Domain: Healthcare — Pathology
Target concept: Proliferation (hormone-dependent proliferation)

Video generation prompt: An endometrial tissue specimen exposed to long-term estrogenic stimulation is placed on the experimental table, and the changes in glandular structure are observed under the microscope.

Evaluation guide:
(i) Target concept: Estrogen-induced endometrial glandular proliferation as a direct morphologic response to sustained hormonal exposure.
Minimum mechanism: Endometrial glands must be present and responsive to estrogen signaling; stromal compartment must remain histologically intact (no atypia or malignancy); proliferation must manifest as architectural (not cytologic) change.
(ii)Storyline: [Frame 0–2] Macro view: Intact endometrial tissue specimen centered on clean experimental table. [Frame 3–5] Transition (cut or split-screen): Microscope body enters frame or static side-by-side appears: objective lens aligned vertically over specimen. [Frame 6–10] Stable microscopic field fills view: Glands dominate field, appearing dilated, irregularly shaped, closely apposed, and lacking secretory vacuoles, all within a single consistent focal plane and illumination condition. Perspective must maintain fixed viewpoint (no simulated eye movement or handheld shake); full field must remain in focus and anatomically coherent.

Manual:
1. Experimental operation procedure: Place endometrial tissue specimen on experimental table; position microscope over specimen; adjust focus to visualize glandular architecture.
2. Observation of experimental phenomena: Microscopic view reveals dilated, crowded, and tortuous endometrial glands with minimal intervening stroma — glands arranged back-to-back without secretory features.
3. Summary of experimental principles: Long-term estrogenic stimulation induces hormone-dependent proliferation of endometrial glands, characterized by increased gland number, dilation, architectural complexity, and reduced stromal volume — a hallmark of simple endometrial hyperplasia.

Prompt Grounding rubric:
level_1: No endometrial tissue specimen appears; no experimental table is shown; no microscope is present; there is no indication anywhere in the clip that glandular structure is being examined.
level_2: The specimen appears but is never placed on the experimental table, or the table is shown without any specimen on it, or the microscope is present but never aimed at the specimen, or there is no visual cue at all pointing to a glandular observation.
level_3: The specimen sits on the experimental table, the microscope is positioned above or next to it, and at least one static frame shows a tissue field containing gland-like shapes, but there is no clear visual link (no cut, no zoom-in, no side-by-side framing) connecting the tabletop specimen to that microscopic field.
level_4: The specimen is placed on the table and the microscope is visibly aimed at it, and a clear side-by-side or sequential link is established between the tabletop specimen and a microscopic field showing gland shapes, but the sequence itself (placement, then microscope positioning, then the static field) is somewhat disjointed, e.g. the microscope appears to move or refocus after the field is first shown.
level_5: The specimen is placed on the table, the microscope is correctly positioned over it, and the clip shows one continuous sequence (or a fixed split-screen) linking the tabletop specimen directly to a static, in-focus microscopic field, with no camera cut that loses the spatial connection between the two views, no stray hands or tools in frame, and no repositioning of the microscope once the field is shown.

Scientific and Causal Correctness rubric:
level_1: The microscopic field shows tissue that isn't endometrium at all (e.g., muscle, skin, or cartilage), or the glands are missing entirely or so distorted they're unrecognizable as glandular structures.
level_2: Gland-like structures are visible, but every gland looks straight, evenly spaced, and tube-like with no crowding, dilation, or complexity; nothing that would be recognized as endometrial gland architecture.
level_3: The glands are visibly dilated and/or more numerous than a baseline normal endometrium, but there's no clear crowding (glands still have visible stroma between them) and gland shape is inconsistent rather than showing a clear winding/tortuous pattern.
level_4: The glands are dilated, elongated, and moderately crowded, with some glands touching each other directly (little stroma between them), but one of the following is still missing: visible winding/tortuosity of the glands, absence of secretory-looking features inside the glands, or a uniform, non-atypical appearance of the lining cells.
level_5: The field shows all the hallmark features together: glands are markedly dilated and irregularly shaped, packed closely together with very little stroma visible between them, showing a clearly winding/branching (tortuous) shape, lined by a uniform layer of cells with no atypical/abnormal-looking nuclei, and no secretory-looking content inside the glands, consistent with prolonged estrogen exposure driving this proliferation.

Spatiotemporal Consistency rubric:
level_1: The specimen jumps to a new location or vanishes and reappears; the microscope disappears and reappears abruptly; the lighting jumps between two very different states with no transition; the specimen or the microscopic field visibly warps, tears, or breaks apart.
level_2: The specimen stays put but the microscope's position shifts erratically (jitters or rotates with no cause); the microscopic field jumps between clearly different magnifications or tissue regions with no transition; a bright reflection appears or disappears on the tissue with no matching change in the light source.
level_3: The specimen stays fixed on the table, the microscope stays in a fixed position, and the microscopic field stays steady in focus and framing, but there's a brief, easily-missed hiccup, such as a short stretch of soft focus or a small jump in the field's framing that quickly self-corrects.
level_4: The specimen and microscope both stay fixed with the field continuously in focus and consistently framed throughout, but one small, non-distracting flaw remains, such as a brief soft-focus moment during a pan (if the camera pans at all) or a passing dust speck in the field that never covers any glands.
level_5: The specimen's position, the microscope's position and angle, the field's framing and focus, and the lighting all stay visibly steady and physically consistent across the whole clip; there is no vanishing, jitter, flicker, warping, or broken transition anywhere, and any camera movement (if present) is smooth and easy to follow.