Domain: Engineering — Geotechnical Engineering
Target concept: Thaw settlement: obvious subsidence of the soil after melting, resulting in thaw settlement deformation.

Video generation prompt: Place a suitable sample of permafrost into a transparent container, heat the container to raise the temperature of the permafrost and cause it to thaw, and observe its morphology and height.

Evaluation guide:
(i) Target concept: Thaw settlement as volumetric contraction due to ice-melt–induced loss of structural support in frozen soil.
Minimum mechanism: Ice must be load-bearing within soil matrix; melting must occur *in situ* under gravitational loading; pore ice loss must trigger particle rearrangement into denser configuration, not just water drainage or surface runoff.
(ii)Storyline: [Frame 0] Intact icy permafrost sample fills lower portion of upright transparent container, with clear ice inclusions and defined upper surface aligned to container reference. → [Heating onset] Thermal energy applied to container base; no immediate change. → [Melt initiation] First visible meltwater emerges at sample surface or interior zone; simultaneous with onset of downward displacement. → [Settlement progression] Sample height monotonically decreases while remaining cohesive; meltwater distributes within or on sample; container walls provide fixed vertical reference. → [Stable endpoint] Descent halts; final settled state is lower, denser, and geometrically stable: no rebound or lateral flow. Perspective: Fixed frontal view, centered on container, full-height framing, no parallax or oblique angle.

Manual:
Experimental Procedure
1. Place a visibly icy permafrost sample into a clear upright transparent container.
2. Apply heat to the container base until thawing begins.
3. Observe continuous vertical height reduction of the sample.
Observation of Experimental Phenomena
The sample shrinks vertically while maintaining cohesive shape; meltwater appears at surface or interior as subsidence progresses; final height is stably lower than initial.
Summary of Experimental Principles
Thaw settlement: obvious subsidence of the soil after melting, resulting in thaw settlement deformation.

Prompt Grounding rubric:
level_1: No permafrost sample of any kind is shown, no transparent container appears, no heating action is depicted, and no change in the sample's height or shape is observable. None of the posted_prompt's core elements (placing a permafrost sample in a container, heating it, and watching its shape/height) are present.
level_2: At least one core element appears (a permafrost-like sample, a transparent container, or some heating cue) but the setup is fundamentally wrong: for example, plain liquid water is shown from the start instead of a solid icy sample, the container is opaque or replaced by something else, the heat source visibly warms the surrounding air or table rather than the container itself, or the sample's height changes before any heating is shown.
level_3: A permafrost sample is placed inside a transparent container, a visible heating action (e.g., a hot plate, heat lamp, or heating coil under/around the container) is then applied, and a change in the sample's height or shape follows (the three steps occur in the right order), but with a fidelity gap: the container is only translucent or frosted rather than clearly see-through, the sample doesn't visibly look icy/frozen before heating starts, or the height drop isn't easy to compare against any fixed point on the container (rim, wall marking, etc.).
level_4: All the posted_prompt's elements are clearly present and correctly ordered: a visibly icy/frozen permafrost sample is placed into a fully see-through, upright container; a clear heating action is then aimed at the container itself; the video continuously shows the sample's height dropping, and that drop can be read against a fixed part of the container (its rim or side wall); at most one small, non-core flaw is present, such as a brief reflection or glare on the glass, or slight camera wobble, that doesn't hide the setup or the height comparison.
level_5: Everything in the 4-point description holds, with no exceptions: the sample's frozen texture (e.g., visible frost or cloudy ice pockets) is clear before any heat is applied; the container's clear walls and rim stay unobstructed and undistorted for the entire clip; the heating action visibly targets the container the whole time it's shown; and the sample's height can be compared against the container's rim or wall from the very first frame to the very last without any glare, reflection, or camera movement ever blocking that view.

Scientific and Causal Correctness rubric:
level_1: The sample doesn't settle at all in a way consistent with thaw: it stays rigid and unchanged, expands, bulges, or cracks apart instead of sinking; or liquid water is present from the very start with no solid phase beforehand; the behavior directly contradicts how melting ice under a load should behave (e.g., the sample rises, explodes apart, or changes to a color no real soil or ice would show).
level_2: The sample does turn from solid to liquid, but its height stays the same or even increases (swells) as this happens; or the height only starts dropping after the sample looks fully melted, rather than while it is still thawing, breaking the link between the ice melting and the ground settling; the sample also may look wrong for frozen soil beforehand (e.g., appearing as dry loose sand or already-wet slurry before any heat is applied).
level_3: The sample's height drops while it is still visibly in the process of thawing (not only after it's fully liquid), it stays in one connected mass rather than splashing, crumbling, or fragmenting, and any settling stays within the container's original footprint rather than spreading outward; however, the timing is still somewhat off: the height drop clearly starts well before any meltwater is visible, or waits until the sample looks almost entirely melted before dropping.
level_4: The sample's height begins dropping around the same time meltwater first shows up on its surface or inside it, and continues to drop smoothly as more of the sample turns liquid; the sample doesn't swell, foam, or break apart; by the end it sits visibly lower and more compact than at the start, with no bounce-back afterward; at most one small non-core issue is allowed, such as a bit of meltwater pooling on top that doesn't interfere with reading the sample's own height.
level_5: The same causal chain as the 4-point description holds throughout the entire clip with no gaps: the first appearance of meltwater and the first sign of the sample sinking happen together rather than one obviously preceding the other; wherever meltwater shows up first, that's also where the surface first visibly sinks; the final settled height holds steady afterward with no delayed creep or rebound; and no other effect competes for credit: there's no visible evaporation, no meltwater draining out of the container, and nothing else pressing down on the sample.

Spatiotemporal Consistency rubric:
level_1: There is a severe break in visual continuity: the container's position or apparent size jumps abruptly between frames as though the camera setup changed; the sample or container vanishes for a stretch and then reappears; the whole scene's lighting swaps abruptly (e.g., a bright frame is immediately followed by a dark one with no gradual change); the framing suddenly zooms or reframes with no pan/zoom motion shown to explain it; or the container appears tilted or knocked over compared to earlier frames with nothing shown causing it.
level_2: Several noticeable but less extreme breaks occur: the container's edge flickers, warps, or appears doubled across a few frames; the illumination on the sample brightens and dims unevenly more than once even though neither the heat source nor the camera visibly moved; the sample's visible top surface bounces up and down rather than moving in one direction as it settles; or the container's base or a side wall is blocked by some object or artifact for more than a moment at a stretch.
level_3: There is one isolated, minor hiccup (for example, the sample's base or the container's rim is briefly hidden for just a moment by a passing reflection, or the container's edge loses sharp contrast for a moment making the height briefly hard to judge), but apart from that one moment, the container stays in place, the sample remains visible, and nothing jumps in position or orientation.
level_4: The container keeps the same position, framing, and upright orientation for the whole clip; the sample stays fully within the container's visible boundary without drifting sideways or leaning to one side; the container's side walls, which the viewer uses to judge the sample's height, stay visible and readable throughout; at most one small, forgivable slip is allowed, such as a moment of blur on the container's edge that doesn't stop the viewer from tracking the sample's height.
level_5: Everything in the 4-point description holds with no exceptions: the container never shifts position, tilts, or changes apparent size at any point in the clip; the sample's outline stays in the same horizontal spot within the container the entire time it settles; the container's side walls stay sharp and visible enough to compare the sample's height against them from the first frame to the last; and the glow from the heat source stays coming from the same place relative to the container throughout, never swapping sides, flaring suddenly, or vanishing in a way that would interrupt the viewer's ability to track the sample's height and shape.