Supporting resource statistics
Inside the research catalog.
Domain coverage, difficulty, tools, and workflow structure in the current catalog. These counts include collected proposals and illustrative sample entries. Scientific verification results are reported separately.
Tasks per domain
Where the corpus is deep — and where it is thin. Faded bars are domains with zero tasks.
Tasks by type
The proposal's coverage taxonomy — outcome known & measurable, open but still verifiable, or judged by a scientist's rubric.
Both axes verifiable — the outcome is quantitatively checkable and every step is scored against the scientist's ground-truth targets.
An open problem. The outcome stays quantitatively verifiable, but the workflow is not — an expected direction may be supplied, while execution strategy and per-step targets remain open.
An open problem whose outcome cannot be quantitatively verified, so it is judged by a scientist's rubric; the workflow is not verifiable either.
Difficulty distribution
Balance across Easy → Expert tiers.
- Easy00%
- Medium735%
- Hard840%
- Expert525%
Review status
Verified vs. in-flight contributions.
- Verified15%
- Under review315%
- Seed / sample1680%
Corpus growth
Cumulative task total, with newly registered tasks per month.
Most-used simulations
How many tasks reference each tool or solver.
Execution environments
Where the referenced tools run.
- HPC1743%
- Terminal1538%
- VM (GUI)38%
- Web API513%
Coverage shape
Task count per domain, as a coverage footprint.
Average workflow length
Mean number of atomic steps per task, by domain.
Domain × difficulty coverage
Every empty cell is an uncollected slice — pick one for your next submission.
Spotted a gap?
Several difficulty tiers within covered domains still sit empty. Bring the open problem you are working on now to the benchmark — after peer review it becomes a task here.