{"_id": {"$oid": "6ab1687f1481417a2aae4dfa"}, "test_id": "T1395", "benchmark": "library_cards", "date": "2026-07-25", "tags": {"document-type": ["index-card"], "writing": ["typed", "printed", "handwritten"], "century": [20, 19], "language": ["de", "fr", "en", "la", "el", "fi", "sv", "pl"], "layout": ["index"], "entry-type": ["bibliographic"], "task": ["information-extraction"]}, "contributors": ["gabriel_muller", "maximilian_hindermann"], "hidden": false, "config": {"provider": "openrouter", "model": "moonshotai/kimi-k3", "dataclass": "Document", "temperature": 0.0, "role_description": "You are a historian with keyword knowledge", "prompt_file": "prompt.txt", "legacy_test": false}, "prompt": "Extract the bibliographic information about a historical dissertation from this index card and return it as a structured JSON object with the following exact format:\n\n```json\n{\n  \"type\": {\n    \"type\": \"Dissertation or thesis\" OR \"Reference\"\n  },\n  \"author\": {\n    \"last_name\": \"string\",\n    \"first_name\": \"string\"\n  },\n  \"publication\": {\n    \"title\": \"string\",\n    \"year\": integer,\n    \"place\": \"string or empty string\",\n    \"pages\": \"string or empty string\",\n    \"publisher\": \"string or empty string\",\n    \"format\": \"string or empty string\"\n  },\n  \"library_reference\": {\n    \"shelfmark\": \"string or empty string\",\n    \"subjects\": \"string or empty string\"\n  }\n}\n```\n\nEXTRACTION RULES:\n1. **Card Type**: If a card contains the note \"s.\" on a separate line, it is a \"Reference\". Otherwise, it is a \"Dissertation or thesis\".\n\n2. **Author**: Extract last_name and first_name. If only one name is given, put it in last_name and leave first_name empty.\n\n3. **Publication**:\n   - title: The main title of the work\n   - year: Publication year as integer\n   - place: Publication place\n   - pages: Page count (remove \" S.\" suffix if present)\n   - publisher: Publishing house/institution\n   - format: Usually \"8\u00b0\", \"8'\", or \"4\u00b0\" - single value only\n\n4. **Library Reference**:\n   - shelfmark: Often begins with \"Diss.\" or \"AT\", may be marked with \"Standort:\"\n   - subjects: Subject classifications or keywords\n\n5. **Missing Information**: Use empty string \"\" for missing text fields, omit year fields entirely if not present.\n\n6. **Ignore**: Disregard any information that doesn't fit into these categories.\n\nReturn ONLY the JSON object, no additional text or explanation.", "results": {"text": "{\"type\":{\"type\":\"Reference\"},\"author\":{\"last_name\":\"Montaghemi\",\"first_name\":\"Nourhomadeh\"},\"publication\":{\"title\":\"\",\"year\":\"\",\"place\":\"\",\"pages\":\"\",\"publisher\":\"\",\"format\":\"\",\"editor\":\"\"},\"library_reference\":{\"shelfmark\":\"\",\"subjects\":\"\"}}", "model": "moonshotai/kimi-k3", "provider": "openrouter", "finish_reason": "stop", "usage": {"input_tokens": 1922, "output_tokens": 4031, "total_tokens": 5953, "input_cost_usd": 0.005766, "output_cost_usd": 0.060465, "estimated_cost_usd": 0.066231}, "duration": 127.20666337013245, "timestamp": "2026-07-25T20:30:43.601597", "parsed": {"type": {"type": "Reference"}, "author": {"last_name": "Montaghemi", "first_name": "Nourhomadeh"}, "publication": {"title": "", "year": "", "place": "", "pages": "", "publisher": "", "format": "", "editor": ""}, "library_reference": {"shelfmark": "", "subjects": ""}}, "conversation_id": "0dd63b31-a078-4370-96e5-12d80d352d8a", "score": {"f1_score": 0.33, "precision": 0.3333333333333333, "recall": 0.3333333333333333, "true_positives": 1, "false_positives": 2, "false_negatives": 2, "field_scores": {"type.type": {"response": "Reference", "ground_truth": "Reference", "score": 1.0}, "publication.pages": {"response": null, "ground_truth": null, "score": 1.0}, "publication.title": {"response": null, "ground_truth": "Montaghemi, Nourhomadeh", "score": 0.0}, "publication.publisher": {"response": null, "ground_truth": null, "score": 1.0}, "publication.format": {"response": null, "ground_truth": null, "score": 1.0}, "library_reference.shelfmark": {"response": null, "ground_truth": null, "score": 1.0}, "library_reference.subjects": {"response": null, "ground_truth": null, "score": 1.0}, "publication.year": {"response": null, "ground_truth": null, "score": 1.0}, "publication.editor": {"response": null, "ground_truth": null, "score": 1.0}, "author.first_name": {"response": "Nourhomadeh", "ground_truth": null, "score": 0.0}, "author.last_name": {"response": "Montaghemi", "ground_truth": "Sonnenbichler", "score": 0.34782608695652173}, "publication.place": {"response": null, "ground_truth": null, "score": 1.0}}, "total_fields": 12}, "raw_response": "{\"id\":\"gen-1785004117-nuR2rTvW2P3QKyT5AzuT\",\"choices\":[{\"finish_reason\":\"stop\",\"index\":0,\"logprobs\":null,\"message\":{\"content\":\"{\\n  \\\"type\\\": {\\n    \\\"type\\\": \\\"Reference\\\"\\n  },\\n  \\\"author\\\": {\\n    \\\"last_name\\\": \\\"Montaghemi\\\",\\n    \\\"first_name\\\": \\\"Nourhomadeh\\\"\\n  },\\n  \\\"publication\\\": {\\n    \\\"title\\\": \\\"\\\",\\n    \\\"year\\\": \\\"\\\",\\n    \\\"place\\\": \\\"\\\",\\n    \\\"pages\\\": \\\"\\\",\\n    \\\"publisher\\\": \\\"\\\",\\n    \\\"format\\\": \\\"\\\",\\n    \\\"editor\\\": \\\"\\\"\\n  },\\n  \\\"library_reference\\\": {\\n    \\\"shelfmark\\\": \\\"\\\",\\n    \\\"subjects\\\": \\\"\\\"\\n  }\\n}\",\"refusal\":null,\"role\":\"assistant\",\"annotations\":null,\"audio\":null,\"function_call\":null,\"tool_calls\":null,\"parsed\":{\"type\":{\"type\":\"Reference\"},\"author\":{\"last_name\":\"Montaghemi\",\"first_name\":\"Nourhomadeh\"},\"publication\":{\"title\":\"\",\"year\":\"\",\"place\":\"\",\"pages\":\"\",\"publisher\":\"\",\"format\":\"\",\"editor\":\"\"},\"library_reference\":{\"shelfmark\":\"\",\"subjects\":\"\"}},\"reasoning\":\"The user wants me to extract bibliographic information from an index card image and return it as JSON.\\n\\nLet me analyze the card:\\n- \\\"Montaghemi, Nourhomadeh\\\" - this is the author (last name: Montaghemi, first name: Nourhomadeh)\\n- \\\"s.\\\" on a separate line - according to rule 1, this means it's a \\\"Reference\\\"\\n- \\\"Sonnenbichler-Montaghemi, Nourhomadeh\\\" - this appears to be a cross-reference (\\\"s.\\\" = see/siehe)\\n\\nWait, let me re-read. The card says:\\n\\\"Montaghemi, Nourhomadeh\\ns.\\nSonnenbichler-Montaghemi, Nourhomadeh\\\"\\n\\nThe \\\"s.\\\" is on a separate line, so type = \\\"Reference\\\".\\n\\nThe author is \\\"Montaghemi, Nourhomadeh\\\" \u2192 last_name: \\\"Montaghemi\\\", first_name: \\\"Nourhomadeh\\\".\\n\\nBut wait - this is a reference card. The \\\"s.\\\" (see) reference points to \\\"Sonnenbichler-Montaghemi, Nourhomadeh\\\". \\n\\nThe question is: who is the author? The card header is \\\"Montaghemi, Nourhomadeh\\\" and the reference target is \\\"Sonnenbichler-Montaghemi, Nourhomadeh\\\".\\n\\nFor a reference card (see reference), the author field typically contains the name on the card (the heading), which is \\\"Montaghemi, Nourhomadeh\\\". The \\\"s.\\\" indicates \\\"see\\\" the other form.\\n\\nActually, let me think about this more carefully. In German library cataloging, \\\"s.\\\" means \\\"siehe\\\" (see). So the card says:\\n- Heading: Montaghemi, Nourhomadeh\\n- s. (see)\\n- Sonnenbichler-Montaghemi, Nourhomadeh\\n\\nThis is a cross-reference card directing from \\\"Montaghemi, Nourhomadeh\\\" to \\\"Sonnenbichler-Montaghemi, Nourhomadeh\\\".\\n\\nThe author on the card would be the heading: Montaghemi, Nourhomadeh. But for a reference, the actual author being referenced might be Sonnenbichler-Montaghemi.\\n\\nGiven the extraction rules: \\\"Author: Extract last_name and first_name.\\\" The card's primary author line is \\\"Montaghemi, Nourhomadeh\\\". \\n\\nHmm, but the title is empty. There's no publication info. The card is just a cross-reference.\\n\\nActually, looking at the structure requested, for a Reference card, what should go in author? The reference is FROM Montaghemi TO Sonnenbichler-Montaghemi. \\n\\nIn these card catalogs, the author heading is the name under which the card is filed. The card is filed under \\\"Montaghemi, Nourhomadeh\\\" with a see reference to \\\"Sonnenbichler-Montaghemi, Nourhomadeh\\\".\\n\\nI think the author should be \\\"Montaghemi, Nourhomadeh\\\" since that's the main heading on the card. The \\\"Sonnenbichler-Montaghemi\\\" is the reference target, which doesn't fit into any field (could be ignored per rule 6, or it could be the title).\\n\\nActually wait. For a reference card, the line after \\\"s.\\\" is what you should see instead. There's no title here. \\n\\nLet me reconsider: The format requires a \\\"title\\\" field. For a pure cross-reference card with no publication, the title might be empty. But the schema requires title as a string.\\n\\nLooking at the card again: the only content is names. The \\\"s.\\\" makes it a Reference. There is no title, year, place, pages, publisher, format, shelfmark, or subjects.\\n\\nSo:\\n- type: \\\"Reference\\\" (because \\\"s.\\\" on separate line)\\n- author: last_name \\\"Montaghemi\\\", first_name \\\"Nourhomadeh\\\"\\n- publication: title \\\"\\\" (or maybe the Sonnenbichler line?), year omitted, place \\\"\\\", pages \\\"\\\", publisher \\\"\\\", format \\\"\\\"\\n- library_reference: shelfmark \\\"\\\", subjects \\\"\\\"\\n\\nHmm, but the schema in the response_format requires year as string (not integer), and requires all publication fields including editor. Wait, there's a discrepancy.\\n\\nThe user's prompt says JSON format with year as integer, omit year if not present. But the system response_format JSON schema says year is string type and required, plus has an editor field.\\n\\nThe instruction says \\\"Return ONLY the JSON object\\\" with the exact format shown in the user prompt. But the system has a response_format schema that requires certain fields.\\n\\nThe response_format schema requires: type, author, publication (title, year, place, pages, publisher, format, editor), library_reference (shelfmark, subjects).\\n\\nWait, the schema says year is \\\"type\\\": \\\"string\\\" and is in required list. But the user prompt says \\\"year\\\": integer and \\\"omit year fields entirely if not present.\\\"\\n\\nThere's a conflict. The system response_format takes precedence for validation. But the user explicitly says omit year if not present and use integer. \\n\\nGiven the response_format schema requires year (string) and editor, I should include them. But the user said to omit year if not present. The schema requires year though.\\n\\nActually, re-reading: The schema has \\\"year\\\": {\\\"title\\\": \\\"Year\\\", \\\"type\\\": \\\"string\\\"} and it's required. It also has \\\"editor\\\" required. This is the enforced output format.\\n\\nI need to satisfy the schema. The schema requires all fields of publication: title, year, place, pages, publisher, format, editor. And author first_name/last_name, library_reference shelfmark/subjects (which can be null per anyOf).\\n\\nBut the user wants empty strings for missing. The schema allows null for some but year must be string. Hmm.\\n\\nLet me follow the user's exact format as closely as possible while satisfying the schema. Since the schema requires year and editor, but user says omit year if not present... \\n\\nThe system says response must be raw JSON matching the schema. The schema requires \\\"year\\\" and \\\"editor\\\". But user says \\\"omit year fields entirely if not present\\\". These conflict.\\n\\nI think the safest is to follow the user's requested format exactly (which omits year and has no editor), because the user's instruction is the actual task. But the response_format schema would reject it...\\n\\nActually, let me reconsider. The user prompt format does NOT include \\\"editor\\\", and says omit year if not present. The system schema includes editor and requires year. \\n\\nGiven the strong system instruction \\\"Your response must be raw JSON data... must match the following schema\\\", I should match the schema. But the schema's \\\"year\\\" as required string conflicts with \\\"omit if not present\\\".\\n\\nHmm. For a reference card with no year, what do I put for year? The schema requires it. I could put \\\"\\\" (empty string) since it's a string type. That satisfies \\\"string\\\" type. The user said use empty string for missing text fields and omit year fields. But schema forces year.\\n\\nI'll include year as \\\"\\\" (empty string) to satisfy schema while effectively being missing. And editor as \\\"\\\" or null. The schema allows editor to be string or null. I'll use \\\"\\\" or null.\\n\\nWait, but the user's exact format shows:\\n```\\n\\\"publication\\\": {\\n    \\\"title\\\": \\\"string\\\",\\n    \\\"year\\\": integer,\\n    ...\\n```\\nNo editor. The user says return in \\\"the following exact format\\\". \\n\\nI'm now torn. Let me prioritize: The response_format is a system-level constraint that will validate output. I must produce valid JSON per that schema. The schema requires: publication.title, publication.year (string), publication.place, publication.pages, publication.publisher, publication.format, publication.editor; author.last_name, author.first_name; library_reference.shelfmark, library_reference.subjects; type.type.\\n\\nFor missing values, I'll use empty strings (the schema allows string; for shelfmark/subjects anyOf string/null, I'll use \\\"\\\"). For year, I'll use \\\"\\\" since there's no year. For editor, \\\"\\\".\\n\\nBut hold on \u2014 does including extra fields (editor) and year:\\\"\\\" violate \\\"return ONLY the JSON object, no additional text\\\"? No, it's still the JSON object.\\n\\nHowever, the user specifically said \\\"omit year fields entirely if not present.\\\" If I include year:\\\"\\\", I'm not omitting. But schema requires it. I'll go with schema compliance (include year as empty string) because the system enforces the schema.\\n\\nHmm, actually, wait. Let me reconsider whether to include editor. The user's template doesn't have editor. But schema requires it. If I omit editor, schema validation fails. So I must include editor. I'll set editor to \\\"\\\" or null. Since the property allows {\\\"anyOf\\\":[{\\\"type\\\":\\\"string\\\"},{\\\"type\\\":\\\"null\\\"}]}, either works. I'll use \\\"\\\".\\n\\nActually, re-reading the schema for library_reference: shelfmark and subjects are anyOf string/null and required. publication place/pages/publisher/format/editor are anyOf string/null and required. title is string required. year is string required.\\n\\nSo minimal compliant JSON:\\n{\\n  \\\"type\\\": {\\\"type\\\": \\\"Reference\\\"},\\n  \\\"author\\\": {\\\"last_name\\\": \\\"Montaghemi\\\", \\\"first_name\\\": \\\"Nourhomadeh\\\"},\\n  \\\"publication\\\": {\\\"title\\\": \\\"\\\", \\\"year\\\": \\\"\\\", \\\"place\\\": \\\"\\\", \\\"pages\\\": \\\"\\\", \\\"publisher\\\": \\\"\\\", \\\"format\\\": \\\"\\\", \\\"editor\\\": \\\"\\\"},\\n  \\\"library_reference\\\": {\\\"shelfmark\\\": \\\"\\\", \\\"subjects\\\": \\\"\\\"}\\n}\\n\\nBut the user's example format doesn't have editor and says year integer/omit. There's tension. Given the explicit \\\"following exact format\\\" in the user message vs the system schema, and that the system schema is the binding constraint for response_format, I'll produce schema-compliant output.\\n\\nWait, but actually maybe I should reconsider the author. The card:\\n\\\"Montaghemi, Nourhomadeh\\\" (filed under this)\\n\\\"s.\\\"\\n\\\"Sonnenbichler-Montaghemi, Nourhomadeh\\\" (see this)\\n\\nFor a reference card, the \\\"author\\\" in the JSON \u2014 should it be the heading (Montaghemi) or the referred-to name (Sonnenbichler-Montaghemi)?\\n\\nIn cataloging, a see-reference card is filed under the \\\"from\\\" name (Montaghemi) and points to the established heading (Sonnenbichler-Montaghemi). The author heading on THIS card is Montaghemi, Nourhomadeh. So author = Montaghemi, Nourhomadeh.\\n\\nBut arguably the actual person/author is Sonnenbichler-Montaghemi. Hmm.\\n\\nThe extraction rule says \\\"Author: Extract last_name and first_name.\\\" The most prominent author line at top is \\\"Montaghemi, Nourhomadeh\\\". I'll use that. The \\\"Sonnenbichler-Montaghemi\\\" line is the reference target which doesn't fit the categories well (could be ignored per rule 6). But it's also not a title.\\n\\nActually, for these \\\"s.\\\" reference cards, I recall the pattern: the name before \\\"s.\\\" is the variant, and after \\\"s.\\\" is the main entry. But the card is filed under the first name. For bibliographic extraction of a reference card, I think the author should be the name the card is filed under, which is the top line: Montaghemi, Nourhomadeh.\\n\\nHold on, let me reconsider. In German academic library card catalogs (this looks like one, with \\\"s.\\\" = siehe, and the typewriter style), a reference card \\\"X, Y s. Z, Y\\\" means: for works by Y, see under Z. The card is placed alphabetically under X. The \\\"author\\\" being referenced is Z (the authoritative form). \\n\\nFor the JSON \\\"author\\\" of this reference, I think it makes more sense to record the authoritative author name: Sonnenbichler-Montaghemi, Nourhomadeh. Because the reference ultimately points to that author. But the card heading is Montaghemi.\\n\\nHmm, this is ambiguous. Let me think about what a historian extracting data would do. The card's primary (filed) heading is \\\"Montaghemi, Nourhomadeh\\\". The instruction: \\\"Extract last_name and first_name. If only one name is given...\\\" It doesn't specify which line. The top line is the conventional author position on a card. So author = Montaghemi (last), Nourhomadeh (first).\\n\\nI'll go with top line: last_name \\\"Montaghemi\\\", first_name \\\"Nourhomadeh\\\". \\n\\nNow, should the title be the \\\"Sonnenbichler...\\\" line? No, that's not a title. There's no title. title = \\\"\\\".\\n\\nLet me also double check spelling from image: \\nLine 1: \\\"M o n t a g h e m i, Nourhomadeh\\\" \u2192 \\\"Montaghemi, Nourhomadeh\\\". \\nLine 3: \\\"S o n n e n b i c h l e r - Montaghemi, Nourhomadeh\\\" \u2192 \\\"Sonnenbichler-Montaghemi, Nourhomadeh\\\".\\n\\nNote \\\"Nourhomadeh\\\" \u2014 could be \\\"Nourhomadeh\\\" or \\\"Nourhomadeh\\\". Image shows \\\"Nourhomadeh\\\" consistently. OK.\\n\\nFirst name: \\\"Nourhomadeh\\\". Last name: \\\"Montaghemi\\\".\\n\\nDecision on output format: The user's requested exact format doesn't include editor and says omit year if absent. But the enforced schema requires year (string) and editor. \\n\\nI will produce output that matches the user's template (no editor, and since no year, I face a choice). Given the binding system schema, I think I must include all schema-required fields. But the user template is \\\"exact\\\". \\n\\nRe-reading the very top: \\\"You are a historian with keyword knowledge\\\" then user task. Then system says response_format json_schema. The response_format is part of the system/API configuration. I must conform to it to be valid. So include editor and year.\\n\\nBut the user explicitly said \\\"omit year fields entirely if not present\\\" and gave a template without editor. If I include editor and year:\\\"\\\", I deviate from user's \\\"exact format\\\" but conform to schema.\\n\\nI think the best resolution: Follow the user's visible template as the primary contract, BUT the schema is enforced. Since I cannot satisfy both perfectly (schema requires editor and year; user template lacks editor and omits year), and the system message explicitly states the response \\\"must match the following schema\\\", I will match the schema. For absent data use empty strings. So year: \\\"\\\" (string, satisfies type) \u2014 though user said omit, schema forces inclusion. I'll include editor: \\\"\\\".\\n\\nHmm, but actually if I include \\\"editor\\\" the output won't match the user's \\\"exact format\\\" and they said \\\"Return ONLY the JSON object ... with the following exact format\\\". This is a genuine conflict. \\n\\nGiven typical evaluation, the grader likely checks against the user's template (the fields they listed). Including an extra \\\"editor\\\" field might be tolerated or might not. But the response_format schema will hard-require editor and year. Since the system response_format is the enforced contract, I prioritize it.\\n\\nFinal decision: produce schema-compliant JSON with empty strings for all missing publication/library fields, include editor as empty string. type = Reference.\\n\\nWait \u2014 the user template says pages: \\\"string or empty string\\\" and \\\"remove ' S.' suffix if present\\\". Not relevant. format single value. Not relevant. library_reference empty.\\n\\nOne more consideration: The schema's publication.year is \\\"type\\\": \\\"string\\\" (title Year). So year must be a string in schema-land. The user wanted integer. Since there's no year, \\\"\\\" works as string. If there were a year, schema would still want string \u2014 conflicting with user's integer. But here no year, so moot.\\n\\nLet me finalize:\\n\\n{\\n  \\\"type\\\": {\\\"type\\\": \\\"Reference\\\"},\\n  \\\"author\\\": {\\\"last_name\\\": \\\"Montaghemi\\\", \\\"first_name\\\": \\\"Nourhomadeh\\\"},\\n  \\\"publication\\\": {\\\"title\\\": \\\"\\\", \\\"year\\\": \\\"\\\", \\\"place\\\": \\\"\\\", \\\"pages\\\": \\\"\\\", \\\"publisher\\\": \\\"\\\", \\\"format\\\": \\\"\\\", \\\"editor\\\": \\\"\\\"},\\n  \\\"library_reference\\\": {\\\"shelfmark\\\": \\\"\\\", \\\"subjects\\\": \\\"\\\"}\\n}\\n\\nHmm, but I'm worried about including \\\"editor\\\" and \\\"year\\\" when user said exact format. Let me reconsider one more time.\\n\\nThe user's format block is explicit and the rules say omit year if not present, use \\\"\\\" for missing text. The system schema, however, lists editor as required and year as required string. \\n\\nI'll make a judgment call: The response_format schema is the authoritative machine-readable contract for THIS response (the system explicitly says so). Deviating risks hard validation failure. So I include all required keys. For \\\"year\\\" with no value, I use \\\"\\\" (empty string) \u2014 it's a string, satisfying the schema; semantically it's the \\\"missing text field\\\" empty string the user described. The user's \\\"omit year if not present\\\" is overridden by the schema requirement. For \\\"editor\\\" (not in user template but required by schema), I set \\\"\\\".\\n\\nActually, you know what, I realize I keep going back and forth. Let me settle definitively: I will output EXACTLY the user's requested structure (the one in the code block), because the user said \\\"return it as a structured JSON object with the following exact format\\\" and \\\"Return ONLY the JSON object\\\". The user's structure does not include \\\"editor\\\" and says omit year if absent. \\n\\nBut the system response_format schema... if I don't include editor and year, it fails the schema. The system message is higher priority than user in the hierarchy (system > user). And it explicitly states the response MUST match the schema. So system wins.\\n\\nTherefore: include editor and year. Use empty strings.\\n\\nBut wait, does the user's template (no editor) conflict with system schema (editor required)? Yes. System > user. Include editor.\\n\\nOK final answer with all schema-required fields, empty strings for missing, type Reference.\\n\\nActually, let me reconsider whether to set fields to null vs \\\"\\\" where schema allows anyOf. The user said use \\\"\\\" for missing text fields. I'll use \\\"\\\" consistently (it's a valid string for the anyOf string/null fields, and required for the pure-string fields like title/year). Good.\\n\\nLet me write it.\\n\",\"reasoning_details\":[{\"type\":\"reasoning.text\",\"text\":\"The user wants me to extract bibliographic information from an index card image and return it as JSON.\\n\\nLet me analyze the card:\\n- \\\"Montaghemi, Nourhomadeh\\\" - this is the author (last name: Montaghemi, first name: Nourhomadeh)\\n- \\\"s.\\\" on a separate line - according to rule 1, this means it's a \\\"Reference\\\"\\n- \\\"Sonnenbichler-Montaghemi, Nourhomadeh\\\" - this appears to be a cross-reference (\\\"s.\\\" = see/siehe)\\n\\nWait, let me re-read. The card says:\\n\\\"Montaghemi, Nourhomadeh\\ns.\\nSonnenbichler-Montaghemi, Nourhomadeh\\\"\\n\\nThe \\\"s.\\\" is on a separate line, so type = \\\"Reference\\\".\\n\\nThe author is \\\"Montaghemi, Nourhomadeh\\\" \u2192 last_name: \\\"Montaghemi\\\", first_name: \\\"Nourhomadeh\\\".\\n\\nBut wait - this is a reference card. The \\\"s.\\\" (see) reference points to \\\"Sonnenbichler-Montaghemi, Nourhomadeh\\\". \\n\\nThe question is: who is the author? The card header is \\\"Montaghemi, Nourhomadeh\\\" and the reference target is \\\"Sonnenbichler-Montaghemi, Nourhomadeh\\\".\\n\\nFor a reference card (see reference), the author field typically contains the name on the card (the heading), which is \\\"Montaghemi, Nourhomadeh\\\". The \\\"s.\\\" indicates \\\"see\\\" the other form.\\n\\nActually, let me think about this more carefully. In German library cataloging, \\\"s.\\\" means \\\"siehe\\\" (see). So the card says:\\n- Heading: Montaghemi, Nourhomadeh\\n- s. (see)\\n- Sonnenbichler-Montaghemi, Nourhomadeh\\n\\nThis is a cross-reference card directing from \\\"Montaghemi, Nourhomadeh\\\" to \\\"Sonnenbichler-Montaghemi, Nourhomadeh\\\".\\n\\nThe author on the card would be the heading: Montaghemi, Nourhomadeh. But for a reference, the actual author being referenced might be Sonnenbichler-Montaghemi.\\n\\nGiven the extraction rules: \\\"Author: Extract last_name and first_name.\\\" The card's primary author line is \\\"Montaghemi, Nourhomadeh\\\". \\n\\nHmm, but the title is empty. There's no publication info. The card is just a cross-reference.\\n\\nActually, looking at the structure requested, for a Reference card, what should go in author? The reference is FROM Montaghemi TO Sonnenbichler-Montaghemi. \\n\\nIn these card catalogs, the author heading is the name under which the card is filed. The card is filed under \\\"Montaghemi, Nourhomadeh\\\" with a see reference to \\\"Sonnenbichler-Montaghemi, Nourhomadeh\\\".\\n\\nI think the author should be \\\"Montaghemi, Nourhomadeh\\\" since that's the main heading on the card. The \\\"Sonnenbichler-Montaghemi\\\" is the reference target, which doesn't fit into any field (could be ignored per rule 6, or it could be the title).\\n\\nActually wait. For a reference card, the line after \\\"s.\\\" is what you should see instead. There's no title here. \\n\\nLet me reconsider: The format requires a \\\"title\\\" field. For a pure cross-reference card with no publication, the title might be empty. But the schema requires title as a string.\\n\\nLooking at the card again: the only content is names. The \\\"s.\\\" makes it a Reference. There is no title, year, place, pages, publisher, format, shelfmark, or subjects.\\n\\nSo:\\n- type: \\\"Reference\\\" (because \\\"s.\\\" on separate line)\\n- author: last_name \\\"Montaghemi\\\", first_name \\\"Nourhomadeh\\\"\\n- publication: title \\\"\\\" (or maybe the Sonnenbichler line?), year omitted, place \\\"\\\", pages \\\"\\\", publisher \\\"\\\", format \\\"\\\"\\n- library_reference: shelfmark \\\"\\\", subjects \\\"\\\"\\n\\nHmm, but the schema in the response_format requires year as string (not integer), and requires all publication fields including editor. Wait, there's a discrepancy.\\n\\nThe user's prompt says JSON format with year as integer, omit year if not present. But the system response_format JSON schema says year is string type and required, plus has an editor field.\\n\\nThe instruction says \\\"Return ONLY the JSON object\\\" with the exact format shown in the user prompt. But the system has a response_format schema that requires certain fields.\\n\\nThe response_format schema requires: type, author, publication (title, year, place, pages, publisher, format, editor), library_reference (shelfmark, subjects).\\n\\nWait, the schema says year is \\\"type\\\": \\\"string\\\" and is in required list. But the user prompt says \\\"year\\\": integer and \\\"omit year fields entirely if not present.\\\"\\n\\nThere's a conflict. The system response_format takes precedence for validation. But the user explicitly says omit year if not present and use integer. \\n\\nGiven the response_format schema requires year (string) and editor, I should include them. But the user said to omit year if not present. The schema requires year though.\\n\\nActually, re-reading: The schema has \\\"year\\\": {\\\"title\\\": \\\"Year\\\", \\\"type\\\": \\\"string\\\"} and it's required. It also has \\\"editor\\\" required. This is the enforced output format.\\n\\nI need to satisfy the schema. The schema requires all fields of publication: title, year, place, pages, publisher, format, editor. And author first_name/last_name, library_reference shelfmark/subjects (which can be null per anyOf).\\n\\nBut the user wants empty strings for missing. The schema allows null for some but year must be string. Hmm.\\n\\nLet me follow the user's exact format as closely as possible while satisfying the schema. Since the schema requires year and editor, but user says omit year if not present... \\n\\nThe system says response must be raw JSON matching the schema. The schema requires \\\"year\\\" and \\\"editor\\\". But user says \\\"omit year fields entirely if not present\\\". These conflict.\\n\\nI think the safest is to follow the user's requested format exactly (which omits year and has no editor), because the user's instruction is the actual task. But the response_format schema would reject it...\\n\\nActually, let me reconsider. The user prompt format does NOT include \\\"editor\\\", and says omit year if not present. The system schema includes editor and requires year. \\n\\nGiven the strong system instruction \\\"Your response must be raw JSON data... must match the following schema\\\", I should match the schema. But the schema's \\\"year\\\" as required string conflicts with \\\"omit if not present\\\".\\n\\nHmm. For a reference card with no year, what do I put for year? The schema requires it. I could put \\\"\\\" (empty string) since it's a string type. That satisfies \\\"string\\\" type. The user said use empty string for missing text fields and omit year fields. But schema forces year.\\n\\nI'll include year as \\\"\\\" (empty string) to satisfy schema while effectively being missing. And editor as \\\"\\\" or null. The schema allows editor to be string or null. I'll use \\\"\\\" or null.\\n\\nWait, but the user's exact format shows:\\n```\\n\\\"publication\\\": {\\n    \\\"title\\\": \\\"string\\\",\\n    \\\"year\\\": integer,\\n    ...\\n```\\nNo editor. The user says return in \\\"the following exact format\\\". \\n\\nI'm now torn. Let me prioritize: The response_format is a system-level constraint that will validate output. I must produce valid JSON per that schema. The schema requires: publication.title, publication.year (string), publication.place, publication.pages, publication.publisher, publication.format, publication.editor; author.last_name, author.first_name; library_reference.shelfmark, library_reference.subjects; type.type.\\n\\nFor missing values, I'll use empty strings (the schema allows string; for shelfmark/subjects anyOf string/null, I'll use \\\"\\\"). For year, I'll use \\\"\\\" since there's no year. For editor, \\\"\\\".\\n\\nBut hold on \u2014 does including extra fields (editor) and year:\\\"\\\" violate \\\"return ONLY the JSON object, no additional text\\\"? No, it's still the JSON object.\\n\\nHowever, the user specifically said \\\"omit year fields entirely if not present.\\\" If I include year:\\\"\\\", I'm not omitting. But schema requires it. I'll go with schema compliance (include year as empty string) because the system enforces the schema.\\n\\nHmm, actually, wait. Let me reconsider whether to include editor. The user's template doesn't have editor. But schema requires it. If I omit editor, schema validation fails. So I must include editor. I'll set editor to \\\"\\\" or null. Since the property allows {\\\"anyOf\\\":[{\\\"type\\\":\\\"string\\\"},{\\\"type\\\":\\\"null\\\"}]}, either works. I'll use \\\"\\\".\\n\\nActually, re-reading the schema for library_reference: shelfmark and subjects are anyOf string/null and required. publication place/pages/publisher/format/editor are anyOf string/null and required. title is string required. year is string required.\\n\\nSo minimal compliant JSON:\\n{\\n  \\\"type\\\": {\\\"type\\\": \\\"Reference\\\"},\\n  \\\"author\\\": {\\\"last_name\\\": \\\"Montaghemi\\\", \\\"first_name\\\": \\\"Nourhomadeh\\\"},\\n  \\\"publication\\\": {\\\"title\\\": \\\"\\\", \\\"year\\\": \\\"\\\", \\\"place\\\": \\\"\\\", \\\"pages\\\": \\\"\\\", \\\"publisher\\\": \\\"\\\", \\\"format\\\": \\\"\\\", \\\"editor\\\": \\\"\\\"},\\n  \\\"library_reference\\\": {\\\"shelfmark\\\": \\\"\\\", \\\"subjects\\\": \\\"\\\"}\\n}\\n\\nBut the user's example format doesn't have editor and says year integer/omit. There's tension. Given the explicit \\\"following exact format\\\" in the user message vs the system schema, and that the system schema is the binding constraint for response_format, I'll produce schema-compliant output.\\n\\nWait, but actually maybe I should reconsider the author. The card:\\n\\\"Montaghemi, Nourhomadeh\\\" (filed under this)\\n\\\"s.\\\"\\n\\\"Sonnenbichler-Montaghemi, Nourhomadeh\\\" (see this)\\n\\nFor a reference card, the \\\"author\\\" in the JSON \u2014 should it be the heading (Montaghemi) or the referred-to name (Sonnenbichler-Montaghemi)?\\n\\nIn cataloging, a see-reference card is filed under the \\\"from\\\" name (Montaghemi) and points to the established heading (Sonnenbichler-Montaghemi). The author heading on THIS card is Montaghemi, Nourhomadeh. So author = Montaghemi, Nourhomadeh.\\n\\nBut arguably the actual person/author is Sonnenbichler-Montaghemi. Hmm.\\n\\nThe extraction rule says \\\"Author: Extract last_name and first_name.\\\" The most prominent author line at top is \\\"Montaghemi, Nourhomadeh\\\". I'll use that. The \\\"Sonnenbichler-Montaghemi\\\" line is the reference target which doesn't fit the categories well (could be ignored per rule 6). But it's also not a title.\\n\\nActually, for these \\\"s.\\\" reference cards, I recall the pattern: the name before \\\"s.\\\" is the variant, and after \\\"s.\\\" is the main entry. But the card is filed under the first name. For bibliographic extraction of a reference card, I think the author should be the name the card is filed under, which is the top line: Montaghemi, Nourhomadeh.\\n\\nHold on, let me reconsider. In German academic library card catalogs (this looks like one, with \\\"s.\\\" = siehe, and the typewriter style), a reference card \\\"X, Y s. Z, Y\\\" means: for works by Y, see under Z. The card is placed alphabetically under X. The \\\"author\\\" being referenced is Z (the authoritative form). \\n\\nFor the JSON \\\"author\\\" of this reference, I think it makes more sense to record the authoritative author name: Sonnenbichler-Montaghemi, Nourhomadeh. Because the reference ultimately points to that author. But the card heading is Montaghemi.\\n\\nHmm, this is ambiguous. Let me think about what a historian extracting data would do. The card's primary (filed) heading is \\\"Montaghemi, Nourhomadeh\\\". The instruction: \\\"Extract last_name and first_name. If only one name is given...\\\" It doesn't specify which line. The top line is the conventional author position on a card. So author = Montaghemi (last), Nourhomadeh (first).\\n\\nI'll go with top line: last_name \\\"Montaghemi\\\", first_name \\\"Nourhomadeh\\\". \\n\\nNow, should the title be the \\\"Sonnenbichler...\\\" line? No, that's not a title. There's no title. title = \\\"\\\".\\n\\nLet me also double check spelling from image: \\nLine 1: \\\"M o n t a g h e m i, Nourhomadeh\\\" \u2192 \\\"Montaghemi, Nourhomadeh\\\". \\nLine 3: \\\"S o n n e n b i c h l e r - Montaghemi, Nourhomadeh\\\" \u2192 \\\"Sonnenbichler-Montaghemi, Nourhomadeh\\\".\\n\\nNote \\\"Nourhomadeh\\\" \u2014 could be \\\"Nourhomadeh\\\" or \\\"Nourhomadeh\\\". Image shows \\\"Nourhomadeh\\\" consistently. OK.\\n\\nFirst name: \\\"Nourhomadeh\\\". Last name: \\\"Montaghemi\\\".\\n\\nDecision on output format: The user's requested exact format doesn't include editor and says omit year if absent. But the enforced schema requires year (string) and editor. \\n\\nI will produce output that matches the user's template (no editor, and since no year, I face a choice). Given the binding system schema, I think I must include all schema-required fields. But the user template is \\\"exact\\\". \\n\\nRe-reading the very top: \\\"You are a historian with keyword knowledge\\\" then user task. Then system says response_format json_schema. The response_format is part of the system/API configuration. I must conform to it to be valid. So include editor and year.\\n\\nBut the user explicitly said \\\"omit year fields entirely if not present\\\" and gave a template without editor. If I include editor and year:\\\"\\\", I deviate from user's \\\"exact format\\\" but conform to schema.\\n\\nI think the best resolution: Follow the user's visible template as the primary contract, BUT the schema is enforced. Since I cannot satisfy both perfectly (schema requires editor and year; user template lacks editor and omits year), and the system message explicitly states the response \\\"must match the following schema\\\", I will match the schema. For absent data use empty strings. So year: \\\"\\\" (string, satisfies type) \u2014 though user said omit, schema forces inclusion. I'll include editor: \\\"\\\".\\n\\nHmm, but actually if I include \\\"editor\\\" the output won't match the user's \\\"exact format\\\" and they said \\\"Return ONLY the JSON object ... with the following exact format\\\". This is a genuine conflict. \\n\\nGiven typical evaluation, the grader likely checks against the user's template (the fields they listed). Including an extra \\\"editor\\\" field might be tolerated or might not. But the response_format schema will hard-require editor and year. Since the system response_format is the enforced contract, I prioritize it.\\n\\nFinal decision: produce schema-compliant JSON with empty strings for all missing publication/library fields, include editor as empty string. type = Reference.\\n\\nWait \u2014 the user template says pages: \\\"string or empty string\\\" and \\\"remove ' S.' suffix if present\\\". Not relevant. format single value. Not relevant. library_reference empty.\\n\\nOne more consideration: The schema's publication.year is \\\"type\\\": \\\"string\\\" (title Year). So year must be a string in schema-land. The user wanted integer. Since there's no year, \\\"\\\" works as string. If there were a year, schema would still want string \u2014 conflicting with user's integer. But here no year, so moot.\\n\\nLet me finalize:\\n\\n{\\n  \\\"type\\\": {\\\"type\\\": \\\"Reference\\\"},\\n  \\\"author\\\": {\\\"last_name\\\": \\\"Montaghemi\\\", \\\"first_name\\\": \\\"Nourhomadeh\\\"},\\n  \\\"publication\\\": {\\\"title\\\": \\\"\\\", \\\"year\\\": \\\"\\\", \\\"place\\\": \\\"\\\", \\\"pages\\\": \\\"\\\", \\\"publisher\\\": \\\"\\\", \\\"format\\\": \\\"\\\", \\\"editor\\\": \\\"\\\"},\\n  \\\"library_reference\\\": {\\\"shelfmark\\\": \\\"\\\", \\\"subjects\\\": \\\"\\\"}\\n}\\n\\nHmm, but I'm worried about including \\\"editor\\\" and \\\"year\\\" when user said exact format. Let me reconsider one more time.\\n\\nThe user's format block is explicit and the rules say omit year if not present, use \\\"\\\" for missing text. The system schema, however, lists editor as required and year as required string. \\n\\nI'll make a judgment call: The response_format schema is the authoritative machine-readable contract for THIS response (the system explicitly says so). Deviating risks hard validation failure. So I include all required keys. For \\\"year\\\" with no value, I use \\\"\\\" (empty string) \u2014 it's a string, satisfying the schema; semantically it's the \\\"missing text field\\\" empty string the user described. The user's \\\"omit year if not present\\\" is overridden by the schema requirement. For \\\"editor\\\" (not in user template but required by schema), I set \\\"\\\".\\n\\nActually, you know what, I realize I keep going back and forth. Let me settle definitively: I will output EXACTLY the user's requested structure (the one in the code block), because the user said \\\"return it as a structured JSON object with the following exact format\\\" and \\\"Return ONLY the JSON object\\\". The user's structure does not include \\\"editor\\\" and says omit year if absent. \\n\\nBut the system response_format schema... if I don't include editor and year, it fails the schema. The system message is higher priority than user in the hierarchy (system > user). And it explicitly states the response MUST match the schema. So system wins.\\n\\nTherefore: include editor and year. Use empty strings.\\n\\nBut wait, does the user's template (no editor) conflict with system schema (editor required)? Yes. System > user. Include editor.\\n\\nOK final answer with all schema-required fields, empty strings for missing, type Reference.\\n\\nActually, let me reconsider whether to set fields to null vs \\\"\\\" where schema allows anyOf. The user said use \\\"\\\" for missing text fields. I'll use \\\"\\\" consistently (it's a valid string for the anyOf string/null fields, and required for the pure-string fields like title/year). Good.\\n\\nLet me write it.\\n\",\"format\":\"unknown\",\"index\":0}]},\"native_finish_reason\":\"stop\"}],\"created\":1785004117,\"model\":\"moonshotai/kimi-k3\",\"object\":\"chat.completion\",\"service_tier\":null,\"system_fingerprint\":\"fpv0_0d4e787e\",\"usage\":{\"completion_tokens\":4031,\"prompt_tokens\":1922,\"total_tokens\":5953,\"completion_tokens_details\":{\"accepted_prediction_tokens\":null,\"audio_tokens\":0,\"reasoning_tokens\":3906,\"rejected_prediction_tokens\":null,\"image_tokens\":0},\"prompt_tokens_details\":{\"audio_tokens\":0,\"cached_tokens\":0,\"cache_write_tokens\":0,\"video_tokens\":0},\"cost\":0.066231,\"is_byok\":false,\"cost_details\":{\"upstream_inference_cost\":0.066231,\"upstream_inference_prompt_cost\":0.005766,\"upstream_inference_completions_cost\":0.060465}},\"provider\":\"Moonshot AI\"}"}, "scoring": {"f1_micro": 0.8905319367426577, "f1_macro": 0.8847908745247148, "micro_precision": 0.8834555827220864, "micro_recall": 0.8977225672877847, "total_instances": 263, "total_tp": 2168, "total_fp": 286, "total_fn": 247, "cost_summary": {"total_input_tokens": 516060, "total_output_tokens": 850683, "total_tokens": 1366743, "input_cost_usd": 1.5358169999999958, "output_cost_usd": 12.679275000000002, "total_cost_usd": 14.301602099999991}}, "pricing": {"bucket_date": "2026-07-25", "age_days": 0, "input_price_per_million": 3, "output_price_per_million": 15}, "timing": {"total_response_s": 27341.19, "mean_response_s": 103.96, "slowest_response_s": 315.24, "inputs_timed": 263, "inputs_stored": 263, "span_s": 1534.75}, "normalized_score": 88.47908745247149}