandbox B descends further and more continuously than load on sandbox A; piles in A remain upright and soil around them undisturbed. [Frame 9–10] Steady-state observation: differential settlement is maintained; no reversal, tilt, or secondary failure. Perspective: fixed frontal view, full sandboxes in frame, no camera movement or zoom.

Manual:
Experimental Procedure
1. Place two identical sandboxes side-by-side on a shaking table.
2. Insert three model piles vertically into sandy soil in sandbox A; leave sandbox B filled with sandy soil only.
3. Apply identical loads on top surfaces of both sandboxes.
4. Activate horizontal oscillation on shaking table.
Observation of Experimental Phenomena
During shaking, sandbox B shows greater vertical settlement of its load than sandbox A; piles in sandbox A remain embedded and stable; no soil ejection or collapse occurs in either sandbox.
Summary of Experimental Principles
Pile foundations increase seismic bearing capacity by transferring load deeper into stable soil layers, reducing settlement compared to non-pile (shallow) foundations under dynamic loading.

Prompt Grounding rubric:
level_1: Sandbox A, sandbox B, the three model piles, the shaking table, or the top loads are missing entirely, or only one sandbox appears in frame, or the two sandboxes are stacked or positioned one behind the other rather than beside each other.
level_2: Both sandboxes are visible but the pile arrangement is wrong: sandbox A has no piles, or piles appear in sandbox B instead, or the load rests on only one sandbox, or the shaking table is missing or is shown rotating instead of sliding back and forth horizontally.
level_3: Sandbox A and sandbox B sit beside each other on the same shaking-table platform, in the same shot; sandbox A contains exactly three model piles standing in sandy soil; sandbox B contains sandy soil with no piles; a load block of matching size sits on top of each sandbox's soil surface before shaking begins.
level_4: All conditions of score 3 are met, and the three piles in sandbox A stand upright with their full length embedded in the soil (no pile tip poking above the surface or floating loose), and the sandy soil in both sandboxes looks like the same granular material at the same fill level, and the two load blocks match each other in shape, size, and color, and no hand, tool, or label appears anywhere in the shot.
level_5: All conditions of score 4 are met, and sandbox A and sandbox B are both fully visible beside each other with neither one hidden behind or overlapping the other, and the three piles in sandbox A are evenly spaced and stand parallel to one another, and the soil surface in both sandboxes is flat before the shaking table starts moving, and both load blocks sit flush and level on the soil (not tilted or partly off it) in the first frame.

Scientific and Causal Correctness rubric:
level_1: The load in sandbox A (with piles) and sandbox B (without piles) settle to the same depth, or neither load settles at all, or the load in sandbox A sinks more than the load in sandbox B, reversing which foundation type should perform better.
level_2: Settlement happens in only one of the two sandboxes rather than both, or a load rises or shifts sideways instead of settling downward, or a pile appears to separate from the soil and float, or the soil in sandbox B cracks open or is thrown outward while sandbox A stays undisturbed in a way that reverses the expected comparison.
level_3: Once shaking starts, the load in both sandboxes settles downward into the soil, and the load in sandbox B (no piles) ends up settling visibly more than the load in sandbox A (with piles); the three piles stay in contact with the surrounding soil in sandbox A; neither sandbox's soil shows liquefaction, flowing, or separating into layers.
level_4: All conditions of score 3 are met, and the load in sandbox B begins visibly settling earlier in the shaking sequence than the load in sandbox A, and all three piles in sandbox A stay vertical and fully embedded for the entire shaking period, and neither sandbox shows soil being thrown out or collapsing in a localized patch, and both loads sink straight down without tipping to one side.
level_5: All conditions of score 4 are met, and the load in sandbox B keeps settling steadily throughout the shaking while the load in sandbox A settles only a small, largely steady amount by comparison, and none of the three piles in sandbox A bends or twists sideways, and the soil surface in sandbox A stays flat and unbroken, while the soil surface in sandbox B may show small ripples or dimpling around the settling load without a large-scale collapse.

Spatiotemporal Consistency rubric:
level_1: Sandbox A or sandbox B disappears or reappears mid-video, a pile jumps to a new spot between frames, a load leaps off the soil surface with no motion leading up to it, the shaking table's back-and-forth motion freezes and then suddenly jumps to a new position, or the lighting suddenly shifts brighter or darker between frames with no clear cause.
level_2: One sandbox's position shifts between shots, a pile's visible orientation changes inconsistently from one frame to the next, a load wobbles even though the shaking table is not moving, or the soil's grainy texture disappears and then reappears for no reason.
level_3: Both sandboxes stay in the same place and orientation for the whole video; the three piles in sandbox A stay visible and upright the entire time; both loads stay resting on the soil surface without lifting off or sinking before shaking starts; once shaking begins, the table's back-and-forth motion is smooth and repeats evenly, moving both sandboxes together.
level_4: All conditions of score 3 are met, and neither sandbox's walls nor any pile shaft bends, buckles, or warps out of shape, and the shadow each sandbox and pile casts stays the same length and falls the same way throughout, matching one unmoving light source, and the soil surface in both sandboxes deforms smoothly as it settles, with no sudden cracking, tearing, or glitching texture.
level_5: All conditions of score 4 are met, and the motion of both sandboxes during shaking looks fluid with no stutter, repeated frames, or ghost trailing, and the boundary between each pile and the surrounding soil stays crisp rather than blurring or smearing during motion, and the contact area between each load and the soil beneath it shows a steady, consistent impression with no sudden gap or unnatural squashing, and the shaking table's oscillation speed looks steady from beginning to end.