Domain: Healthcare — Pharmacy
Target concept: Effect of Desiccant Coating on Drug Stability

Video generation prompt: Two identical transparent containers are placed side by side in a high-humidity environment. A desiccant-coated tablet is placed in the left container, and an uncoated tablet is placed in the right container. The appearance changes are observed.

Evaluation guide:
(i) Target concept: Humidity-induced physical degradation of pharmaceutical tablets is mitigated by surface desiccant coating.
Minimum mechanism: Water vapor must be present in sufficient concentration to drive condensation/sorption on uncoated solid surface; desiccant layer must remain intact and functional at interface to sequester water before it alters tablet morphology.
(ii)Storyline: Frame opens on static wide shot showing two identical transparent containers placed adjacent in same humid environment → Left container contains tablet with matte/glossy uniform surface (coated indicator) → Right container contains tablet with granular/dull surface (uncoated indicator) → Over time, right tablet develops persistent surface haze or whitening while left tablet surface remains optically uniform → No motion of tablets or containers; no environmental intervention; viewpoint remains fixed; all changes are confined to tablet surfaces without spillover or interaction between containers.

Manual:
Experimental Procedure
1. Place two identical transparent containers side-by-side in a high-humidity environment.
2. Place one desiccant-coated tablet in the left container.
3. Place one uncoated tablet in the right container.
4. Observe appearance changes over time.
Observation of Experimental Phenomena
The uncoated tablet develops visible surface moisture, haze, or whitening; the desiccant-coated tablet remains visually unchanged (dry, clear, no haze).
Summary of Experimental Principles
Desiccant coating absorbs ambient moisture, inhibiting hygroscopic degradation of the tablet — preserving physical appearance and chemical stability in humid conditions.

Prompt Grounding rubric:
level_1: Only one of the two containers is shown, or neither container holds a tablet, or the two containers never appear together in the same shot, so the desiccant-coated tablet and the uncoated tablet cannot both be identified as present.
level_2: Both containers and both tablets are present, but the coated tablet sits in the right container and the uncoated tablet in the left (the left/right assignment is reversed), or the two tablets look identical in surface finish with no way to tell which one carries the coating, or one container appears to hold both tablets while the other sits empty.
level_3: The left container holds exactly one tablet and the right container holds exactly one tablet; the left (coated) tablet shows a smooth, uniform matte-to-glossy surface consistent with an intact protective coating, while the right (uncoated) tablet shows a duller, more granular surface consistent with bare tablet material; this natural texture contrast, rather than any added label, color tint, or icon, is what makes the left = coated / right = uncoated assignment readable.
level_4: Everything at level 3 holds, and in addition neither tablet is swapped, hidden, or moved into the other container at any point in the clip; the two-container, one-tablet-each humid-storage setup stays intact and recognizable for the full duration.
level_5: Everything at level 4 holds, and in addition both containers stay fully in view for the entire clip with no cropping and no hand or object blocking either tablet, and there is no camera cut or reframe that could plausibly conceal a tablet swap; the coated/uncoated texture contrast from level 3 stays visible from the first frame to the last.

Scientific and Causal Correctness rubric:
level_1: Neither tablet shows any visible change over the course of the video: no haze, wetness, discoloration, or texture shift appears on the coated tablet or the uncoated one, so no effect of the desiccant coating is depicted at all; or the coated tablet develops visibly more haze, wetness, or discoloration than the uncoated tablet, the reverse of what desiccant coating should do.
level_2: Some visible change appears, but it fails to demonstrate the coating's protective effect: both tablets develop haze or wetness to roughly the same degree, or a faint change appears only briefly on one tablet and clears up again before any clear pattern is established, so a viewer cannot tell whether the coating made a difference.
level_3: The uncoated tablet develops visible surface haze, wetness, or whitening while the coated tablet's surface stays visibly dry and clear; the direction of the contrast matches how a desiccant coating should behave (it blocks moisture uptake), even if the haze on the uncoated tablet is still modest in extent.
level_4: Everything at level 3 holds, and in addition the haze or wetness on the uncoated tablet visibly grows or persists across the later part of the video rather than appearing as a single brief flicker, while the coated tablet shows no comparable moisture-related change at any point, so the contrast reads as a sustained trend rather than a one-off difference.
level_5: Everything at level 4 holds, and in addition the coated tablet stays dry and optically clear for the entire video with no isolated wet spot appearing and then vanishing, while the haze or whitening on the uncoated tablet is continuous rather than clearing up and reappearing; the change on the uncoated tablet stays a surface-level optical effect (haze or whitening) rather than turning into crumbling, dissolving, or a spreading color bleed.

Spatiotemporal Consistency rubric:
level_1: The left or right container disappears and reappears between frames, or a tablet vanishes from its container and reappears later with no motion connecting the two moments, or the scene jumps between a dim, shadowed look and a fully bright look within consecutive frames with no gradual transition, or a container's outline breaks apart or dissolves, or the camera suddenly jumps to a different angle or zoom level.
level_2: A container shifts sideways or up/down by more than half its own width between two frames with no in-between motion shown, or a tablet appears to hover above the container floor and then drop into place with no visible falling motion, or the shadow cast by a tablet or container switches to the opposite side of the frame with no light source shown moving to explain it.
level_3: Both containers stay in the same place in the frame for the whole video; both tablets stay inside their own container the entire time, never exiting, floating free, or passing through a container wall; the video shows no sudden jump in overall brightness or contrast; neither the containers nor the tablets warp, bend, or break apart in shape.
level_4: Everything at level 3 holds, and in addition each tablet's surface keeps a steady level of shininess or dullness across frames (it does not flicker between glossy and matte in ways unrelated to the moisture change being depicted); the transparent container walls keep an even, consistent see-through appearance with no patch suddenly looking warped or shimmering.
level_5: Everything at level 4 holds, and in addition the video plays as continuous motion with no stutter or skipped-looking jump between frames; both container outlines stay crisp and stable in shape throughout; each tablet's outline stays clearly and consistently defined, with neither tablet's edge turning blurry or doubled while the other stays sharp.