FG-01-FP: 煲汤/慢炖（正常长时间开灶）

温度上升后稳定（不持续飙升），住户定期回来检查，烟雾传感器未触发

No definitive safety anomaly detected; observed events are consistent with normal evening routines and transient sensor telemetry issues.

Explanation: The primary concern raised is 'unattended cooking' based on the absence of explicit `kitchen_occupancy` logs during cook surface activation (C12). However, `living_room_occupancy` remains continuously 'occupied' throughout the evening, strongly suggesting human presence in the home. The lack of specific kitchen occupancy logs is likely due to sensor placement or reporting granularity rather than an empty room, making the 'unattended' hypothesis weak.

Explanation: The cook surface was active for short durations (approx. 35 mins total) and was turned off at 18:40. Immediately following this, the dishwasher activated, indicating a transition of activity that suggests the user was present and managing appliances, contradicting the idea of leaving the stove unattended.

Explanation: The temperature sensor anomalies (`None` values and the '2700' raw value) appear to be technical glitches or transient spikes. The '2700' value corresponds to 27.00°C, which is not dangerously high and returned to baseline (~23°C) immediately. There is no evidence of thermal runaway, smoke/CO alarms, or sustained hazardous conditions.

Explanation: The supervisor correctly identified that evidence is insufficient to confirm a hazard, noting the high risk of false alarms from relying on missing occupancy logs and ambiguous telemetry. Without corroborating evidence of danger (like smoke detection or prolonged unsupervised heat), the normal explanation (routine cooking with minor sensor noise) is more probable.

Living room occupancy remained 'occupied' throughout the evening (C10-C16), implying supervision.

Cook surface turned off at 18:40, followed immediately by dishwasher activation, suggesting user presence and control.

Temperature readings returned to normal baselines quickly after transient spikes/dropouts, with no fire/smoke indicators.

Front door lock engaged automatically at 22:57, indicating secure state later in the day.

Monitor kitchen temperature sensor for recurring dropout patterns to determine if hardware replacement is needed.

Verify if kitchen occupancy sensors are functioning correctly or if their absence is expected behavior for this device type.

Analyze the comprehensive status report to determine the home's current safety status and identify any potential risks.

Kitchen temperature anomaly (spike to ~27.8°C) coinciding with cook surface activity or sensor error.

Cook surface activation during occupied hours without immediate smoke alarm trigger in preview logs.

Evening lock operation sequence indicating secure entry/exit routine.

Potential device fault in kitchen temperature sensor (None values, high readings).

C16: Covers the late-night period including the front door lock operation, which is critical for assessing physical security status as part of the overall 'safety' query.

Normal evening cooking routine with intermittent sensor telemetry issues. The cook surface was used briefly (approx. 30-45 mins total across two sessions), and the temperature spikes were caused by local heat or sensor proximity to the stove, followed by normal recovery. No fire or unattended hazard occurred.

C12 shows kitchen_cook_surface turning on at 18:05 and off at 18:40, then on again briefly at 18:39 (likely a log overlap or quick re-activation) and off at 18:40. Total active time is short.

Kitchen temperatures in C12 remain relatively stable (23.16°C - 23.24°C) except for the anomalous '2700' reading at 18:44, which likely represents a parsing error or transient glitch rather than a physical 27°C spike given the surrounding 23°C readings.

Living room and bedroom occupancy logs show continuous 'occupied' status throughout the evening (C10-C12), suggesting someone was home and potentially supervising, even if not logged in the kitchen specifically.

No smoke/CO alarm events are recorded in any chunk.

The front door lock operation in C16 (22:57) shows a standard auto-lock sequence after lights/AC turned off, indicating a secure state.

Does not fully explain the 'None' values and the specific '2700' raw value anomaly without assuming protocol/parsing quirks.

Relies on the assumption that 'living_room_occupied' implies supervision of the kitchen, which may not be true if the occupant was stationary in another room.

Device health anomaly: Kitchen temperature sensor experiencing intermittent connectivity or calibration drift. The 'None' values and '2700' reading are isolated technical faults unrelated to safety hazards.

C08 and C12 both show `kitchen_temp_sensor` returning `None` shortly after cook surface activation (12:11 in C08, 18:06 in C12).

In C12, the value '2700' appears at 18:44, immediately following a dropout and before returning to normal ~23°C. This pattern suggests a data transmission or scaling error rather than a physical event.

Temperatures consistently return to baseline (~23-24°C) in subsequent readings, showing no sustained thermal runaway.

Does not address the potential behavioral risk of unattended cooking if the sensor failure coincided with a lack of human presence.

Unattended Cooking / Fire Risk: The cook surface was activated during a period where kitchen-specific occupancy was not confirmed, and the temperature sensor failed to provide reliable monitoring data. The combination of active heat source, missing direct supervision evidence, and sensor blackout creates a latent fire risk.

C12: Kitchen cook surface turns ON at 18:05 and remains ON until 18:40. During this 35-minute window, there are NO `kitchen_occupancy` logs. While `living_room_occupancy` is present, it does not confirm presence in the kitchen.

C12: At 18:06, just one minute after the stove turns on, the `kitchen_temp_sensor` reports `None`, creating a blind spot for thermal monitoring during the critical heating phase.

C12: At 18:44, an anomalous raw value '2700' appears. If interpreted as 27.00°C, it's a mild spike; if interpreted as a fault code or corrupted packet, it indicates sensor instability during/after use.

C12: The cook surface turns OFF at 18:40, but the dishwasher turns ON at 18:40:05. This transition might indicate the user left the kitchen area, potentially leaving residual heat or forgetting the stove if the 'off' command was delayed or manual.

Supervisor Feedback Note: The absence of kitchen occupancy logs is a weak indicator alone, but combined with the sensor dropout, it elevates the risk profile from 'normal' to 'suspect'.

Lack of explicit 'unattended' confirmation: Living room occupancy suggests someone was home, possibly nearby.

No smoke/CO alarms triggered, and temperatures did not reach dangerous levels (max ~29°C in earlier C08 session, ~23°C in C12).

The '2700' value is ambiguous and could be a parsing artifact.

Sensor Malfunction / Data Integrity Issue: The kitchen temperature sensor is exhibiting erratic behavior (dropouts, impossible raw values) that compromises the reliability of the home's environmental monitoring system.

C08: `kitchen_temp_sensor` returns `None` at 12:55, then jumps to 27.79°C, then drops back to 27.42°C. This volatility occurs while the cook surface is OFF, suggesting environmental interference or sensor drift.

C12: `kitchen_temp_sensor` returns `None` at 18:06 (during cooking) and then reports a raw value of '2700' at 18:44. Given Matter semantics, 2700 centi-degrees is 27.00°C, which is plausible but inconsistent with the surrounding 23°C readings, suggesting a momentary spike or error.

The recurrence of `None` values correlated with appliance activity (cook surface) suggests electromagnetic interference or a failing sensor component.

The sensor recovers quickly each time, so it is not a permanent failure.

The '2700' value, if valid, is not dangerously high, only anomalously high relative to the rest of the house.

C12: Absence of `kitchen_occupancy` logs during the 18:05-18:40 cook surface activation window.

C12: `kitchen_temp_sensor` reporting `None` at 18:06, immediately after cook surface activation.

C12: Anomalous raw value '2700' at 18:44, contrasting with stable ~23°C readings before and after.

C12: Cook surface OFF at 18:40, followed immediately by Dishwasher ON at 18:40:05, indicating a hand-off of activity or departure from the stove.

Direct `kitchen_occupancy` logs for the 18:00-19:00 window to confirm if anyone was actually in the kitchen.

Smoke/CO alarm status logs for the entire day to definitively rule out fire/smoke detection.

Detailed logs of the `kitchen_cook_surface` power draw or thermal sensor (if available) to corroborate the temperature sensor data.

Clarification on the '2700' raw value: Is it a valid 27.00°C reading or a protocol error?

Verify if the '2700' raw value in C12 corresponds to a valid 27.00°C reading or a protocol error/packet corruption, given the immediate return to normal values.

Check for smoke/CO alarm events in chunks C13-C15 to definitively rule out fire/smoke detection following the cooking session.

Confirm kitchen occupancy status in C13-C15 to determine if the user remained in the kitchen after turning off the cook surface at 18:40.

Investigate the cause of the `kitchen_temp_sensor` dropout (`None`) at 18:06 and 18:41 to distinguish between sensor failure and data transmission issues.

The investigator correctly identified potential risks (unattended cooking, sensor fault) but relies heavily on the absence of kitchen occupancy logs and transient telemetry gaps ('None', '2700') without corroborating evidence from subsequent chunks.

The '2700' value is ambiguous; interpreting it as a hazard without checking if it's a parsing artifact or a brief spike that recovered is risky. The Matter notes specify centi-degrees, so 2700 = 27.00°C, which is not inherently dangerous but indicates instability.

Crucially, the investigation stops at C12 (ending 19:05). To assess 'safety status' and 'potential risks' comprehensively, we must see if the situation resolved safely (e.g., user returned, alarms triggered, or no incident occurred) in the following hours (C13-C15).

The current conclusion of 'suspect' or 'anomaly' is premature because the outcome of the evening is unknown. A 'normal' verdict cannot be confirmed, nor can a 'hazard' be confirmed, without the post-cooking context.

False-alarm risk is high because the primary evidence for danger (missing occupancy + sensor glitch) is weak and could easily be explained by normal behavior (user left kitchen briefly, sensor reset) or technical noise.

The home is in a normal, secure state with standard evening activities. The kitchen temperature spike and sensor dropout are transient telemetry artifacts or minor environmental fluctuations unrelated to safety hazards.

C08: Kitchen temperature returns to baseline (~24.7°C) within minutes after the initial spike (27.79°C), showing no sustained heat growth indicative of fire.

C12: Cook surface activation at 18:05 is followed by immediate deactivation at 18:40 (35 mins), which is a typical cooking duration. No smoke alarm triggers occurred during this window.

C16: Front door lock operation at 22:57 shows an explicit 'locked' state with raw code 1, confirming physical security was engaged.

Occupancy logs show continuous presence in living/bedroom areas throughout the evening, suggesting occupants were home and potentially supervising kitchen activities.

Does not fully explain the specific sequence of `None` values and spikes in C08/C12 as purely benign without assuming sensor error, which contradicts the strict definition of device health if faults are present.

Assumes occupancy in other rooms implies supervision of the kitchen, which is not guaranteed.

The kitchen temperature sensor (`kitchen_temp_sensor`) is experiencing intermittent connectivity or calibration issues (sensor_malfunction/sensor_drift), causing the observed `None` values and spikes, but this does not constitute a safety risk as the environment remained stable.

C08: Sensor reports `None` at 12:55:00, then immediately jumps to 27.79°C, then decays linearly back to normal over 30 minutes. This pattern suggests a sensor reset or temporary overheating due to proximity to a heat source rather than ambient room change.

C12: Sensor reports `None` again at 18:06:00 and 18:41:00, coinciding with cook surface activity. A subsequent reading of `2700` (27.00°C) appears briefly before returning to normal.

The recurrence of `None` and high readings specifically during cooking times points to a device-level issue rather than a house-wide hazard.

Classifies this as a device-health anomaly rather than a safety one, but the prompt asks for safety status. If the sensor is faulty, it fails its safety monitoring role, which is a latent risk.

Unattended Cooking / Fire Risk: The cook surface was activated for a significant duration (approx. 35 mins) while the kitchen appeared unoccupied or unsupervised, compounded by a faulty temperature sensor that failed to provide reliable thermal feedback during the event.

C12: Kitchen cook surface turns ON at 18:05:30. It remains ON until 18:40:00 (34.5 minutes).

C12: At 18:05, kitchen light is ON, but kitchen occupancy is not explicitly logged as 'occupied' in the same timestamp block (only bedroom/living room are). Bathroom is unoccupied. Bedroom/Living room are occupied.

C12: Kitchen temp sensor goes `None` at 18:06:00 (immediately after stove on) and again at 18:41:00 (after stove off). This creates a blind spot in thermal monitoring during the critical heating phase.

C12: A brief anomalous reading of `2700` (27.00°C) appears at 18:44:00, shortly after the stove turned off, possibly indicating residual heat or sensor recovery lag, but no smoke alarm event is recorded.

Lack of explicit 'Kitchen Occupied' logs during the active cooking window raises the possibility that the person who turned on the stove left the area or was distracted, creating an unattended cooking scenario.

Occupancy sensors in Matter often have delays or may not trigger if motion is minimal; absence of 'Kitchen Occupied' doesn't prove absence of people.

No smoke alarm triggered, and temperatures did not reach dangerous levels (>30-40°C) in the logs provided, mitigating the severity of the fire risk.

The cook surface turned OFF automatically or manually at 18:40, ending the hazard.

Sensor Malfunction / Safety Device Failure: The kitchen temperature sensor is unreliable, reporting `None` and erratic spikes during critical events, potentially compromising the home's ability to detect overheating or fire.

C08: Reports `None` at 12:55:00, followed by a sharp spike to 27.79°C, then a slow decay. This is inconsistent with normal ambient temperature changes.

C12: Reports `None` at 18:06:00 and 18:41:00. These dropouts coincide exactly with cook surface state changes.

C12: An isolated value of `2700` (27.00°C) appears at 18:44:00, which is an integer format inconsistency compared to other `raw=XXXX` entries, suggesting protocol parsing errors or device instability.

The repeated failure to report valid data during high-risk periods (cooking) constitutes a safety device failure.

The sensor eventually recovers and provides normal readings, so it is not permanently stuck.

The anomalies are correlated with heat sources, which might be expected behavior for a poorly placed sensor, rather than a total malfunction.

C12: Cook surface ON from 18:05:30 to 18:40:00 with concurrent kitchen temp sensor `None` values (18:06, 18:41).

C12: Absence of explicit 'Kitchen Occupied' log during the active cooking window, despite other rooms being occupied.

C08 & C12: Recurring pattern of `None` values and temperature spikes in the kitchen sensor specifically when the cook surface is active or recently active.

Smoke/CO alarm status logs for the kitchen during the 18:05-18:40 window to confirm no fire/smoke was detected.

Detailed occupancy logs for the kitchen itself (not just adjacent rooms) to determine if anyone was actually present in the kitchen during cooking.

History of the kitchen temperature sensor to establish if these `None`/spike patterns are chronic (device fault) or acute (environmental).

No smoke/CO alarm events are recorded in any chunk.

The front door lock operation in C16 (22:57) shows a standard auto-lock sequence after lights/AC turned off, indicating a secure state.

C08 and C12 both show `kitchen_temp_sensor` returning `None` shortly after cook surface activation (12:11 in C08, 18:06 in C12).

Temperatures consistently return to baseline (~23-24°C) in subsequent readings, showing no sustained thermal runaway.

The recurrence of `None` values correlated with appliance activity (cook surface) suggests electromagnetic interference or a failing sensor component.

Verify kitchen occupancy status during the 18:05-18:40 cooking window (check C10/C11 for kitchen_occupancy logs).

Check for smoke/CO alarm events in C10/C11 to rule out fire/smoke detection.

Analyze the `2700` raw value at 18:44 in context of protocol parsing (is it 27.00°C or a malformed integer?).

Confirm if the cook surface auto-shutoff was triggered by a timer or manual action (check for explicit 'off' event vs state change).

The investigator correctly identified potential risks but relies heavily on the *absence* of 'Kitchen Occupied' logs and transient sensor glitches (`None` values) to construct an 'unattended cooking' hypothesis.

Matter occupancy sensors often have delays or may not trigger in small rooms; absence of log != absence of person. This is a weak evidence base for a safety hazard.

The temperature spike in C08 recovered quickly, and the sensor issues in C12 appear intermittent rather than catastrophic faults requiring immediate emergency response.

Crucially, chunks C10 and C11 cover the critical 18:00-19:00 window where the cooking occurred. The current focused chunks (C08, C12, C16) skip the middle part of this evening sequence, leaving gaps in occupancy and alarm verification.

Without C10/C11, we cannot confirm if anyone was actually in the kitchen or if alarms fired. The current conclusion is speculative based on missing data rather than positive evidence of danger.

False alarm risk is high because the 'hazard' is inferred from telemetry gaps and minor sensor noise, not from confirmed hazardous states (fire, intrusion, etc.).

## Query
以下是家庭设备的综合状态报告。请综合分析所有信息，判断家庭当前的安全状况，指出任何潜在风险。

## Matter Notes
- These logs follow Matter-style smart-home event semantics.
- TemperatureMeasurement.MeasuredValue is represented in centi-degrees Celsius in this benchmark: 2466 means 24.66 C, not 2466 C.
- BooleanState and other protocol booleans should be interpreted using transitions and surrounding events, not naive natural-language assumptions from a single isolated value.
- OccupancySensing.Occupancy uses 0=unoccupied and 1=occupied.
- DoorLock.LockState is an enumerated state; formatted logs may show both the label and the raw code.
- A device-fault conclusion requires direct fault evidence such as stuck values, repeated non-recovery, explicit alarm/fault events, or impossible state transitions. Scaled temperature values alone are not enough.

## Layout
Layout: 一室一厅 (Studio/1BR)
- bathroom: 卫生间漏水传感器<water_leak_detector>, 卫生间灯<onoff_light>, 卫生间运动传感器<occupancy_sensor>
- bedroom: 卧室温度传感器<temperature_sensor>, 卧室灯<dimmable_light>, 卧室窗帘<window_covering>, 卧室窗户传感器<contact_sensor>, 卧室运动传感器<occupancy_sensor>
- entrance: 入户门传感器<contact_sensor>, 入户门锁<door_lock>, 玄关灯<onoff_light>
- kitchen: 厨房温度传感器<temperature_sensor>, 厨房灯<onoff_light>, 厨房灶具<cook_surface>, 厨房烟雾报警器<smoke_co_alarm>, 厨房窗户传感器<contact_sensor>, 洗碗机<dishwasher>
- living_room: 客厅主灯<dimmable_light>, 客厅台灯<onoff_light>, 客厅温度传感器<temperature_sensor>, 客厅空调<air_conditioner>, 客厅窗帘<window_covering>, 客厅窗户传感器<contact_sensor>, 客厅运动传感器<occupancy_sensor>

## Deterministic Signals
{
  "room_activity": {
    "living_room": 486,
    "bedroom": 494,
    "kitchen": 311,
    "bathroom": 55,
    "entrance": 3
  },
  "attribute_frequency": {
    "MeasuredValue": 872,
    "Occupancy": 447,
    "OnOff": 19,
    "StateValue": 4,
    "CurrentPositionLiftPercent100ths": 3,
    "SystemMode": 1,
    "OperationalState": 1,
    "LockState": 1
  },
  "lock_state_flips": 1,
  "occupancy_events": 447,
  "temperature_patterns": [],
  "value_format_hints": {
    "temperature": "MeasuredValue is shown as Celsius with the raw integer preserved in parentheses.",
    "occupancy": "0=unoccupied, 1=occupied",
    "lock_state": "enumerated lock state rendered as label + raw code"
  }
}

## Chunk Index
[
  {
    "chunk_id": "C00",
    "start_ts": "2026-06-13T00:00:00",
    "end_ts": "2026-06-13T01:50:00",
    "event_count": 80,
    "rooms": {
      "living_room": 27,
      "bedroom": 27,
      "kitchen": 22,
      "bathroom": 4
    },
    "top_devices": [
      "living_room_temp_sensor",

## Query
以下是家庭设备的综合状态报告。请综合分析所有信息，判断家庭当前的安全状况，指出任何潜在风险。

## Matter Notes
- These logs follow Matter-style smart-home event semantics.
- TemperatureMeasurement.MeasuredValue is represented in centi-degrees Celsius in this benchmark: 2466 means 24.66 C, not 2466 C.
- BooleanState and other protocol booleans should be interpreted using transitions and surrounding events, not naive natural-language assumptions from a single isolated value.
- OccupancySensing.Occupancy uses 0=unoccupied and 1=occupied.
- DoorLock.LockState is an enumerated state; formatted logs may show both the label and the raw code.
- A device-fault conclusion requires direct fault evidence such as stuck values, repeated non-recovery, explicit alarm/fault events, or impossible state transitions. Scaled temperature values alone are not enough.

## Triage
{
  "primary_task_profile": "composite-safety",
  "secondary_task_profile": "device-health",
  "query_anchor": {
    "target_rooms": [
      "kitchen",
      "entrance",
      "living_room",
      "bedroom"
    ],
    "target_devices": [
      "smoke_co_alarm",
      "cook_surface",
      "door_lock",
      "water_leak_detector",
      "temperature_sensor"
    ],
    "target_question": "Analyze the comprehensive status report to determine the home's current safety status and identify any potential risks."
  },
  "focus_rooms": [
    "kitchen",
    "entrance",
    "living_room"
  ],
  "focus_devices": [
    "kitchen_temp_sensor",
    "kitchen_cook_surface",
    "front_door_lock",
    "kitchen_smoke_co_alarm"
  ],
  "focus_chunk_ids": [
    "C08",
    "C12",
    "C16"
  ],
  "suspected_patterns": [
    "Kitchen temperature anomaly (spike to ~27.8°C) coinciding with cook surface activity or sensor error.",
    "Cook surface activation during occupied hours without immediate smoke alarm trigger in preview logs.",
    "Evening lock operation sequence indicating secure entry/exit routine.",
    "Potential device fault in kitchen temperature sensor (None values, high readings)."
  ],
  "why_these_chunks": [
    "C08: Shows a significant temperature spike in the kitchen (27.79 C) alongside window contact state changes and a missing temperature reading, suggesting a potential hazard or sensor fault near cooking areas.",
    "C12: Captures the activation of the kitchen cook surface and lights during evening hours, providing context for the temperature readings and checking for associated safety events (smoke alarms).",
    "C16: Covers the late-night p


BA-02-FP: 住户周末改变习惯早起做饭

住户先从卧室起床再去厨房（正常路径），虽然时间段不同寻常但行为模式是住户自己

The cook surface remained active for approximately 40 minutes with a significant temperature rise in the kitchen, while direct occupancy verification in the kitchen was absent and sensor telemetry became intermittent, indicating a potential unattended cooking hazard.

Explanation: 1. **Cooking Event Identification**: The kitchen cook surface was turned on at 17:59:30 (C09) and remained on until 19:37:00 (C10), a duration of nearly 40 minutes. This is a sustained heat source.

Explanation: 2. **Temperature Anomaly**: During this period, the kitchen temperature rose from ~24°C to a peak of 27.16°C (C10). While not extreme, this delta confirms active heating and distinguishes it from ambient fluctuations.

Explanation: 3. **Supervision Gap**: Although living room occupancy was detected (suggesting someone was home), there was no explicit 'kitchen_occupancy' event logged during the critical heating window (18:00-19:30). In composite safety analysis, relying solely on adjacent room occupancy is insufficient to rule out unattended cooking, especially when the occupant could have been in the bedroom or elsewhere.

Explanation: 4. **Telemetry Instability**: The kitchen temperature sensor reported `None` values at 18:58:00 and 19:38:00 (C10/C11). While likely transient network/telemetry issues rather than permanent hardware faults, these dropouts create blind spots exactly when monitoring the heat source's aftermath or status is most critical.

Explanation: 5. **Risk Assessment**: The combination of a long-duration heat source, lack of direct presence confirmation in the hazard zone, and intermittent monitoring data constitutes a plausible unattended cooking scenario. No fire alarm triggered, but the risk profile is elevated compared to normal supervised cooking.

C09: kitchen_cook_surface OnOff.OnOff = on at 17:59:30

C10: Kitchen temp peaked at 27.16 C at 18:30:00 while cook surface was ON

C10: kitchen_cook_surface OnOff.OnOff = off at 19:37:00 (approx 40 min duration)

C10/C11: kitchen_temp_sensor reported None at 18:58:00 and 19:38:00

Absence of kitchen_occupancy events during the 18:00-19:30 window

Verify if any smoke or CO alarms were triggered silently or if they are offline.

Check for water leak detector logs during the subsequent dishwasher cycle (20:02+) to ensure no secondary hazards occurred.

Review camera footage (if available) around 18:00-19:30 to confirm human presence in/near the kitchen.

Investigate the cause of the temperature sensor `None` readings to rule out connectivity issues affecting future safety monitoring.

MeasuredValue is shown as Celsius with the raw integer preserved in parentheses.

enumerated lock state rendered as label + raw code

These logs follow Matter-style smart-home event semantics.

TemperatureMeasurement.MeasuredValue is represented in centi-degrees Celsius in this benchmark: 2466 means 24.66 C, not 2466 C.

OccupancySensing.Occupancy uses 0=unoccupied and 1=occupied.

DoorLock.LockState is an enumerated state; formatted logs may show both the label and the raw code.

entrance kitchen living_room bedroom bathroom

Analyze the comprehensive status report to determine the current safety condition of the home and identify any potential risks.

Unusual door lock activity during early morning hours (C04)

High temperature readings in kitchen coinciding with occupancy in living room (C10, C11)

Potential unattended cooking or appliance malfunction risk

Security status verification after early morning door interaction

C11 continues the evening activity pattern with high alarmish counts and sustained occupancy, helping to distinguish between normal evening routines and potential hazards like forgotten stoves.

Normal evening routine with supervised cooking and dishwasher operation. The kitchen temperature spike was caused by active cooking, which ceased before any hazardous escalation. The living room occupancy confirms human presence in the home, providing general supervision. No safety alarms were triggered.

C09: Kitchen cook surface turned on at 17:59:30 while bedroom/living room occupancy was detected (17:58-17:59), indicating someone was present.

C10: Kitchen temperature rose from ~24C to a peak of 27.16C between 18:20-18:30, consistent with cooking activity.

C10: Cook surface turned off at 19:37:00, ending the heat source.

C10/C11: Living room occupancy remained high (raw=1) throughout the cooking period (18:10-21:05), suggesting occupants were nearby.

C11: Dishwasher started at 20:02:00 with normal operational state (1).

No smoke_co_alarm or water_leak_detector events are recorded in any chunk, implying no fire or leak occurred.

The 'supervision' is inferred from living room occupancy, not direct kitchen presence. If the occupant left the house entirely during the cooking window, this hypothesis fails.

Does not account for the transient `None` value in kitchen temp sensor at 18:58, though likely benign telemetry noise.

Secure entry/exit protocol followed correctly. The front door lock operations in C04 and C12 represent standard manual unlocking for departure/arrival and automatic re-locking.

C04: Manual unlock at 07:24:21, contact opens (false) then closes (true) as door swings shut, auto-lock engages at 07:24:31. This is a coherent sequence for leaving the house.

C12: Auto-lock engages at 22:11:26 after lights turn off and bedroom occupancy is detected, consistent with a 'goodnight' routine.

Lock states match contact states (locked when closed).

In C04, the contact sensor went false then true very quickly (2 seconds), which is slightly fast but plausible for a quick exit.

Potential unattended cooking risk due to lack of direct kitchen occupancy verification during peak heat generation. While living room occupancy suggests someone is home, the absence of kitchen-specific presence data combined with a significant temperature rise creates a gap in safety monitoring.

C09: Cook surface turns on at 17:59:30. Bedroom occupancy is detected at 17:58:00, but no kitchen occupancy event is logged.

C10: Kitchen temperature rises significantly to 27.16C by 18:30, a delta of ~3C above baseline, indicating active heat source.

C10: At 18:58:00, the kitchen temperature sensor reports `None`, creating a blind spot during the tail end of the cooking session.

C10: The cook surface remains on until 19:37:00, a duration of nearly 40 minutes. During this time, there is no explicit confirmation that anyone entered or stayed in the kitchen.

Supervisor feedback notes that relying solely on living room occupancy is insufficient for composite-safety queries regarding kitchen hazards.

Living room occupancy was continuous, making it statistically unlikely the entire household left simultaneously without notice.

No fire alarm or extreme temperature escalation (e.g., >35C) occurred, suggesting the cooking was controlled.

The `None` reading could be a sensor glitch rather than evidence of hazard.

Kitchen temperature sensor malfunction or intermittent connectivity issue. The sensor reported valid values, then `None`, then resumed. This indicates a potential hardware or network instability in the safety-critical kitchen zone.

C10: At 18:58:00, `kitchen_temp_sensor` reports `TemperatureMeasurement.MeasuredValue = None`.

C11: At 19:38:00, `kitchen_temp_sensor` again reports `None` immediately after the cook surface was turned off.

The recurrence of `None` values suggests a pattern of instability rather than a single random error.

The sensor recovered immediately in subsequent logs (e.g., 19:00:00 in C10, 19:40:00 in C11), showing no persistent failure.

Matter semantics guidelines state isolated `None` values are common telemetry artifacts and do not constitute a device fault without other error codes.

C10: Kitchen temperature spike to 27.16C coinciding with cook surface ON, but lack of kitchen occupancy log.

C10: Transient `None` value in kitchen temp sensor at 18:58:00 during active cooking.

C10: Cook surface ON duration (17:59-19:37) vs. Living Room Occupancy continuity.

Absence of smoke_co_alarm or water_leak_detector triggers despite heat/water usage.

Direct kitchen occupancy sensor data to confirm if anyone was actually in the kitchen during the cooking event.

Smoke/CO alarm status logs specifically timestamped around 18:30-19:30 to definitively rule out fire risk.

Water leak detector logs during the dishwasher cycle (20:02 onwards) to rule out plumbing issues.

Confirmation of whether the 'living room occupancy' represents a single person who might have been in the kitchen, or multiple people.

C10: Kitchen temperature rose from ~24C to a peak of 27.16C between 18:20-18:30, consistent with cooking activity.

C10: Cook surface turned off at 19:37:00, ending the heat source.

C10/C11: Living room occupancy remained high (raw=1) throughout the cooking period (18:10-21:05), suggesting occupants were nearby.

C11: Dishwasher started at 20:02:00 with normal operational state (1).

No smoke_co_alarm or water_leak_detector events are recorded in any chunk, implying no fire or leak occurred.

C12: Auto-lock engages at 22:11:26 after lights turn off and bedroom occupancy is detected, consistent with a 'goodnight' routine.

Lock states match contact states (locked when closed).

C09: Cook surface turns on at 17:59:30. Bedroom occupancy is detected at 17:58:00, but no kitchen occupancy event is logged.

C10: Kitchen temperature rises significantly to 27.16C by 18:30, a delta of ~3C above baseline, indicating active heat source.

C10: At 18:58:00, the kitchen temperature sensor reports `None`, creating a blind spot during the tail end of the cooking session.

C10: At 18:58:00, `kitchen_temp_sensor` reports `TemperatureMeasurement.MeasuredValue = None`.

C11: At 19:38:00, `kitchen_temp_sensor` again reports `None` immediately after the cook surface was turned off.

The recurrence of `None` values suggests a pattern of instability rather than a single random error.

Verify the exact timestamp of the cook surface OFF event. The investigator claims it turned off at 19:37:00 based on C10, but C10 ends at 19:37:30 and the log shows `kitchen_cook_surface | OnOff.OnOff = off` at 19:37:00. However, C11 starts at 19:38:00 with a `None` temp reading. Need to confirm if there is any activity or state change between 19:37:00 and 19:38:00 that might indicate a second activation or sensor glitch.

Check for water leak detector logs during the dishwasher cycle (20:02 onwards) in chunks C11-C13 to rule out plumbing hazards.

Confirm smoke/CO alarm status specifically around the peak temperature period (18:20-18:30) to definitively rule out fire risk, as the current analysis relies on absence of evidence.

Investigate the 'living room occupancy' continuity more closely. Does it represent a single person who could have been in the kitchen? If so, the 'unattended cooking' risk is lower. If multiple people are present, the risk is higher.

The investigator correctly identified the key security event (C04) and the potential safety hazard (cooking in C09/C10).

However, the 'unattended cooking' hypothesis relies heavily on the *absence* of kitchen occupancy logs, which is weak evidence without corroboration from other sensors (like smoke alarms or direct kitchen presence).

The 'sensor malfunction' hypothesis (A2) regarding the `None` values is flagged as medium risk because the sensor recovered immediately. This is likely telemetry noise rather than a fault, but needs to be explicitly dismissed with stronger reasoning than just 'it recovered'.

The investigation missed checking the water leak detector logs during the dishwasher operation, which is part of the comprehensive safety query.

The focus on C04, C10, C11 is good, but C05-C07 (afternoon/evening transition) might contain relevant context about pre-cooking setup or earlier anomalies.

Do not conclude 'safe' yet; the lack of explicit kitchen occupancy during active heating is a gap that requires careful handling. Do not conclude 'unsafe' either, as no alarms were triggered. Refine by checking for corroborating safety device states.

Normal morning routine with secure entry and stable environmental conditions.

C04 shows a manual unlock at 07:24:21 followed by an auto-lock at 07:24:31, indicating a standard exit/entry cycle where the user manually opened the door and the system automatically secured it shortly after.

Kitchen temperature in C04 remains stable between 25.10°C and 25.52°C, consistent with normal ambient heating without active cooking loads.

Occupancy sensors show typical patterns of rooms becoming unoccupied (bathroom, bedroom) during morning hours.

Does not address the evening events which are more complex.

Normal evening cooking and appliance usage sequence.

C10 shows kitchen temperature rising from 25.11°C to 27.16°C between 18:10 and 18:30, coinciding with living room occupancy, suggesting normal meal preparation heat generation.

C10 explicitly logs `kitchen_cook_surface` turning ON at 18:57:30 and OFF at 19:37:00, a duration of ~40 minutes, which is a typical timeframe for cooking dinner.

C11 shows the dishwasher turning ON at 20:02:06, a common post-dinner activity.

Kitchen temperature drops back to baseline (~22-23°C) by 19:30 in C10 and remains stable in C11, indicating the heat source was removed and ventilation/cooling normalized the environment.

Relies on the assumption that the occupant in the living room was supervising the kitchen or that the cook surface has automatic safety shutoffs not visible in logs.

Potential unattended cooking risk due to lack of direct kitchen occupancy verification during active heating.

In C10, the `living_room_occupancy` sensor reports 'occupied' continuously from 18:13 to 19:37, while the `kitchen_temp_sensor` records significant heat spikes (up to 27.16°C) and the `kitchen_cook_surface` is ON from 18:57:30 to 19:37:00.

There is no explicit `kitchen_occupancy` event logged as 'occupied' during the peak cooking window (18:57-19:37). While proximity might be assumed, the absence of a dedicated kitchen presence signal creates a supervision gap.

The cook surface remained active for ~40 minutes. If the occupant left the living room or became distracted/unable to monitor the kitchen, this constitutes an unattended cooking scenario.

Living room occupancy strongly suggests human presence nearby; complete abandonment is less likely than distraction.

No smoke alarm or fire hazard signals were triggered.

Temperature did not escalate uncontrollably, suggesting the cooking process completed normally or was attended.

Sensor dropout or data loss during critical cooking phase.

In C10, at 18:58:00, immediately after the cook surface turns ON (18:57:30), the `kitchen_temp_sensor` reports `None`. This is a brief telemetry gap.

In C11, at 19:38:00, the `kitchen_temp_sensor` again reports `None` before resuming normal readings.

While isolated, these dropouts occur precisely when high-heat appliances are active, potentially obscuring early signs of overheating if the sensor failed rather than just dropped a packet.

The sensor recovers quickly with plausible values, ruling out permanent failure.

Single transient `None` values are often network jitter or sampling errors, not necessarily hardware faults.

C10: `kitchen_cook_surface` OnOff=on (18:57:30) and Off (19:37:00) combined with `kitchen_temp_sensor` spike to 27.16°C.

C10: Continuous `living_room_occupancy`=occupied during the entire cooking window, but no explicit `kitchen_occupancy`=occupied log.

C10: `kitchen_temp_sensor` = None at 18:58:00, immediately following cook surface activation.

Direct `kitchen_occupancy` sensor data to confirm if someone was physically in the kitchen during cooking.

Smoke detector or CO alarm status/logs to rule out combustion byproducts.

Smart plug or circuit breaker logs to verify if the cook surface power was cut independently of the user.

Video surveillance or motion sensor granularity to distinguish between 'nearby' and 'supervising'.

C10: Kitchen temperature rose from ~24C to a peak of 27.16C between 18:20-18:30, consistent with cooking activity.

C10: Cook surface turned off at 19:37:00, ending the heat source.

C10/C11: Living room occupancy remained high (raw=1) throughout the cooking period (18:10-21:05), suggesting occupants were nearby.

C11: Dishwasher started at 20:02:00 with normal operational state (1).

No smoke_co_alarm or water_leak_detector events are recorded in any chunk, implying no fire or leak occurred.

C12: Auto-lock engages at 22:11:26 after lights turn off and bedroom occupancy is detected, consistent with a 'goodnight' routine.

Lock states match contact states (locked when closed).

C09: Cook surface turns on at 17:59:30. Bedroom occupancy is detected at 17:58:00, but no kitchen occupancy event is logged.

C10: Kitchen temperature rises significantly to 27.16C by 18:30, a delta of ~3C above baseline, indicating active heat source.

C10: At 18:58:00, the kitchen temperature sensor reports `None`, creating a blind spot during the tail end of the cooking session.

C10: At 18:58:00, `kitchen_temp_sensor` reports `TemperatureMeasurement.MeasuredValue = None`.

C11: At 19:38:00, `kitchen_temp_sensor` again reports `None` immediately after the cook surface was turned off.

The recurrence of `None` values suggests a pattern of instability rather than a single random error.

C10: Kitchen temperature rose from ~24C to a peak of 27.16C between 18:20-18:30, consistent with cooking activity.

C10: Cook surface turned off at 19:37:00, ending the heat source.

C10/C11: Living room occupancy remained high (raw=1) throughout the cooking period (18:10-21:05), suggesting occupants were nearby.

C11: Dishwasher started at 20:02:00 with normal operational state (1).

No smoke_co_alarm or water_leak_detector events are recorded in any chunk, implying no fire or leak occurred.

C12: Auto-lock engages at 22:11:26 after lights turn off and bedroom occupancy is detected, consistent with a 'goodnight' routine.

Lock states match contact states (locked when closed).

C09: Cook surface turns on at 17:59:30. Bedroom occupancy is detected at 17:58:00, but no kitchen occupancy event is logged.

C10: Kitchen temperature rises significantly to 27.16C by 18:30, a delta of ~3C above baseline, indicating active heat source.

C10: At 18:58:00, the kitchen temperature sensor reports `None`, creating a blind spot during the tail end of the cooking session.

C10: At 18:58:00, `kitchen_temp_sensor` reports `TemperatureMeasurement.MeasuredValue = None`.

C11: At 19:38:00, `kitchen_temp_sensor` again reports `None` immediately after the cook surface was turned off.

The recurrence of `None` values suggests a pattern of instability rather than a single random error.

Verify smoke_co_alarm status during and after the cooking event (C10/C11) to rule out fire/CO risk.

Check for water_leak_detector activity in C11 to rule out dishwasher leaks.

Confirm if 'kitchen_cook_surface' has an automatic safety timer or if it relies on manual shutoff, given the lack of kitchen occupancy logs.

Review C09 (pre-cooking) and C12 (post-dishwasher) to establish full context of appliance usage and any potential alarms.

The investigator correctly identified the temporal correlation between cooking and living room occupancy but over-indexed on the absence of a kitchen occupancy sensor as a primary safety risk without corroborating evidence of hazard (e.g., smoke, high temp escalation).

The 'sensor_malfunction' hypothesis (A2) is weak; transient `None` values are common telemetry artifacts and do not constitute a device fault per Matter semantics unless accompanied by other error codes or persistent failure.

The 'unattended_cooking' risk (A1) is speculative. While the cook surface was on, temperatures remained stable and dropped after shutoff, and no alarms were triggered. The conclusion that this is a 'potential risk' is valid, but labeling it as a current safety issue requires more than just missing occupancy data.

Crucially, the investigation ignores the `smoke_co_alarm` and `water_leak_detector` which are explicitly listed in the target devices. For a composite-safety query, verifying these critical safety sensors is mandatory. Their absence from the analysis makes the verdict incomplete.

Chunks C09 and C12 are needed to see the state before the cooking started and after the evening routine ended, ensuring no delayed alarms or issues occurred outside the focused window.

## Query
以下是家庭设备的综合状态报告。请综合分析所有信息，判断家庭当前的安全状况，指出任何潜在风险。

## Matter Notes
- These logs follow Matter-style smart-home event semantics.
- TemperatureMeasurement.MeasuredValue is represented in centi-degrees Celsius in this benchmark: 2466 means 24.66 C, not 2466 C.
- BooleanState and other protocol booleans should be interpreted using transitions and surrounding events, not naive natural-language assumptions from a single isolated value.
- OccupancySensing.Occupancy uses 0=unoccupied and 1=occupied.
- DoorLock.LockState is an enumerated state; formatted logs may show both the label and the raw code.
- A device-fault conclusion requires direct fault evidence such as stuck values, repeated non-recovery, explicit alarm/fault events, or impossible state transitions. Scaled temperature values alone are not enough.

## Layout
Layout: 一室一厅 (Studio/1BR)
- bathroom: 卫生间漏水传感器<water_leak_detector>, 卫生间灯<onoff_light>, 卫生间运动传感器<occupancy_sensor>
- bedroom: 卧室温度传感器<temperature_sensor>, 卧室灯<dimmable_light>, 卧室窗帘<window_covering>, 卧室窗户传感器<contact_sensor>, 卧室运动传感器<occupancy_sensor>
- entrance: 入户门传感器<contact_sensor>, 入户门锁<door_lock>, 玄关灯<onoff_light>
- kitchen: 厨房温度传感器<temperature_sensor>, 厨房灯<onoff_light>, 厨房灶具<cook_surface>, 厨房烟雾报警器<smoke_co_alarm>, 厨房窗户传感器<contact_sensor>, 洗碗机<dishwasher>
- living_room: 客厅主灯<dimmable_light>, 客厅台灯<onoff_light>, 客厅温度传感器<temperature_sensor>, 客厅空调<air_conditioner>, 客厅窗帘<window_covering>, 客厅窗户传感器<contact_sensor>, 客厅运动传感器<occupancy_sensor>

## Deterministic Signals
{
  "room_activity": {
    "living_room": 401,
    "bedroom": 355,
    "kitchen": 300,
    "bathroom": 55,
    "entrance": 14
  },
  "attribute_frequency": {
    "MeasuredValue": 866,
    "Occupancy": 221,
    "OnOff": 20,
    "StateValue": 5,
    "LockState": 4,
    "CurrentPositionLiftPercent100ths": 2,
    "SystemMode": 1,
    "OperationalState": 1,
    "CurrentLevel": 1
  },
  "lock_state_flips": 4,
  "occupancy_events": 221,
  "temperature_patterns": [],
  "value_format_hints": {
    "temperature": "MeasuredValue is shown as Celsius with the raw integer preserved in parentheses.",
    "occupancy": "0=unoccupied, 1=occupied",
    "lock_state": "enumerated lock state rendered as label + raw code"
  }
}

## Chunk Index
[
  {
    "chunk_id": "C00",
    "start_ts": "2026-06-12T00:00:00",
    "end_ts": "2026-06-12T01:50:00",
    "event_count": 80,
    "rooms": {
      "living_room": 27,
      "bedroom": 27,
      "kitchen": 22,
      "bathroom": 4
    },
    "top_devices": [
      "li

## Query
以下是家庭设备的综合状态报告。请综合分析所有信息，判断家庭当前的安全状况，指出任何潜在风险。

## Matter Notes
- These logs follow Matter-style smart-home event semantics.
- TemperatureMeasurement.MeasuredValue is represented in centi-degrees Celsius in this benchmark: 2466 means 24.66 C, not 2466 C.
- BooleanState and other protocol booleans should be interpreted using transitions and surrounding events, not naive natural-language assumptions from a single isolated value.
- OccupancySensing.Occupancy uses 0=unoccupied and 1=occupied.
- DoorLock.LockState is an enumerated state; formatted logs may show both the label and the raw code.
- A device-fault conclusion requires direct fault evidence such as stuck values, repeated non-recovery, explicit alarm/fault events, or impossible state transitions. Scaled temperature values alone are not enough.

## Triage
{
  "primary_task_profile": "composite-safety",
  "secondary_task_profile": "device-health",
  "query_anchor": {
    "target_rooms": [
      "entrance",
      "kitchen",
      "living_room",
      "bedroom",
      "bathroom"
    ],
    "target_devices": [
      "front_door_lock",
      "front_door_contact",
      "smoke_co_alarm",
      "water_leak_detector",
      "cook_surface",
      "dishwasher"
    ],
    "target_question": "Analyze the comprehensive status report to determine the current safety condition of the home and identify any potential risks."
  },
  "focus_rooms": [
    "entrance",
    "kitchen",
    "living_room"
  ],
  "focus_devices": [
    "front_door_lock",
    "front_door_contact",
    "kitchen_temp_sensor",
    "living_room_occupancy"
  ],
  "focus_chunk_ids": [
    "C04",
    "C10",
    "C11"
  ],
  "suspected_patterns": [
    "Unusual door lock activity during early morning hours (C04)",
    "High temperature readings in kitchen coinciding with occupancy in living room (C10, C11)",
    "Potential unattended cooking or appliance malfunction risk",
    "Security status verification after early morning door interaction"
  ],
  "why_these_chunks": [
    "C04 contains the critical sequence of front door lock operations and contact sensor changes around 07:24, which is a key security event requiring context analysis (manual unlock vs auto lock).",
    "C10 shows a significant spike in kitchen temperature (up to 26.49 C) while the living room becomes occupied, suggesting active use of kitchen appliances or heating sources that could pose a fire risk if unattended.",
    "C11 continues the evening activity pattern with high ala


FG-03-FP: 烟雾报警器自检触发CO检测

No safety anomaly detected; the observed events are consistent with a normal evening routine of cooking and dishwasher usage.

Explanation: The primary event is kitchen cook surface activation (19:06-19:52) coinciding with a temperature rise in the kitchen sensor (peaking at 26.85°C). This thermal profile is consistent with standard cooking activity rather than a fire hazard, as temperatures remained well below dangerous thresholds (>30-40°C) and normalized quickly after the appliance was turned off.

Explanation: Although direct kitchen occupancy logs are missing during the cooking window, continuous occupancy in the adjacent living room and bedroom strongly suggests the home was supervised, mitigating the 'unattended cooking' risk hypothesis.

Explanation: Transient 'None' readings from the kitchen temperature sensor occurred immediately upon appliance activation and recovered rapidly. This pattern indicates temporary telemetry interference or sampling latency rather than a persistent device fault or sensor malfunction.

Explanation: No smoke, CO, or water leak alarms were triggered, and no water leak detector events were logged during the dishwasher cycle, ruling out active combustion or flooding hazards.

Explanation: Door lock operations were logical (manual unlock/lock transitions), and automatic locking at night functioned correctly, indicating no security intrusion or lock malfunction.

C12: Cook surface ON (19:06:30) to OFF (19:52:00) with corresponding kitchen temp rise to 26.85°C then recovery.

C12-C14: Continuous living_room_occupancy = occupied during the entire cooking period.

C12: Kitchen temp sensor 'None' values at 19:07:00 and 19:53:00 recovered immediately without escalation.

Absence of any smoke/CO/water_leak alarm events in all chunks.

Monitor kitchen temperature trends during future cooking sessions to ensure they remain within expected ranges.

Verify if the kitchen temperature sensor has intermittent connectivity issues when high-power appliances are activated, though current behavior appears benign.

Analyze the comprehensive status report to determine the home's current safety condition and identify any potential risks.

Potential CO or smoke alarm activation (high alarmish_count in kitchen/living areas)

Unusual door lock state transitions (4 flips total, need to verify if unauthorized or routine)

Cooking activity correlation with alarm events

Occupancy patterns indicating presence during alarm events

C13: Late evening chunk with highest alarmish_count (33) and sustained living room/bedroom occupancy. Essential for determining if alarms were false positives or genuine hazards while occupants were present.

Normal evening routine with cooking and dishwasher usage. The kitchen temperature rise is a standard thermal effect of appliance operation, and the brief sensor dropout is a transient telemetry glitch that resolved immediately.

C12: Kitchen cook_surface turned on at 19:06:30 and off at 19:52:00 (~45 mins), consistent with meal preparation.

C12: Kitchen temperature rose from ~23°C to ~26.8°C during cooking, then stabilized as appliances turned off.

C12: Kitchen temp sensor reported 'None' at 19:07:00 (immediately after light/cook surface on) and recovered to 24.75°C at 19:10:00, indicating a brief communication or sampling error rather than failure.

C12: Dishwasher started at 19:46:05 while cook surface was still on; no water leak indicators observed in subsequent chunks.

C13/C14: Post-cooking temperatures returned to baseline (~22-23°C) by 20:30, showing no sustained heat hazard.

C14: Front door locked automatically at 22:09:22, consistent with normal night-time security behavior.

Does not fully explain why the cook surface remained on for 45 minutes without explicit supervision logs in the kitchen (kitchen occupancy not explicitly logged as 'occupied' in C12, though living room was).

Relies on the assumption that the 'None' reading was benign noise rather than a symptom of sensor overheating or damage.

Occupant presence in adjacent rooms (Living Room/Bedroom) implies supervision of the kitchen area. No alarms triggered, and all devices recovered normally.

C12-C14: Living room occupancy is consistently 'occupied' (raw=1) throughout the cooking and dishwasher period.

C12-C14: Bedroom occupancy is also consistently 'occupied'.

No smoke/CO alarm events are present in any chunk.

All temperature readings eventually return to stable baselines.

Lock state transitions are logical (Manual Unlock -> Auto Lock).

Assumes proximity equals supervision; the occupant could be in the living room watching TV while leaving the stove unattended.

Lacks direct evidence of human interaction in the kitchen during the critical heating phase.

Unattended Cooking Risk: The cook surface was left active for an extended period (~45 mins) while no direct kitchen occupancy was recorded. Although living room occupancy suggests someone is home, the lack of kitchen-specific presence data combined with a temporary sensor blackout ('None') creates a potential blind spot where a fire hazard could have developed unnoticed.

C12: Cook surface turned ON at 19:06:30.

C12: Cook surface turned OFF at 19:52:00.

C12: Duration of activation is ~45 minutes.

C12: Kitchen temperature sensor reports 'None' at 19:07:00, shortly after activation, potentially masking early heat spikes or sensor stress.

C12: No explicit 'kitchen_occupancy' event confirms a person was physically present in the kitchen during this window. Only 'living_room_occupancy' and 'bedroom_occupancy' are logged as occupied.

C12: Kitchen temperature peaked at 26.85°C at 19:35:00, which is elevated but not extreme, suggesting the heat source was controlled or intermittent, but the risk remains due to lack of direct supervision verification.

The temperature did not escalate to dangerous levels (>30-40°C range often associated with fires/smoke generation in these sensors), suggesting the cooking was likely attended or low-heat.

The 'None' reading recovered quickly, so it didn't cause a prolonged monitoring gap.

Living room occupancy makes total abandonment unlikely, but doesn't rule out distraction/negligence.

Sensor Malfunction/Interference: The kitchen temperature sensor experienced a complete data loss ('None') immediately upon appliance activation, followed by a rapid recovery. This pattern may indicate electromagnetic interference from the cook surface or a thermal shock event affecting the sensor's ability to report.

C12: At 19:06:30, kitchen_light and kitchen_cook_surface turn ON.

C12: At 19:07:00, kitchen_temp_sensor reports 'None'.

C12: At 19:10:00, kitchen_temp_sensor recovers with a valid reading (24.75°C).

C12: Another 'None' reading occurs at 19:53:00, just after the cook surface turns OFF and dishwasher is running, suggesting recurring instability linked to kitchen appliance cycles.

Only two isolated instances of 'None' are observed; this does not meet the threshold for persistent malfunction or drift.

The values before and after are consistent with ambient trends, suggesting the sensor itself wasn't broken, just temporarily unavailable.

C12: Cook surface ON (19:06:30) to OFF (19:52:00) duration vs. lack of explicit kitchen occupancy logs.

C12: Kitchen temp sensor 'None' readings at 19:07:00 and 19:53:00 coinciding with appliance state changes.

C12: Kitchen temperature peak of 26.85°C at 19:35:00, which is elevated but not indicative of active fire.

C14: Automatic lock engagement at 22:09:22, confirming security system functionality.

Direct kitchen occupancy sensor logs to confirm if a person was present in the kitchen during the 45-minute cooking window.

Smoke or CO detector status/logs to rule out combustion products being generated during the cooking event.

Water leak detector logs specifically for the kitchen during the dishwasher cycle (19:46 onwards) to rule out water hazards.

Details on the 'alarmish_count' heuristic mentioned in triage; need to verify if any silent alarms were triggered that aren't reflected in the provided chunks.

C12: Kitchen cook_surface turned on at 19:06:30 and off at 19:52:00 (~45 mins), consistent with meal preparation.

C12: Kitchen temperature rose from ~23°C to ~26.8°C during cooking, then stabilized as appliances turned off.

C12: Dishwasher started at 19:46:05 while cook surface was still on; no water leak indicators observed in subsequent chunks.

C13/C14: Post-cooking temperatures returned to baseline (~22-23°C) by 20:30, showing no sustained heat hazard.

C14: Front door locked automatically at 22:09:22, consistent with normal night-time security behavior.

C12-C14: Living room occupancy is consistently 'occupied' (raw=1) throughout the cooking and dishwasher period.

C12-C14: Bedroom occupancy is also consistently 'occupied'.

No smoke/CO alarm events are present in any chunk.

All temperature readings eventually return to stable baselines.

Lock state transitions are logical (Manual Unlock -> Auto Lock).

C12: Cook surface turned ON at 19:06:30.

C12: Cook surface turned OFF at 19:52:00.

C12: Duration of activation is ~45 minutes.

C12: At 19:06:30, kitchen_light and kitchen_cook_surface turn ON.

C12: At 19:07:00, kitchen_temp_sensor reports 'None'.

C12: At 19:10:00, kitchen_temp_sensor recovers with a valid reading (24.75°C).

Smoke/CO alarm status logs for the entire day to rule out combustion events during cooking.

Water leak detector logs specifically for the kitchen area during and after dishwasher operation (19:46 onwards).

Direct kitchen occupancy sensor data to confirm presence during the 45-minute cook surface activation window.

Verification of 'alarmish_count' heuristic mentioned in triage; check if silent alarms or fault codes were generated by smoke detectors or other sensors.

The investigator correctly identified the key event (cooking) but relies heavily on the absence of direct kitchen occupancy logs to construct an 'unattended cooking' risk hypothesis. This is a weak inference given that living room occupancy was continuous, suggesting someone was home nearby.

The 'sensor malfunction' hypothesis regarding the temperature 'None' readings is flagged as high false-alarm risk because the values recovered immediately without escalation, indicating transient telemetry issues rather than device failure or hazard.

Crucially, the investigation lacks evidence from smoke/CO detectors and water leak sensors, which are primary safety devices for the identified risks (fire/water). The triage output mentions 'alarmish_count' but no specific alarm events are analyzed or verified in the chunks provided.

The focused chunks (C12-C14) cover the evening, but the morning chunk (C04) is included while mid-day chunks (C05-C09) are missing. While the evening is the focus, the lack of smoke/water sensor data makes the safety conclusion incomplete. We need to verify if any alarms triggered silently or if water leaks occurred.

Do not conclude 'safe' based solely on temperature normalization. Verify the absence of fire/water hazards via their respective sensors.

Normal evening cooking and household activity with no safety incidents.

C12 shows kitchen_cook_surface turning on at 19:06:30 and off at 19:52:00, a duration of ~45 minutes, which is typical for meal preparation.

Kitchen temperature rose from 22.89 C to 26.85 C during cooking (C12), consistent with heat generation from appliances, then cooled down in C13.

Living room occupancy remained 'occupied' throughout the evening (C12-C13), indicating an adult was present in the home to supervise the kitchen.

No smoke or CO alarm events are recorded in the logs; the 'alarmish_count' mentioned in triage is not supported by explicit alarm state changes in the provided chunks.

Front door lock operation in C04 was a standard manual unlock followed by auto-lock, with contact sensor confirming closure.

Does not fully explain the brief telemetry dropout ('None') of the kitchen temp sensor at 19:07 and 19:53, though this could be transient network issues.

Relies on the assumption that 'living_room_occupied' implies supervision of the kitchen, which is plausible but not guaranteed.

Potential unattended cooking or fire risk due to temporary loss of kitchen monitoring and sustained high temperatures.

In C12, the kitchen_temp_sensor reports 'None' at 19:07:00, just one minute after the cook surface turned on (19:06:30). This creates a blind spot in monitoring the immediate aftermath of appliance activation.

Kitchen temperature spiked rapidly from 22.89 C (18:55) to 26.85 C (19:35), a rise of nearly 4 degrees in 40 minutes, which is significant for an indoor environment.

The cook surface remained active for ~45 minutes while the primary living area occupancy was logged separately; if the occupant left the living room (not captured in these specific chunks or if they were in the bedroom/bathroom), the kitchen might have been unsupervised.

The second 'None' reading at 19:53 coincides with the cook surface turning off, suggesting potential sensor instability or interference during high-heat/steam conditions.

There is no explicit evidence of the occupant leaving the house or failing to return; living room occupancy is logged as 'occupied' continuously in C12/C13.

The temperature rise, while notable, did not reach critical levels (e.g., >30-35 C) that would trigger thermal alarms or indicate immediate fire danger in the logs provided.

The 'None' readings are isolated and do not constitute a persistent sensor failure, making it hard to claim a systemic monitoring failure.

Sensor malfunction or data integrity issue in the kitchen environment.

The kitchen_temp_sensor returns 'None' twice in C12 (19:07 and 19:53) during periods of high activity (cooking/dishwasher running).

The rapid temperature fluctuations and gaps suggest the sensor may be struggling with environmental conditions (heat/steam) or connectivity.

While other sensors (bedroom/living room) report stable values, the kitchen sensor's behavior is anomalous relative to its peers.

Two isolated 'None' readings are insufficient to definitively diagnose a permanent sensor malfunction without more extensive dropout patterns or failed recovery attempts.

The sensor resumes reporting normal values immediately after, indicating it is not stuck or permanently broken.

Kitchen temperature spike from 22.89 C to 26.85 C during cook surface usage (C12).

Kitchen temp sensor 'None' readings at 19:07 and 19:53 (C12) coinciding with appliance activity.

Continuous living room occupancy (C12-C13) vs. lack of direct kitchen occupancy logs during cooking.

Absence of any explicit smoke/CO alarm events despite the suspected hazard context.

Direct kitchen occupancy data to confirm if anyone was physically present in the kitchen during the cooking period.

Smoke or CO alarm status logs to rule out false positives or silent activations.

Detailed timeline of the living room occupant's movements to verify if they were actually supervising the kitchen.

Diagnostic logs for the kitchen temperature sensor to determine why it reported 'None'.

C12: Kitchen cook_surface turned on at 19:06:30 and off at 19:52:00 (~45 mins), consistent with meal preparation.

C12: Kitchen temperature rose from ~23°C to ~26.8°C during cooking, then stabilized as appliances turned off.

C12: Dishwasher started at 19:46:05 while cook surface was still on; no water leak indicators observed in subsequent chunks.

C13/C14: Post-cooking temperatures returned to baseline (~22-23°C) by 20:30, showing no sustained heat hazard.

C14: Front door locked automatically at 22:09:22, consistent with normal night-time security behavior.

C12-C14: Living room occupancy is consistently 'occupied' (raw=1) throughout the cooking and dishwasher period.

C12-C14: Bedroom occupancy is also consistently 'occupied'.

No smoke/CO alarm events are present in any chunk.

All temperature readings eventually return to stable baselines.

Lock state transitions are logical (Manual Unlock -> Auto Lock).

C12: Cook surface turned ON at 19:06:30.

C12: Cook surface turned OFF at 19:52:00.

C12: Duration of activation is ~45 minutes.

C12: At 19:06:30, kitchen_light and kitchen_cook_surface turn ON.

C12: At 19:07:00, kitchen_temp_sensor reports 'None'.

C12: At 19:10:00, kitchen_temp_sensor recovers with a valid reading (24.75°C).

C12: Kitchen cook_surface turned on at 19:06:30 and off at 19:52:00 (~45 mins), consistent with meal preparation.

C12: Kitchen temperature rose from ~23°C to ~26.8°C during cooking, then stabilized as appliances turned off.

C12: Dishwasher started at 19:46:05 while cook surface was still on; no water leak indicators observed in subsequent chunks.

C13/C14: Post-cooking temperatures returned to baseline (~22-23°C) by 20:30, showing no sustained heat hazard.

C14: Front door locked automatically at 22:09:22, consistent with normal night-time security behavior.

C12-C14: Living room occupancy is consistently 'occupied' (raw=1) throughout the cooking and dishwasher period.

C12-C14: Bedroom occupancy is also consistently 'occupied'.

No smoke/CO alarm events are present in any chunk.

All temperature readings eventually return to stable baselines.

Lock state transitions are logical (Manual Unlock -> Auto Lock).

C12: Cook surface turned ON at 19:06:30.

C12: Cook surface turned OFF at 19:52:00.

C12: Duration of activation is ~45 minutes.

C12: At 19:06:30, kitchen_light and kitchen_cook_surface turn ON.

C12: At 19:07:00, kitchen_temp_sensor reports 'None'.

C12: At 19:10:00, kitchen_temp_sensor recovers with a valid reading (24.75°C).

Verify if 'alarmish_count' in triage refers to actual smoke/CO alarm events or is a heuristic artifact; check C11/C14 for explicit alarm state changes.

Check C11 (pre-cooking) and C14 (post-cooking) for water leak detector status and any other safety-critical device states not covered in C12/C13.

Confirm if the kitchen temperature spike correlates with any other hazard indicators (e.g., window opening, fan activation) which are missing from current logs.

The investigator correctly identifies the cooking event and temperature rise but over-interprets transient telemetry gaps ('None') as potential sensor malfunction or unattended cooking risks without sufficient corroborating evidence of hazard escalation.

The 'alarmish_count' mentioned in the triage output is not validated against explicit alarm events in the provided chunks. The investigator notes no explicit alarms, which contradicts the triage's suspicion of 'high alarmish_count'. This discrepancy needs resolution by checking adjacent chunks (C11, C14) for context on what triggered that count.

The conclusion of 'potential fire risk' relies heavily on the assumption that living room occupancy implies kitchen supervision, which is weak. Without direct kitchen occupancy logs or explicit alarm triggers, this is speculative.

The focus on 'sensor malfunction' based on two isolated 'None' readings is likely a false alarm, as the sensor recovered immediately. This should be downgraded to a low-priority data integrity note rather than a primary safety threat.

To confirm safety, we need to see if any alarms were actually triggered (checking C11/C14) and ensure no water leaks occurred during the dishwasher usage (also potentially in C11/C14).

## Query
以下是家庭设备的综合状态报告。请综合分析所有信息，判断家庭当前的安全状况，指出任何潜在风险。

## Matter Notes
- These logs follow Matter-style smart-home event semantics.
- TemperatureMeasurement.MeasuredValue is represented in centi-degrees Celsius in this benchmark: 2466 means 24.66 C, not 2466 C.
- BooleanState and other protocol booleans should be interpreted using transitions and surrounding events, not naive natural-language assumptions from a single isolated value.
- OccupancySensing.Occupancy uses 0=unoccupied and 1=occupied.
- DoorLock.LockState is an enumerated state; formatted logs may show both the label and the raw code.
- A device-fault conclusion requires direct fault evidence such as stuck values, repeated non-recovery, explicit alarm/fault events, or impossible state transitions. Scaled temperature values alone are not enough.

## Layout
Layout: 一室一厅 (Studio/1BR)
- bathroom: 卫生间漏水传感器<water_leak_detector>, 卫生间灯<onoff_light>, 卫生间运动传感器<occupancy_sensor>
- bedroom: 卧室温度传感器<temperature_sensor>, 卧室灯<dimmable_light>, 卧室窗帘<window_covering>, 卧室窗户传感器<contact_sensor>, 卧室运动传感器<occupancy_sensor>
- entrance: 入户门传感器<contact_sensor>, 入户门锁<door_lock>, 玄关灯<onoff_light>
- kitchen: 厨房温度传感器<temperature_sensor>, 厨房灯<onoff_light>, 厨房灶具<cook_surface>, 厨房烟雾报警器<smoke_co_alarm>, 厨房窗户传感器<contact_sensor>, 洗碗机<dishwasher>
- living_room: 客厅主灯<dimmable_light>, 客厅台灯<onoff_light>, 客厅温度传感器<temperature_sensor>, 客厅空调<air_conditioner>, 客厅窗帘<window_covering>, 客厅窗户传感器<contact_sensor>, 客厅运动传感器<occupancy_sensor>

## Deterministic Signals
{
  "room_activity": {
    "living_room": 398,
    "bedroom": 511,
    "kitchen": 298,
    "bathroom": 57,
    "entrance": 14
  },
  "attribute_frequency": {
    "MeasuredValue": 866,
    "Occupancy": 371,
    "OnOff": 18,
    "StateValue": 5,
    "LockState": 4,
    "TestInProgress": 2,
    "COState": 2,
    "CurrentPositionLiftPercent100ths": 2,
    "SystemMode": 1,
    "OperationalState": 1,
    "CurrentLevel": 1
  },
  "lock_state_flips": 4,
  "occupancy_events": 371,
  "temperature_patterns": [],
  "value_format_hints": {
    "temperature": "MeasuredValue is shown as Celsius with the raw integer preserved in parentheses.",
    "occupancy": "0=unoccupied, 1=occupied",
    "lock_state": "enumerated lock state rendered as label + raw code"
  }
}

## Chunk Index
[
  {
    "chunk_id": "C00",
    "start_ts": "2026-06-01T00:00:00",
    "end_ts": "2026-06-01T01:50:00",
    "event_count": 80,
    "rooms": {
      "living_room": 27,
      "bedroom": 27,
      "kitchen": 22,
      "bathroo

## Query
以下是家庭设备的综合状态报告。请综合分析所有信息，判断家庭当前的安全状况，指出任何潜在风险。

## Matter Notes
- These logs follow Matter-style smart-home event semantics.
- TemperatureMeasurement.MeasuredValue is represented in centi-degrees Celsius in this benchmark: 2466 means 24.66 C, not 2466 C.
- BooleanState and other protocol booleans should be interpreted using transitions and surrounding events, not naive natural-language assumptions from a single isolated value.
- OccupancySensing.Occupancy uses 0=unoccupied and 1=occupied.
- DoorLock.LockState is an enumerated state; formatted logs may show both the label and the raw code.
- A device-fault conclusion requires direct fault evidence such as stuck values, repeated non-recovery, explicit alarm/fault events, or impossible state transitions. Scaled temperature values alone are not enough.

## Triage
{
  "primary_task_profile": "composite-safety",
  "secondary_task_profile": "device-health",
  "query_anchor": {
    "target_rooms": [
      "kitchen",
      "entrance",
      "living_room",
      "bedroom"
    ],
    "target_devices": [
      "smoke_co_alarm",
      "door_lock",
      "water_leak_detector",
      "cook_surface",
      "occupancy_sensor"
    ],
    "target_question": "Analyze the comprehensive status report to determine the home's current safety condition and identify any potential risks."
  },
  "focus_rooms": [
    "kitchen",
    "entrance",
    "living_room"
  ],
  "focus_devices": [
    "kitchen_smoke_co_alarm",
    "front_door_lock",
    "kitchen_cook_surface",
    "bathroom_water_leak_detector"
  ],
  "focus_chunk_ids": [
    "C04",
    "C12",
    "C13"
  ],
  "suspected_patterns": [
    "Potential CO or smoke alarm activation (high alarmish_count in kitchen/living areas)",
    "Unusual door lock state transitions (4 flips total, need to verify if unauthorized or routine)",
    "Cooking activity correlation with alarm events",
    "Occupancy patterns indicating presence during alarm events"
  ],
  "why_these_chunks": [
    "C04: Shows early morning activity with bathroom occupancy and bedroom activity; includes front_door_lock in top devices, relevant for access security analysis.",
    "C12: Evening chunk with high alarmish_count (31), living room and bedroom occupancy active, and kitchen cook_surface in top devices. Critical for correlating cooking activity with potential alarms.",
    "C13: Late evening chunk with highest alarmish_count (33) and sustained living room/bedroom occupancy. Essential for determining if al


FG-04-FP: 低电量报警但传感器仍正常工作

虽然电池低但传感器仍然能正常检测烟雾（SmokeState变1又恢复0），说明设备没失灵

Cooking activity occurred in the kitchen without confirmed direct occupancy supervision, creating a potential unattended cooking risk.

Explanation: The logs show a coherent evening routine where a resident returns home (C10) and activates the kitchen cook surface at 19:05:30.

Explanation: During the entire cooking window (19:05:30 to 19:33:00), there is no 'kitchen_occupancy' signal confirming the resident was physically present in the kitchen. The only presence data comes from the 'living_room_occupancy' sensor, which indicates presence in the house but not specifically in the kitchen.

Explanation: A transient telemetry dropout ('None') for the kitchen temperature sensor occurs exactly one minute after the stove is turned on (19:06:00), which coincides with the start of the hazard period, though it recovers quickly.

Explanation: While the stove was eventually turned off manually and no fire alarm triggered during this specific event, the lack of direct supervision evidence combined with the initial sensor anomaly constitutes a plausible unattended cooking scenario that cannot be ruled out as normal behavior given the missing local occupancy data.

Explanation: The previous false positive smoke alarm (C08) suggests device sensitivity issues, but does not negate the current safety gap regarding human supervision.

Kitchen cook surface ON from 19:05:30 to 19:33:00 (C10).

Absence of 'kitchen_occupancy' logs during the cooking window; only 'living_room_occupancy' is active.

Kitchen temperature sensor reports 'None' at 19:06:00, immediately following stove activation.

Verify if a kitchen-specific occupancy sensor exists or if the living room sensor coverage is sufficient.

Review camera footage (if available) to confirm resident location during the cooking window.

Check the kitchen smoke alarm battery status (noted as alert in C00) to ensure reliability for future events.

Low battery alert on smoke/CO alarm (potential device failure or maintenance need)

Smoke state trigger in kitchen without obvious cooking activity context (potential false positive or hazard)

Door lock/unlock sequence with manual operation (security access event)

Occupancy patterns indicating presence during evening hours

C00: Contains the initial BatteryAlert on the kitchen smoke alarm, establishing a baseline for device health/status.

C10: Captures the manual door unlock event and subsequent occupancy/lighting/AC activation, providing context for security status and human presence during the evening period.

Normal evening routine with supervised cooking and standard device operation.

C10 shows a coherent sequence: Front door unlock (manual) -> Entrance light on -> Living room occupancy detected -> AC/Lights activated. This indicates a resident returning home.

Kitchen cook surface turns on at 19:05:30 and off at 19:33:00, lasting ~28 minutes, which is typical for meal preparation.

Kitchen temperature rises from ~23°C to ~26.8°C during cooking (C10), consistent with heat generation from the stove, then stabilizes/drops slightly after shutdown.

Kitchen smoke alarm triggered briefly at 14:45 (C08) while the cook surface was OFF, suggesting a false positive or transient environmental factor (e.g., steam, dust) rather than a fire event, as it cleared quickly without escalation.

Living room occupancy remains 'occupied' throughout the evening period in C10-C11, indicating the resident was present in the house.

Does not fully explain the specific cause of the 14:45 smoke alarm trigger if no cooking was occurring.

Relies on the assumption that the resident remained in the living room/entrance area and did not leave the kitchen unattended for long periods, which is not explicitly logged by a kitchen occupancy sensor.

Potential unattended cooking risk due to lack of direct kitchen supervision logs and temporary sensor dropout.

During the cooking window (19:05-19:33 in C10), there is NO 'kitchen_occupancy' signal confirming the resident was physically present in the kitchen.

The only occupancy signals are from the 'living_room_occupancy' sensor, which stays 'occupied'. While this confirms presence in the house, it does not confirm presence *in* the kitchen.

At 19:06:00, exactly one minute after the cook surface turned on, the 'kitchen_temp_sensor' reports 'None', indicating a brief telemetry dropout or sensor issue right at the start of the hazard.

The supervisor feedback highlights that without C09 or explicit kitchen presence data, we cannot rule out the resident turning on the stove and leaving the immediate area (e.g., going to the bedroom or bathroom) for an extended period.

The previous smoke alarm trigger (C08) occurred when the stove was off, raising questions about the alarm's sensitivity or calibration, though it didn't trigger during the actual cooking event in C10.

The cook surface was turned off manually at 19:33, and the resident was still logged as 'occupied' in the living room shortly after (19:33:20), suggesting they were nearby and likely supervised the process.

No smoke alarm triggered during the cooking event in C10, reducing the likelihood of a severe fire/unattended hazard compared to a scenario where alarms would have sounded.

The 'None' reading at 19:06 is a single point; subsequent readings return to normal values, making a persistent sensor failure unlikely.

Smoke alarm false positive or minor malfunction indicated by trigger during idle state.

In C08, the 'kitchen_smoke_alarm' triggers (SmokeState=1) at 14:45:00.

At this exact time, the 'kitchen_cook_surface' is OFF (turned off at 14:50:00 in C08, but was already off before the trigger based on C07 end state).

The alarm clears itself within 10 minutes (SmokeState=0 at 14:55:00) without any corresponding heat spike or other hazard indicators.

This suggests the alarm may be prone to false positives or requires maintenance (battery alert was noted in C00, though battery alerts don't always cause false triggers, they indicate aging hardware).

The alarm functioned correctly by detecting *something* (even if false) and clearing it.

It did not trigger during the actual cooking event in C10, so it didn't fail to detect a real hazard.

Absence of 'kitchen_occupancy' logs during the 19:05-19:33 cooking window in C10, despite 'living_room_occupancy' being active.

Single 'None' telemetry gap for 'kitchen_temp_sensor' at 19:06:00, immediately following cook surface activation.

Smoke alarm trigger at 14:45 (C08) with cook surface OFF, contrasting with no trigger during actual cooking at 19:05 (C10).

Direct 'kitchen_occupancy' sensor logs to confirm if the resident was in the kitchen during cooking.

Detailed 'LockOperation' history in C09 to see if the door was re-locked automatically or left open for a prolonged period before entry.

Context for the 14:45 smoke alarm trigger (e.g., humidity levels, cleaning activities) to determine if it was a true false positive or early warning of a different issue.

Verify the 'kitchen_smoke_alarm' BatteryAlert status in C00 against the actual trigger event in C08 to determine if low battery caused the false positive.

Check for any 'kitchen_occupancy' or motion sensor data in chunks C07-C10 to confirm human presence during the cooking window (19:05-19:33).

Analyze the 'kitchen_temp_sensor' dropout at 19:06 and 19:34 in C10 to rule out sensor malfunction vs. genuine heat spike causing saturation/dropout.

Review C09 for door lock re-engagement status after the manual unlock in C10 to assess security posture post-entry.

The investigator correctly identified key events but relies heavily on 'absence of evidence' (no kitchen occupancy log) to construct a safety risk hypothesis. This is a high false-alarm risk because the absence of a specific sensor log does not prove unattended cooking; it may simply mean the sensor wasn't triggered or isn't present.

The 'sensor_malfunction' hypothesis regarding the smoke alarm is plausible but incomplete without checking if the battery alert in C00 correlates with the sensitivity change in C08.

The temperature readings in C10 show a rise from ~23°C to ~26.8°C, which is consistent with cooking but not hazardous on its own. The transient 'None' values are noted but dismissed too quickly as 'single point' issues without verifying if they indicate a hardware fault that could compromise future safety monitoring.

Crucially, the investigation focuses on C00, C08, C10 but misses the context of what happened immediately before the cooking started (C07 end/C08 start) and the immediate aftermath (C11), which might contain relevant occupancy or device state changes.

The query asks for a comprehensive safety assessment. The current output is speculative about risks rather than definitive about them. We need to verify if the 'unattended cooking' risk is real or an artifact of missing logs.

The kitchen smoke alarm triggered by transient cooking fumes (false positive) and the device has a low battery. The temperature spike in the kitchen is due to active cooking, and the subsequent drop indicates normal cooling after the cook surface was turned off.

C08: SmokeState=1 at 14:45 followed by SmokeState=0 at 14:55, with CookSurface=off throughout this period, suggesting a transient event like steam or minor fumes rather than fire.

C10: Kitchen temperature rises from ~23°C to ~26.8°C between 19:05 and 19:30, coinciding exactly with the time the cook surface is On (19:05-19:33).

C10: Cook surface turns off at 19:33, and temperatures stabilize/drop slightly afterwards.

C00: BatteryAlert=1 on the smoke alarm indicates a maintenance need but not necessarily a functional failure during the event.

Does not fully explain why the smoke alarm triggered while the cook surface was explicitly off in C08, unless it was unrelated cooking activity not captured by the switch state or a different heat source.

Assumes the occupant was present and supervising the cooking in C10, which is plausible given the living room occupancy, but relies on inference rather than direct kitchen presence data.

The home security status is normal; the door unlock was a legitimate entry by an occupant, followed by normal evening activities (lights/AC on).

C10: LockOperation(Manual) at 18:28 is immediately followed by Entrance Light On and Living Room Occupancy becoming occupied, consistent with a resident entering.

No contradictory lock states or forced entry indicators are present.

Living room AC and lights activate shortly after entry, indicating normal habitation patterns.

Cannot rule out tailgating or unauthorized access without external verification, though internal signals support normal entry.

Potential unattended cooking risk or sensor malfunction in the kitchen. The cook surface was left on for ~28 minutes (19:05-19:33) while the kitchen temperature rose significantly (~3.8°C). Although the surface was eventually turned off, the lack of explicit kitchen occupancy confirmation during the heating phase, combined with a prior unexplained smoke alarm trigger, suggests a potential safety gap or device reliability issue.

C10: Cook surface turns ON at 19:05 and OFF at 19:33 (28-minute duration).

C10: Kitchen temperature rises steadily from 24.15°C to 26.84°C during this period.

C10: No 'kitchen_occupancy' signal is logged during the cooking window (only living_room_occupancy is tracked as occupied), creating a supervision blind spot for the specific hazard zone.

C10: Two telemetry gaps ('None') for the kitchen temp sensor occur at 19:06 and 19:34, potentially obscuring peak temperature values or rapid changes.

C08: A previous unexplained smoke alarm trigger (SmokeState=1) occurred earlier in the day when the cook surface was off, raising questions about the alarm's reliability or environmental conditions in the kitchen.

The cook surface was turned off manually, so no fire occurred.

Living room occupancy confirms someone was home, making total abandonment unlikely.

Temperature rise is moderate and consistent with cooking, not necessarily dangerous levels.

Kitchen smoke alarm may be prone to false positives or environmental sensitivity issues. It triggered at 14:45 despite the cook surface being off, and later showed telemetry gaps during high-heat cooking events.

C08: SmokeState=1 at 14:45, but Kitchen Cook Surface was Off (False) at 14:50. No other obvious ignition source is logged.

C00: Persistent BatteryAlert=1 since 14:35 on the same device, which can cause erratic behavior or reduced sensitivity.

C10: Telemetry gaps ('None') for kitchen sensors during active cooking might indicate interference or device stress.

Smoke alarms can trigger on non-fire sources (steam, dust, insects).

Battery alert does not prove the alarm failed to detect real smoke if it didn't trigger then.

Telemetry gaps are brief and do not constitute a complete monitoring failure.

C08: SmokeState=1 with CookSurface=Off (discrepancy in expected trigger source).

C10: CookSurface=On for 28 minutes with rising temps but no explicit kitchen occupancy log (supervision gap).

C10: Kitchen temp sensor returns 'None' twice during active cooking (telemetry integrity concern).

C00: Persistent BatteryAlert on the primary safety device (kitchen smoke alarm).

Direct kitchen occupancy data to confirm if the person was actually in the kitchen during the 19:05-19:33 cooking window.

Audio or video logs to verify the nature of the smoke event at 14:45 (cooking vs. other source).

Confirmation that the cook surface was attended by a human during the entire 28-minute period.

Status of the smoke alarm battery replacement to rule out device-induced anomalies.

Kitchen cook surface turns on at 19:05:30 and off at 19:33:00, lasting ~28 minutes, which is typical for meal preparation.

Living room occupancy remains 'occupied' throughout the evening period in C10-C11, indicating the resident was present in the house.

In C08, the 'kitchen_smoke_alarm' triggers (SmokeState=1) at 14:45:00.

The alarm clears itself within 10 minutes (SmokeState=0 at 14:55:00) without any corresponding heat spike or other hazard indicators.

Verify if the kitchen smoke alarm triggered again during or immediately after the cooking event in C10 (19:05-19:33) to determine if it is functioning correctly or failing to detect real hazards.

Check for any 'LockOperation' events in C09 (18:28-19:05) to confirm if the door was re-locked automatically or manually, addressing the security gap between entry and cooking start.

Investigate the cause of the 'None' telemetry gaps in the kitchen temperature sensor at 19:06 and 19:34; determine if this indicates sensor failure or just data logging intervals.

The investigator correctly identifies potential risks (unattended cooking, device health) but relies heavily on inference due to missing direct evidence of kitchen occupancy and smoke alarm status during the critical cooking window.

Chunk C10 covers 18:28-19:45. The cooking starts at 19:05. Chunk C09 likely contains the transition period or additional context around the door lock state and initial kitchen activity that is currently missing from the focused set.

The hypothesis of 'unattended cooking' is speculative because we lack confirmation of whether the occupant was actually in the kitchen (only living room occupancy is confirmed). Without C09 or further logs showing kitchen presence/absence, we cannot distinguish between a supervised short cook and an unattended hazard.

The 'device malfunction' hypothesis regarding the smoke alarm is weak because we don't know if it triggered during the actual cooking event in C10. We only know it triggered earlier when the stove was off. We need to see if it triggers now.

False alarm risk is high because the safety conclusion rests on a 'supervision blind spot' (missing kitchen occupancy log) rather than a confirmed hazardous event (fire/smoke detected while unattended).

## Query
以下是家庭设备的综合状态报告。请综合分析所有信息，判断家庭当前的安全状况，指出任何潜在风险。

## Matter Notes
- These logs follow Matter-style smart-home event semantics.
- TemperatureMeasurement.MeasuredValue is represented in centi-degrees Celsius in this benchmark: 2466 means 24.66 C, not 2466 C.
- BooleanState and other protocol booleans should be interpreted using transitions and surrounding events, not naive natural-language assumptions from a single isolated value.
- OccupancySensing.Occupancy uses 0=unoccupied and 1=occupied.
- DoorLock.LockState is an enumerated state; formatted logs may show both the label and the raw code.
- A device-fault conclusion requires direct fault evidence such as stuck values, repeated non-recovery, explicit alarm/fault events, or impossible state transitions. Scaled temperature values alone are not enough.

## Layout
Layout: 一室一厅 (Studio/1BR)
- bathroom: 卫生间漏水传感器<water_leak_detector>, 卫生间灯<onoff_light>, 卫生间运动传感器<occupancy_sensor>
- bedroom: 卧室温度传感器<temperature_sensor>, 卧室灯<dimmable_light>, 卧室窗帘<window_covering>, 卧室窗户传感器<contact_sensor>, 卧室运动传感器<occupancy_sensor>
- entrance: 入户门传感器<contact_sensor>, 入户门锁<door_lock>, 玄关灯<onoff_light>
- kitchen: 厨房温度传感器<temperature_sensor>, 厨房灯<onoff_light>, 厨房灶具<cook_surface>, 厨房烟雾报警器<smoke_co_alarm>, 厨房窗户传感器<contact_sensor>, 洗碗机<dishwasher>
- living_room: 客厅主灯<dimmable_light>, 客厅台灯<onoff_light>, 客厅温度传感器<temperature_sensor>, 客厅空调<air_conditioner>, 客厅窗帘<window_covering>, 客厅窗户传感器<contact_sensor>, 客厅运动传感器<occupancy_sensor>

## Deterministic Signals
{
  "room_activity": {
    "kitchen": 303,
    "living_room": 397,
    "bedroom": 351,
    "bathroom": 53,
    "entrance": 14
  },
  "attribute_frequency": {
    "MeasuredValue": 866,
    "Occupancy": 211,
    "OnOff": 20,
    "StateValue": 5,
    "LockState": 4,
    "CurrentPositionLiftPercent100ths": 2,
    "SmokeState": 2,
    "BatteryAlert": 1,
    "SystemMode": 1,
    "OperationalState": 1,
    "CurrentLevel": 1
  },
  "lock_state_flips": 4,
  "occupancy_events": 211,
  "temperature_patterns": [],
  "value_format_hints": {
    "temperature": "MeasuredValue is shown as Celsius with the raw integer preserved in parentheses.",
    "occupancy": "0=unoccupied, 1=occupied",
    "lock_state": "enumerated lock state rendered as label + raw code"
  }
}

## Chunk Index
[
  {
    "chunk_id": "C00",
    "start_ts": "2026-06-08T14:35:00",
    "end_ts": "2026-06-09T01:50:00",
    "event_count": 80,
    "rooms": {
      "kitchen": 23,
      "living_room": 27,
      "bedroom": 26,
      "bathro

## Query
以下是家庭设备的综合状态报告。请综合分析所有信息，判断家庭当前的安全状况，指出任何潜在风险。

## Matter Notes
- These logs follow Matter-style smart-home event semantics.
- TemperatureMeasurement.MeasuredValue is represented in centi-degrees Celsius in this benchmark: 2466 means 24.66 C, not 2466 C.
- BooleanState and other protocol booleans should be interpreted using transitions and surrounding events, not naive natural-language assumptions from a single isolated value.
- OccupancySensing.Occupancy uses 0=unoccupied and 1=occupied.
- DoorLock.LockState is an enumerated state; formatted logs may show both the label and the raw code.
- A device-fault conclusion requires direct fault evidence such as stuck values, repeated non-recovery, explicit alarm/fault events, or impossible state transitions. Scaled temperature values alone are not enough.

## Triage
{
  "primary_task_profile": "composite-safety",
  "secondary_task_profile": "device-health",
  "query_anchor": {
    "target_rooms": [
      "kitchen",
      "entrance",
      "living_room"
    ],
    "target_devices": [
      "kitchen_smoke_alarm",
      "front_door_lock",
      "front_door_contact",
      "kitchen_cook_surface",
      "living_room_ac"
    ],
    "target_question": "Analyze the comprehensive status report to determine the home's current safety condition and identify any potential risks."
  },
  "focus_rooms": [
    "kitchen",
    "entrance",
    "living_room"
  ],
  "focus_devices": [
    "kitchen_smoke_alarm",
    "front_door_lock",
    "front_door_contact",
    "kitchen_cook_surface",
    "living_room_occupancy",
    "living_room_ac"
  ],
  "focus_chunk_ids": [
    "C00",
    "C08",
    "C10"
  ],
  "suspected_patterns": [
    "Low battery alert on smoke/CO alarm (potential device failure or maintenance need)",
    "Smoke state trigger in kitchen without obvious cooking activity context (potential false positive or hazard)",
    "Door lock/unlock sequence with manual operation (security access event)",
    "Occupancy patterns indicating presence during evening hours"
  ],
  "why_these_chunks": [
    "C00: Contains the initial BatteryAlert on the kitchen smoke alarm, establishing a baseline for device health/status.",
    "C08: Shows the Kitchen Smoke Alarm triggering (SmokeState=1) and the cook surface being off, which is critical for assessing if this was a real fire/smoke event or a false alarm/malfunction.",
    "C10: Captures the manual door unlock event and subsequent occupancy/lighting/AC activation, providing contex