Research/Terra/ 253892
Task evidence / geographic-heatmap

Create a heatmap of seaport density in regions with high GDP growth in Latin America

PassComputational taskUnpublished draft
Download evidence JSON ↓

The question

253892
Create a heatmap of seaport density in regions with high GDP growth in Latin America.
Exact submitted task and declared adaptations
Create a heatmap of seaport density in regions with high GDP growth in Latin America.

Task conventions: Use supplied countries with SUBREGION in ["South America", "Caribbean", "Central America"]. High growth follows the released reference: 2023 current-USD GDP per capita divided by 2018 GDP per capita at least 1.34. It is nominal GDP-per-capita growth, not inflation-adjusted total GDP growth. Use unit port count weights, not the FACID_NUM identifier. Use original point records strictly within the original selected country polygons; no clipped polygons, location guesses or current data. Join country ISO_A3 to the supplied indicator table's Country Code exactly. Unknown country indicators, nonpositive ratio denominators, missing geometry and missing/nonfinite weights are unknown, not zero. Known zero weights remain valid. Exclude valid points outside the specified geography. Include only eligible points with a finite nonnegative weight in the contributing artifact; report other potentially eligible points as unknown. Use this explicit geographic heatmap convention: grid={"bounds": [-18000000, -7325000, 18000000, 7325000], "crs": "EPSG:6933", "resolutionX": 25000, "resolutionY": 25000}, radius 150000 metres = three Gaussian standard deviations. First bin each point into its containing grid cell and sum its weight. Smooth using a normalized separable Gaussian, numerical support four standard deviations, constant-zero exterior; do not renormalize edges. Use both grid resolutions for the two axes; keep original grid alignment. This is a declared metric raster adaptation to the original interactive screen-pixel heatmap, not an equivalent zoom-dependent rendering. Output unit: events per grid cell. Zero cells are valid; this is not density per square kilometre. Do not rescale the values for presentation.



Add the heatmap raster to the map and retain an inspectable selected-point artifact with original geometry and benchmark_row_id. End with one fenced JSON object: {count: contributing point records, unknown_count: records with unknown eligibility or weight, unlocated_count: original points lacking valid geometry, coverage_note: string, selection: {collectionId,itemId,assetKey}, density: {collectionId,itemId,assetKey}, map_layer_id: heatmap_layer_id}. Explain the data edition, numerical weights, grid, smoothing and coverage limitations. The source-point artifact is not itself the requested heatmap.

Delivery format: provide the answer object with all fields specified above as final_response on assess_result, alongside the inspected final artifact_refs. This replaces the JSON-code-block formatting requirement above. Blue attaches your explicit selection to the accepted final answer. Finish with a concise ordinary-language answer agreeing with that selected result; do not duplicate the JSON in chat.

Supplied immutable inputs:
[
  {
    "name": "Latin American mineral-exporting seaports",
    "edition": "USGS OFR 2017-1079 frozen benchmark compilation",
    "units": {},
    "collectionId": "blue-generated--[resource id withheld]",
    "itemId": "[resource id withheld]",
    "assetKey": "data"
  },
  {
    "name": "World Bank country boundaries",
    "edition": "GeoBenchX harmonized names",
    "units": {},
    "collectionId": "blue-generated--[resource id withheld]",
    "itemId": "[resource id withheld]",
    "assetKey": "data"
  },
  {
    "name": "GDP per capita",
    "edition": "Frozen WDI; current US dollars by year",
    "units": {
      "2023": "current USD per capita",
      "2020": "current USD per capita",
      "2022": "current USD per capita"
    },
    "collectionId": "blue-generated--[resource id withheld]",
    "itemId": "[resource id withheld]",
    "assetKey": "data"
  }
]

Outcome & verification

Independent artifact and delivery checks passed.

Duration
39m 20s
Recorded Blue tool calls
69
Total tokens
5,523,954
Model cost
Not recorded
Application revision
d50497ea9084f29c91b05406688f87035df98d8a
Release
terra-geobenchx-v1

Recorded final answer

Done — the heatmap is on your map, and the matching 56 contributing seaport records were published for inspection. It uses unit port counts on the declared 25 km EPSG:6933 grid, smoothed with the declared 150 km Gaussian radius. Sources: USGS OFR 2017-1079 frozen benchmark seaports; World Bank country boundaries, GeoBenchX harmonized edition; frozen World Bank WDI GDP per capita. Main limitation: 7 ports in Cuba and Venezuela remain unknown because the supplied GDP table does not confirm their 2023 country values for the exact join rule. Also, “high growth” here is nominal 2023/2018 GDP per capita, not inflation-adjusted or total GDP growth. Next: click the heatmap layer or inspect the contributing-point artifact to review the exact source records behind it. ### Limitations - The result reflects the supplied frozen benchmark seaport compilation and does not represent current port activity or current infrastructure. - High growth here means nominal 2023 current-USD GDP per capita divided by 2018 GDP per capita; it is not inflation-adjusted growth and not total GDP growth. - Seven potentially eligible seaport records in Cuba and Venezuela remain unknown because the supplied GDP table does not provide confirmed 2023 values for those country joins. - The heatmap uses constant-zero exterior smoothing, so edge cells are not renormalized. - High growth is nominal current-USD GDP per capita ratio only. - Countries with missing 2023 GDP or nonpositive 2018 GDP remain unknown. - The final contributing artifact includes only known-eligible points with finite nonnegative unit weights. - Unknown-eligibility ports are counted separately and do not contribute to the heatmap. - The heatmap reflects only the supplied benchmark ports that pass the eligibility filter. - Zero cells are valid and values are not rescaled for presentation.

Independent checks

These checks are separate from the agent's own assessment. A successful job or an assertion of success is not enough to pass.

Expected count
56
Reported count
56
Computation verified
Yes
Answer fulfilled
Yes
Full grading and rubric record
{
  "expectedCount": 56,
  "actualCount": 56,
  "expectedMetrics": null,
  "actualMetrics": null,
  "computationCorrect": true,
  "answerFulfilled": true,
  "adjudication": null,
  "qualification": null,
  "reasons": []
}

Recorded investigation findings

The agent's reported hypotheses and assessments, retained as evidence of its process—not independent proof that the answer is correct. Failed calls retain their requested verdict, not an accepted assessment.

run_trial · completed

Do the supplied snapshots expose the exact fields needed for country eligibility, strict point-in-polygon selection, and preserved benchmark_row_id delivery?

assess_trial · completed · assessment: sufficient

The supplied boundary snapshot exposes SUBREGION and ISO_A3 fields on valid original country polygons. The supplied GDP table exposes Country Code plus numeric 2018 and 2023 GDP-per-capita columns. The supplied seaport snapshot contains valid Point geometries and benchmark_row_id for all 230 rows. These observations are sufficient to wire the exact country filter, ISO_A3-to-Country Code join, and preserved-point delivery.

run_trial · completed

Does the full requested computation produce unique contributing original point records and the declared heatmap raster for high-growth Latin American countries?

run_trial · completed

Can I select the same contributing points with an aggregate spatial join so the output keeps the original port benchmark_row_id field name while leaving the heatmap unchanged?

assess_trial · completed · assessment: sufficient

Using aggregate spatial join preserves the original port benchmark_row_id field name while keeping the same 56 strictly within-country contributing point records. The corrected selected-point output keeps valid original point geometry and benchmark_row_id from the port source, and the corrected heatmap remains identical on the declared EPSG:6933 25 km grid with 150000 m Gaussian smoothing and total input weight 56.

assess_trial · completed · assessment: insufficient

The trial correctly identified 4 eligible countries, 56 contributing ports, 7 unknown-eligibility ports, and a heatmap on the declared EPSG:6933 25 km grid with 150000 m Gaussian smoothing. However, the selected-port output did not preserve the original port benchmark_row_id field name directly because the spatial join renamed colliding ID fields.

run_trial · completed

Do the retained corrected selected-point and heatmap artifacts resolve the final delivery defect for the seaport-density result?

assess_trial · completed · assessment: sufficient

The retained corrected selected-point artifact has 56 rows, valid original point geometry, and a plain benchmark_row_id field. The retained corrected heatmap artifact remains on the declared EPSG:6933 grid with 25000 m cells, 150000 m Gaussian smoothing behavior, and total input weight 56. This resolves the earlier delivery defect for the seaport-density result without changing the tested heatmap values.

assess_result · completed · assessment: sufficient

The contributing-point artifact is published and inspectable. It contains 56 original port records with original geometry and plain benchmark_row_id. A separate supporting artifact reports 7 original port records in Cuba and Venezuela as unknown because the supplied GDP table does not confirm their country eligibility under the requested rule.

assess_result · failed · requested assessment: sufficient

The final heatmap is published and on the map. It uses 56 contributing original seaport records and the declared 25 km EPSG:6933 grid with 150000 m Gaussian smoothing. The practical limitation is that 7 original port records in Cuba and Venezuela remain unknown because the supplied GDP table does not confirm their country eligibility under the requested rule. Next action: inspect the selected-point and unknown-point artifacts if you want record-level review behind the heatmap.

assess_result · completed · assessment: sufficient

The final heatmap is published and on the map. It uses 56 contributing original seaport records on the declared 25 km EPSG:6933 grid with 150000 m Gaussian smoothing. The main remaining limitation is that 7 original port records in Cuba and Venezuela remain unknown because the supplied GDP table does not confirm their country eligibility under the requested rule.

Recorded workflow

  1. 01

    countries src

    Recorded source · succeeded

  2. 02

    Unknown-eligibility seaports

    Recorded output · succeeded

  3. 03

    Contributing seaports

    Recorded output · succeeded

  4. 04

    Seaport density heatmap

    Recorded output · succeeded

  5. 05

    eligible countries

    Recorded vector-filter · succeeded

  6. 06

    gdp src

    Recorded source · succeeded

  7. 07

    heatmap

    Recorded point-density · succeeded

  8. 08

    latam countries

    Recorded vector-filter · succeeded

  9. 09

    latam countries gdp

    Recorded table-attribute-join · succeeded

  10. 10

    latam countries ratio

    Recorded vector-field-calculate · succeeded

  11. 11

    ports src

    Recorded source · succeeded

  12. 12

    selected ports

    Recorded vector-spatial-join · succeeded

  13. 13

    unknown countries

    Recorded vector-filter · succeeded

  14. 14

    unknown ports

    Recorded vector-spatial-join · succeeded

  15. 15

    heatmap corrected

    Recorded source · succeeded

  16. 16

    selected ports corrected

    Recorded source · succeeded

  17. 17

    selected ports corrected

    Recorded output · succeeded

  18. 18

    heatmap corrected

    Recorded output · succeeded

  19. 19

    eligible countries src

    Recorded source · succeeded

  20. 20

    heatmap fixed

    Recorded point-density · succeeded

  21. 21

    ports src

    Recorded source · succeeded

  22. 22

    selected ports fixed

    Recorded vector-spatial-join · succeeded

  23. 23

    selected ports fixed

    Recorded output · succeeded

  24. 24

    heatmap fixed

    Recorded output · succeeded

  25. 25

    countries src

    Recorded source · succeeded

  26. 26

    eligible countries

    Recorded vector-filter · succeeded

  27. 27

    gdp src

    Recorded source · succeeded

  28. 28

    heatmap

    Recorded point-density · succeeded

  29. 29

    latam countries

    Recorded vector-filter · succeeded

  30. 30

    latam countries gdp

    Recorded table-attribute-join · succeeded

  31. 31

    latam countries ratio

    Recorded vector-field-calculate · succeeded

  32. 32

    ports src

    Recorded source · succeeded

  33. 33

    selected ports

    Recorded vector-spatial-join · succeeded

  34. 34

    eligible countries

    Recorded output · succeeded

  35. 35

    selected ports

    Recorded output · succeeded

  36. 36

    unknown ports

    Recorded output · succeeded

  37. 37

    heatmap

    Recorded output · succeeded

  38. 38

    unknown countries

    Recorded vector-filter · succeeded

  39. 39

    unknown ports

    Recorded vector-spatial-join · succeeded

  40. 40

    countries src

    Recorded source · succeeded

  41. 41

    gdp src

    Recorded source · succeeded

  42. 42

    ports src

    Recorded source · succeeded

  43. 43

    ports src

    Recorded output · succeeded

  44. 44

    countries src

    Recorded output · succeeded

  45. 45

    gdp src

    Recorded output · succeeded

Activity

Recorded actions

Recorded observable actions only, not private reasoning. Raw payloads, geometry, private links and credentials are omitted; full evidence is retained privately. Activity/workflow lists bounded at 500 entries.

  1. Progress update

    I’ll inspect the supplied sources and set up a small analysis brief first, then I’ll test the selection and heatmap method before proposing the full run.

  2. get_analysis

    Recorded tool call · completed

  3. Progress update

    I found no saved brief yet. Next I’m checking the three supplied snapshots for exact fields, item bindings, and whether the country table can support the required ISO join and years.

  4. get_collection

    Recorded tool call · completed

  5. get_collection

    Recorded tool call · completed

  6. get_collection

    Recorded tool call · completed

  7. inspect_artifact

    Recorded tool call · failed

  8. inspect_artifact

    Recorded tool call · failed

  9. inspect_artifact

    Recorded tool call · failed

  10. Progress update

    I have the snapshot metadata, but not the row fields yet. I’m saving a brief now so I can run private source-inspection trials and confirm the exact join keys, year columns, and point attributes before building the full method.

  11. update_analysis_brief

    Recorded tool call · completed

  12. get_tool_help

    Recorded tool call · completed

  13. get_tool_help

    Recorded tool call · completed

  14. get_tool_help

    Recorded tool call · completed

  15. list_processors

    Recorded tool call · completed

  16. describe_processors

    Recorded tool call · completed

  17. describe_processors

    Recorded tool call · completed

  18. describe_processors

    Recorded tool call · completed

  19. describe_processors

    Recorded tool call · completed

  20. Progress update

    I found a processor that already matches the declared heatmap behavior: `point-density`. Before I use it, I’m running a tiny private source trial to confirm the exact fields for SUBREGION, ISO code, GDP years, geometry, and benchmark_row_id.

  21. run_trial

    Recorded tool call · completed

  22. Progress update

    The trial was rejected because the saved brief scope used string coordinates. I’m correcting that argument now, then I’ll rerun the source inspection.

  23. update_analysis_brief

    Recorded tool call · completed

  24. Progress update

    The source trial finished. I confirmed the seaport points, country polygons, and the key boundary and GDP fields are present. I’m inspecting a few rows now to verify the exact year and code columns, then I’ll run one combined trial that reaches the actual selected points and heatmap output.

  25. inspect_artifact

    Recorded tool call · completed

  26. inspect_artifact

    Recorded tool call · completed

  27. inspect_artifact

    Recorded tool call · completed

  28. get_trial_report

    Recorded tool call · completed

  29. Progress update

    I’ve confirmed the needed source fields exist. Next I’m checking exact sample rows so I can wire the join and country filter correctly, then I’ll test the full selection-plus-heatmap method in one private run.

  30. inspect_artifact

    Recorded tool call · completed

  31. inspect_artifact

    Recorded tool call · completed

  32. inspect_artifact

    Recorded tool call · completed

  33. get_trial_report

    Recorded tool call · completed

  34. Progress update

    The source check is sufficient: the required fields are there. One practical caution remains: the GDP table includes aggregate non-country rows, so the exact ISO_A3 = Country Code join and the subregion filter are both important. I’m moving to a combined trial that should produce the actual eligible points and the heatmap behavior, not just another setup check.

  35. assess_trial

    Recorded tool call · completed

  36. Progress update

    Expectation: this full-method trial should give a smaller contributing-port set than the 230 original ports, because the geography excludes Mexico and only some selected countries should meet the 2023/2018 GDP-per-capita threshold. I also expect the selected points to keep unique `benchmark_row_id` values and the raster to land exactly on the declared 25 km EPSG:6933 grid.

  37. run_trial

    Recorded tool call · completed

  38. get_tool_help

    Recorded tool call · completed

  39. inspect_artifact

    Recorded tool call · completed

  40. inspect_artifact

    Recorded tool call · completed

  41. get_trial_report

    Recorded tool call · completed

  42. list_processors

    Recorded tool call · completed

  43. Progress update

    I found one likely delivery issue in the trial: the spatial join appears to rename the port and country row IDs to avoid a collision. I’m checking whether the original port ID is still present under a target-suffixed field; if so, I can save a production workflow that makes the selected points inspectable and keeps the heatmap unchanged.

  44. Progress update

    I confirmed the issue: the trial output keeps the original port ID as `benchmark_row_id_target`, not plain `benchmark_row_id`. That is a delivery defect, not a data gap. I’m running one focused correction trial now to keep the same 56 points and heatmap while preserving the original port ID field name in the selected-point artifact.

  45. run_trial

    Recorded tool call · completed

  46. get_tool_help

    Recorded tool call · completed

  47. get_trial_report

    Recorded tool call · completed

  48. get_tool_help

    Recorded tool call · completed

  49. get_tool_help

    Recorded tool call · completed

  50. Progress update

    I’ve got the correction result too: it preserves plain `benchmark_row_id` on the 56 contributing ports and keeps the heatmap identical. I’m reading the workflow schema now so I can save one clean production run with the final point artifact, heatmap, and supporting unknown-point count.

  51. assess_trial

    Recorded tool call · completed

  52. get_tool_help

    Recorded tool call · completed

  53. get_tool_help

    Recorded tool call · completed

  54. get_tool_help

    Recorded tool call · completed

  55. Progress update

    The correction trial succeeded: same 56 contributing ports, plain `benchmark_row_id`, and the same heatmap values. I’m recording that, then I’ll save the production workflow with the supporting unknown-port branch so the final counts are all inspectable.

  56. get_analysis

    Recorded tool call · completed

  57. inspect_artifact

    Recorded tool call · completed

  58. Progress update

    I’ve tested the method end to end and fixed the point-ID field. I’m grabbing the exact eligible-country names now, then I’ll save and run the final workflow and add the heatmap layer.

  59. update_analysis_brief

    Recorded tool call · completed

  60. Progress update

    I’ve retired the stale setup notes in the brief. The remaining limits are now the real ones: frozen benchmark ports, nominal GDP-per-capita growth only, and 7 ports with unknown eligibility from missing country indicators. Then I’ll save the final workflow.

  61. Progress update

    The first full-method trial proved the country filter, counts, and raster, but not the final selected-point field name. I’m marking that as insufficient and pointing to the correction, so the saved workflow uses the actually supported method.

  62. assess_trial

    Recorded tool call · completed

  63. Progress update

    I’m saving the full production workflow now. It uses the tested exact country filter, the corrected point-selection method, a separate unknown-port branch for the reported count, and the declared heatmap grid and smoothing.

  64. propose_workflow

    Recorded tool call · failed

  65. Progress update

    The only issue was bookkeeping: Blue treats a null parameter expectation as missing. I’m removing that one and resaving the same workflow.

  66. propose_workflow

    Recorded tool call · failed

  67. Progress update

    Blue wanted clearer requirement bindings. I’m tightening the contract so the eligible-country rule binds to the contributing-port join, and the unknown-country rule binds separately to the unknown-port support branch. The computation itself is unchanged.

  68. propose_workflow

    Recorded tool call · completed

  69. Progress update

    The workflow is valid, but Blue wants the corrected trial formally tied back to the earlier failed point-ID attempt. I’m resolving that now so the saved workflow can run without rebuilding anything.

  70. get_analysis

    Recorded tool call · completed

  71. get_analysis

    Recorded tool call · completed

  72. Progress update

    I’ve got the exact finding reference. I’m resolving it with the correction trial evidence so Blue can treat the saved workflow as supported, not just syntactically valid.

  73. assess_plan

    Recorded tool call · failed

  74. Progress update

    Blue wants the correction evidence attached to the heatmap result itself. I’m doing a tiny retained-artifact trial now, using the already-corrected point and raster outputs, so the saved workflow can be approved without changing the computation again.

  75. run_trial

    Recorded tool call · completed

  76. Progress update

    I now have the exact retained-artifact confirmation Blue asked for: the corrected selected-point artifact still has 56 rows with plain `benchmark_row_id`, and the corrected heatmap stays on the same declared grid with the same values. I’m attaching that to the saved workflow so it can run.

  77. assess_trial

    Recorded tool call · completed

  78. Progress update

    I’ve now got the required sufficient correction evidence attached to the heatmap result itself. I’m clearing the saved workflow’s review hold, then I’ll execute it and inspect the final outputs.

  79. assess_plan

    Recorded tool call · completed

  80. Progress update

    The method is now fully supported. I’m starting the saved final workflow. Once it finishes, I’ll inspect the published outputs and bind the heatmap layer to the map.

  81. execute_workflow

    Recorded tool call · completed

  82. Progress update

    The final workflow finished in the background. I’m inspecting the published outputs now so I can verify the final artifact IDs, counts, and layer binding before I return the result.

  83. inspect_workflow_results

    Recorded tool call · completed

  84. inspect_workflow_results

    Recorded tool call · completed

  85. Progress update

    The production run completed. I’m reading its exact output receipts now so I can verify the final artifact IDs and add the heatmap layer to the map.

  86. Progress update

    I’ve got the final artifact IDs and the map layer receipt. I’m doing one last bounded inspection of the final point and raster artifacts so the final answer is tied to the published outputs, not just the workflow summary.

  87. inspect_artifact

    Recorded tool call · completed

  88. inspect_artifact

    Recorded tool call · completed

  89. inspect_artifact

    Recorded tool call · completed

  90. list_map_layers

    Recorded tool call · completed

  91. Progress update

    I already have the final IDs and layer binding. I’m just fetching the final bounded previews now to verify the published point fields and raster statistics before I record the result.

  92. inspect_artifact

    Recorded tool call · completed

  93. inspect_artifact

    Recorded tool call · completed

  94. inspect_artifact

    Recorded tool call · completed

  95. Progress update

    I have the final counts, final artifact identities, and the live heatmap layer. I’m checking the exact `assess_result` input shape once, then I’ll record the final result object and finish.

  96. get_tool_help

    Recorded tool call · completed

  97. Progress update

    I’ve verified the final point and unknown-point artifacts. I’m recording the point-result decision first, then I’ll record the heatmap result with the answer object attached.

  98. assess_result

    Recorded tool call · completed

  99. Progress update

    I’ve recorded the point result. Now I’m recording the heatmap result and the requested answer object, using the published raster, the selected-point artifact, and the supporting unknown-point artifact.

  100. assess_result

    Recorded tool call · failed

  101. assess_result

    Recorded tool call · completed

|||

© 2026 Exia Labs, Inc.