```json
{
  "is_anomaly": true,
  "confidence": "medium",
  "threat_type": "unattended_cooking",
  "threat_description": "Kitchen temperature spike to 27.19°C while home was unoccupied, with no prior cook surface event logged, indicates a high-probability unattended cooking event or residual heat from earlier unattended operation.",
  "reasoning": [
    "Kitchen temperature rose sharply from 23.83°C at 18:00 to 27.19°C at 18:30, a 3.36°C rise in 30 minutes, while living room temperature remained stable at ~23°C, confirming a localized heat source in the kitchen.",
    "The home was unoccupied until 18:28:21 (living room occupancy became occupied) and kitchen occupancy was never logged during the spike, meaning no one was in the kitchen to attend the heat source.",
    "The cook surface was turned on at 18:58:30 after the temperature peak, and turned off at 19:42:00 with the kitchen window opened at 19:42:30 for ventilation, consistent with the resident discovering heat/smoke upon return.",
    "No smoke or CO alarm events appear in any reviewed chunk, but the temperature spike and subsequent ventilation suggest a real thermal event, not a sensor fault — the 'None' values at 18:59 and 19:43 are transient and do not undermine the coherent heating/cooling curve.",
    "The unattended_cooking hypothesis is better supported than the normal-cooking hypothesis because the temperature spike preceded any logged cook surface event and the home was empty; the investigator's N1 weakness of a ~30-minute gap and no prior cooking event confirms the anomaly is more plausible."
  ],
  "key_evidence": [
    "Kitchen temperature: 23.83°C at 18:00 → 27.19°C at 18:30, with all occupancy sensors unoccupied until 18:28.",
    "Cook surface turned on at 18:58:30 (after peak), off at 19:42:00, and kitchen window opened at 19:42:30.",
    "Living room temperature remained flat (~23°C) throughout, showing the heat was localized to the kitchen.",
    "No smoke/CO alarm events were triggered, suggesting smoldering or residual heat rather than a full fire."
  ],
  "recommended_actions": [
    "Inspect the cook surface and surrounding area for signs of overheating, burning, or food residue.",
    "Check if the cook surface has an auto-shutoff feature and whether it activated; consider manual verification.",
    "Review later chunks (C12, C13) for any auto-lock of the front door and confirm the door was secured after the incident.",
    "Consider installing a dedicated kitchen occupancy sensor or using heat sensors with alert thresholds.",
    "Educate the resident about never leaving cooking unattended, especially when leaving the home."
  ]
}
```

Kitchen temperature: 23.83°C at 18:00 → 27.19°C at 18:30, with all occupancy sensors unoccupied until 18:28.

Cook surface turned on at 18:58:30 (after peak), off at 19:42:00, and kitchen window opened at 19:42:30.

Living room temperature remained flat (~23°C) throughout, showing the heat was localized to the kitchen.

No smoke/CO alarm events were triggered, suggesting smoldering or residual heat rather than a full fire.

Inspect the cook surface and surrounding area for signs of overheating, burning, or food residue.

Check if the cook surface has an auto-shutoff feature and whether it activated; consider manual verification.

Review later chunks (C12, C13) for any auto-lock of the front door and confirm the door was secured after the incident.

Consider installing a dedicated kitchen occupancy sensor or using heat sensors with alert thresholds.

Educate the resident about never leaving cooking unattended, especially when leaving the home.

综合分析家庭当前的安全状况，指出任何潜在风险

kitchen temperature spike (27.19°C) at 18:30 while other rooms cool, possible cook surface left on or fire risk

front door unlocked at 18:28 (C10), then auto-locked at 07:11 (C04) – inconsistent daily pattern, possible user habit risk

occupancy absent in kitchen during high temperature but present in living room suggests unattended cooking

no explicit leak/smoke alarm events yet but kitchen temp anomaly warrants attention

C10 shows the critical kitchen temperature spike (27.19°C) at 18:30 with living_room occupancy only, indicating unattended cooking or fire risk.

C11 shows continuing elevated kitchen temp falling gradually and dishwasher turned on later, possibly masking a cook surface issue.

C04 provides a baseline for normal lock behavior and morning routine for comparison with C10's unlocked door event.

综合分析家庭当前的安全状况，指出任何潜在风险

```json
{
  "normal_hypotheses": [
    {
      "id": "N1",
      "description": "The kitchen temperature spike from 23.18°C at 18:00 to 27.19°C at 18:30 is residual heat from normal cooking activities earlier in the afternoon. The cook surface was turned on at 18:58:30 and off at 19:42:00, and the temperature rose and fell within the expected range for active cooking followed by natural cooling with the window opened at 19:42:30. The front door was unlocked at 18:28 as the resident returned home, a normal evening routine. The door was manually unlocked and no subsequent forced entry or prolonged open state is detected.",
      "evidence": [
        "Kitchen temperature began rising gradually from 23.83°C at 18:00 to 24.54°C at 18:05, 25.22°C at 18:10, peaking at 27.19°C at 18:30—consistent with heat from cooking rather than a sudden fire event.",
        "Living room temperature remained stable at ~23°C throughout, indicating the heat was localized to the kitchen and not indicative of a spreading fire.",
        "The cook surface was turned on (18:58:30) and off (19:42:00), and the kitchen window was opened at 19:42:30 for ventilation, suggesting controlled, attended cooking.",
        "Temperature declined steadily after the peak (26.98°C at 18:35, 26.12°C at 18:50, 24.95°C at 19:05, 23.17°C at 19:25), consistent with a cooking heat source being turned off and venting.",
        "Living room occupancy was continuously 'occupied' from 18:28 to 21:15, meaning the resident was home and likely aware of kitchen activity."
      ],
      "weaknesses": [
        "The temperature spike began before the cook surface was explicitly logged as 'on' at 18:58:30, leaving a ~30-minute gap (18:28–18:58) during which the kitchen temperature rose from 23.83°C to 27.19°C without a device-verified heat source.",
        "The kitchen temperature sensor reported None at 18:59 and 19:43, which could indicate a sensor fault or communication issue that briefly overlapped with the highest temperatures.",
        "No prior cooking event (e.g., cook surface 'on' in the afternoon) is present in the available chunks to explain pre-18:28 heat buildup."
      ]
    }
  ],
  "anomaly_hypotheses": [
    {
      "id": "A1",
      "description": "Unattended cooking or a cook surface left on before the resident returned home. The kitchen temperature spiked to 27.19°C at 18:30, well above the ambient living room temperature (~23°C), while occupancy was absent in the kitchen and present only in the living room after the resident's arrival at 18:28. The temperature rise began at 18:00 (23.83°C) and climbed rapidly, suggesting a heat source was active before the resident even entered. The resident may have left a burner on earlier in the day, discovered it upon return, turned on the cook surface again at 18:58:30 to finish cooking, and opened the window for ventilation at 19:42:30.",
      "threat_type": "unattended_cooking",
      "evidence": [
        "Kitchen temperature rose from 23.83°C at 18:00 to 27.19°C at 18:30, a 3.36°C rise in 30 minutes, while living room temperature remained flat at ~23°C—indicating a focused heat source in the kitchen.",
        "Occupancy was 'unoccupied' in the kitchen and 'unoccupied' in the living room until 18:28:21, meaning the home was empty during the initial temperature spike.",
        "The cook surface was later turned on at 18:58:30 and off at 19:42:00, but the temperature spike preceded this explicit act, suggesting either a heat source was already active or residual heat from a previous unattended cooking session.",
        "The front door was unlocked manually at 18:28:00, and the resident entered, turned on lights, AC, and then the cook surface—this sequence suggests the resident may have discovered a problem upon return.",
        "At 19:42:30, the kitchen window was opened, indicating the resident felt the need to ventilate, consistent with smoke, steam, or excessive heat."
      ],
      "weaknesses": [
        "No explicit cooking event before 18:58:30 is captured in the available chunks, so the pre-18:28 heat could be residual from earlier normal cooking (though no prior cook surface 'on' event is logged).",
        "No smoke/CO alarm events are reported, which would be expected if the heat source caused smoke or burning.",
        "The temperature sensor reported None at 18:59 and 19:43, which could indicate a sensor glitch rather than a genuine temperature reading; however, the readings before and after these None values are consistent with a cooling trend."
      ]
    },
    {
      "id": "A2",
      "description": "Front door left unlocked for an extended period after the resident's evening return. At 18:28:00, the front door was manually unlocked and the door contact opened (StateValue=false). No subsequent auto-lock or manual lock event is recorded in the evening chunks (C10, C11). The door remained unlocked through the evening routine (cooking, dishwasher, occupant in living room), posing a security risk if the door was not manually locked via an internal mechanism that does not generate a LockOperation event.",
      "threat_type": "intrusion",
      "evidence": [
        "At 18:28:00, a LockOperation event with LockOperationType=1 (Manual unlock) changed LockState to unlocked (raw=2). The last lock event before this was an auto-lock at 07:11:31 (LockState=locked). This suggests the door was locked when the resident arrived.",
        "After 18:28:02, the front_door_contact reported StateValue=false (door open), but no subsequent StateValue=true (door closed) or lock event is logged during the evening chunks (C10 ends at 19:45, C11 ends at 21:15).",
        "The door was not auto-locked after closing, unlike the morning routine where auto-lock triggered within 11 seconds of closing (07:11:20 unlock, 07:11:30 contact true, 07:11:31 auto-lock).",
        "The resident was home and in the living room from 18:28 onward, so they may have intentionally left the door unlocked for ventilation or easy re-entry, but the absence of any lock event increases risk."
      ],
      "weaknesses": [
        "The door may have been manually locked via thumb turn, which may not generate a LockOperation event in all systems (as noted in supervisor feedback). The absence of a log event does not prove the door remained unlocked.",
        "The resident was home and present, so the risk is primarily from external intrusion when the resident is asleep or distracted.",
        "Evening chunks (C12, C13) are not available—a later auto-lock or manual lock event may exist but was not reviewed."
      ]
    }
  ],
  "most_discriminative_evidence": [
    "Kitchen temperature spike from 23.83°C at 18:00 to 27.19°C at 18:30 with no prior cook surface 'on' event, while the home was unoccupied until 18:28.",
    "Front door manually unlocked at 18:28:00 with no subsequent lock event or door contact closure event logged through 21:15.",
    "Cook surface turned on at 18:58:30 and off at 19:42:00; kitchen window opened at 19:42:30 for ventilation.",
    "Kitchen temperature sensor reported None at 18:59 and 19:43, coinciding with the period after the peak temperature.",
    "Living room occupancy was continuous (occupied) from 18:28 to 21:15, suggesting the resident was home during the events but not necessarily in the kitchen."
  ],
  "missing_information": [
    "No smoke/CO alarm events or water leak events appear in any of the reviewed chunks (C00-C02, C04, C09-C11)—these are target devices for the query and their silence may be important, but the chunks have not been searched for them explicitly; their absence in provided data is noted but not conclusive.",
    "Evening chunks beyond 21:15 (C12, C13) are missing—they could show a delayed auto-lock event or a late-night lock event that resolves the door security concern.",
    "Pre-18:00 kitchen cooking events (e.g., cook surface 'on', oven use) are not present in C09—if the resident cooked earlier in the afternoon, the residual heat could explain the spike without unattended cooking.",
    "The cook surface type (gas vs electric) and its safety features (auto-shutoff, thermal sensors) are unknown but affect risk assessment for unattended operation.",
    "It is unknown whether the front door contact sensor ever reported StateValue=true after 18:28:02—a door closure without a corresponding lock event would still indicate security risk."
  ]
}
```

Living room temperature remained stable at ~23°C throughout, indicating the heat was localized to the kitchen and not indicative of a spreading fire.

Living room occupancy was continuously 'occupied' from 18:28 to 21:15, meaning the resident was home and likely aware of kitchen activity.

No prior cooking event (e.g., cook surface 'on' in the afternoon) is present in the available chunks to explain pre-18:28 heat buildup.

Occupancy was 'unoccupied' in the kitchen and 'unoccupied' in the living room until 18:28:21, meaning the home was empty during the initial temperature spike.

At 19:42:30, the kitchen window was opened, indicating the resident felt the need to ventilate, consistent with smoke, steam, or excessive heat.

No smoke/CO alarm events are reported, which would be expected if the heat source caused smoke or burning.

The resident was home and present, so the risk is primarily from external intrusion when the resident is asleep or distracted.

Evening chunks (C12, C13) are not available—a later auto-lock or manual lock event may exist but was not reviewed.

Kitchen temperature spike from 23.83°C at 18:00 to 27.19°C at 18:30 with no prior cook surface 'on' event, while the home was unoccupied until 18:28.

Front door manually unlocked at 18:28:00 with no subsequent lock event or door contact closure event logged through 21:15.

Cook surface turned on at 18:58:30 and off at 19:42:00; kitchen window opened at 19:42:30 for ventilation.

Kitchen temperature sensor reported None at 18:59 and 19:43, coinciding with the period after the peak temperature.

Living room occupancy was continuous (occupied) from 18:28 to 21:15, suggesting the resident was home during the events but not necessarily in the kitchen.

Evening chunks beyond 21:15 (C12, C13) are missing—they could show a delayed auto-lock event or a late-night lock event that resolves the door security concern.

The cook surface type (gas vs electric) and its safety features (auto-shutoff, thermal sensors) are unknown but affect risk assessment for unattended operation.

```json
{
  "on_topic": true,
  "evidence_sufficient": false,
  "risk_of_false_alarm": "medium",
  "recommended_action": "refine_investigation",
  "needs_more_chunks": ["C03", "C12", "C13"],
  "missing_checks": [
    "Check for smoke/CO alarm or water leak events in all remaining chunks (C03, C05–C08, C12, C13) to rule out fire/safety threats.",
    "Verify if auto-lock occurred later (C12, C13) or door contact closed after 21:15 to resolve the door security concern.",
    "Check for any explicit cook surface events before 18:00 in chunk C03 (afternoon period) to see if unattended cooking started earlier.",
    "Confirm kitchen occupancy status during the temperature spike — only living_room occupancy is logged; kitchen occupancy is missing entirely.",
    "Examine temperature sensor 'None' values for possible sensor fault (communication errors) vs. genuine absence of reading.",
    "Check cook surface type (gas/electric) and auto-shutoff features — not available in logs but affects risk profile.",
    "Verify kitchen window contact state after 19:42:30 to see if it was closed later (could indicate resolved ventilation)."
  ],
  "supervisor_notes": [
    "Investigator correctly flags the kitchen temperature spike as the primary concern but lacks data to distinguish between unattended cooking, residual heat, or sensor anomaly — more chunks needed.",
    "The front door lock concern is valid but incomplete without checking C12–C13 for late-night auto-lock events.",
    "Missing chunks C03 (afternoon) and C05–C08 (morning/midday) could reveal earlier cooking activity or device faults.",
    "The 'None' temperature readings at 18:59 and 19:43 overlap with the peak heat period; this could indicate a sensor communication issue rather than genuine high heat, increasing false-alarm risk.",
    "No smoke/CO alarm data is present in any reviewed chunk — this is a critical gap for confirming a fire risk.",
    "Investigator's hypotheses are well-structured and evidence-based, but the evidence is still ambiguous without the missing data."
  ]
}
```

Check for smoke/CO alarm or water leak events in all remaining chunks (C03, C05–C08, C12, C13) to rule out fire/safety threats.

Verify if auto-lock occurred later (C12, C13) or door contact closed after 21:15 to resolve the door security concern.

Check for any explicit cook surface events before 18:00 in chunk C03 (afternoon period) to see if unattended cooking started earlier.

Confirm kitchen occupancy status during the temperature spike — only living_room occupancy is logged; kitchen occupancy is missing entirely.

Examine temperature sensor 'None' values for possible sensor fault (communication errors) vs. genuine absence of reading.

Check cook surface type (gas/electric) and auto-shutoff features — not available in logs but affects risk profile.

Verify kitchen window contact state after 19:42:30 to see if it was closed later (could indicate resolved ventilation).

The front door lock concern is valid but incomplete without checking C12–C13 for late-night auto-lock events.

Missing chunks C03 (afternoon) and C05–C08 (morning/midday) could reveal earlier cooking activity or device faults.

No smoke/CO alarm data is present in any reviewed chunk — this is a critical gap for confirming a fire risk.

Investigator's hypotheses are well-structured and evidence-based, but the evidence is still ambiguous without the missing data.

```json
{
  "normal_hypotheses": [
    {
      "id": "N1",
      "description": "A resident returned home at 18:28, unlocked the front door, entered, turned on lights and AC in the living room, and was present there throughout the evening. The kitchen temperature spike to 27.19°C at 18:30 was caused by residual heat from earlier cooking or the oven being on briefly before the resident entered the living room. The cook surface was turned on at 18:58 for dinner preparation, then off at 19:42, and the dishwasher started at 19:57 — a normal evening routine. The kitchen window was opened at 19:42 to ventilate.",
      "evidence": [
        "Front door unlocked at 18:28, lights turned on, AC activated — consistent with someone arriving home.",
        "Living room occupancy is continuously occupied from 18:28 onward, indicating the resident was present in the living room.",
        "Kitchen temperature peaked before the cook surface was turned on (18:58), suggesting the spike was from earlier use, not the current cooking event.",
        "Cook surface turned off at 19:42, kitchen window opened at 19:42:30, dishwasher started at 19:57 — plausible post-dinner cleanup.",
        "Kitchen temperature returned to ~22.7°C by 19:45 and remained stable, no further anomalies.",
        "Morning routine (C04): lights off, door unlocked, then auto-locked within seconds — consistent with a normal departure."
      ],
      "weaknesses": [
        "Does not explain why the kitchen was 27.19°C at 18:30 when the resident had just arrived; no prior cooking event is logged in the chunks before 18:28.",
        "Does not explain why the kitchen temperature sensor read None at 18:59 and 19:43 — could be a brief sensor communication issue or power cycle.",
        "No explicit event showing the cook surface being used before 18:28."
      ]
    }
  ],
  "anomaly_hypotheses": [
    {
      "id": "A1",
      "description": "Potential unattended cooking or fire risk: The kitchen temperature spike to 27.19°C at 18:30, while the resident was in the living room, suggests something was left on in the kitchen unattended. The resident may have returned home to find a pan or appliance still on, then later used the cook surface at 18:58, but the initial spike is unexplained by the resident's immediate actions.",
      "threat_type": "unattended_cooking",
      "evidence": [
        "Kitchen temperature at 18:30 = 27.19°C, while living room was 22.99°C and bedroom 22.19°C — a 4.2°C differential, well outside normal ambient variance.",
        "At 18:30, living room occupancy is occupied (resident present), not kitchen — meaning the high kitchen temp was not due to active cooking by the resident at that moment.",
        "No prior cook surface on event before 18:58, so the spike at 18:30 is unexplained by the logged cooking activity.",
        "Kitchen temperature sensor reported None at 18:59 and 19:43, which could indicate power loss, disconnection, or a sensor glitch possibly related to heat stress.",
        "The spike decays from 27.19°C at 18:30 to 22.70°C by 19:35, consistent with a heat source being removed or cooling down after a hazard was addressed."
      ],
      "weaknesses": [
        "The spike could be from residual heat of earlier cooking not captured in these focused chunks (e.g., oven or cook surface used before 18:28).",
        "No smoke or CO alarm event is logged in the chunks — if there was a fire risk, the alarm would likely have triggered.",
        "The resident turned on the cook surface at 18:58, suggesting they were cooking normally, not reacting to an emergency."
      ]
    },
    {
      "id": "A2",
      "description": "Possible front door security anomaly: The front door was unlocked at 18:28 with no corresponding auto-lock or lock operation in the evening chunks, unlike the morning routine where auto-lock followed immediately after door contact change. This could indicate the door was left unlocked during the evening, posing an intrusion or tailgating risk.",
      "threat_type": "intrusion",
      "evidence": [
        "At 18:28, front door lock state = unlocked (raw=2), but no LockOperation event is shown before or after this unlock in the evening chunks — the unlock is not preceded by a manual or auto unlock event in C10.",
        "In the morning routine (C04), the door was unlocked manually at 07:11:20 and then auto-locked at 07:11:31 after door contact changed — a secure pattern. No such auto-lock is seen in the evening.",
        "The door contact changed to false at 18:28:02 (door opened), then the resident entered, but no subsequent door contact change (back to true) and no lock event is logged later in C10 or C11 — the door may have remained unlocked.",
        "If the door remained unlocked for hours, it could allow unauthorized entry while the resident was in the living room."
      ],
      "weaknesses": [
        "The door may have been manually locked later without triggering a LockOperation event (e.g., manual thumb turn may not be logged).",
        "No contact sensor event shows the door being closed (StateValue = true) after 18:28:02, which is odd — this could be a contact sensor reporting issue or the door was left ajar.",
        "The auto-lock may have been delayed or scheduled; absence of an event is not definitive proof of an unlocked door."
      ]
    }
  ],
  "most_discriminative_evidence": [
    "Kitchen temperature = 27.19°C at 18:30 while living room occupancy = occupied, with no prior cooking event logged before 18:58.",
    "Front door unlocked at 18:28 with no subsequent LockOperation or door contact closed event in the evening chunks.",
    "Kitchen temperature sensor reported None at 18:59 and 19:43 — possible transient fault or disconnection.",
    "Living room occupancy is continuously occupied after 18:28, indicating resident was in living room during the kitchen temperature spike."
  ],
  "missing_information": [
    "What was the kitchen temperature in the hour before 18:28? Was there any cooking event (oven, cook surface) before the resident returned?",
    "Did the front door auto-lock after the resident entered at 18:28? Is there a schedule for auto-lock that would cover this?",
    "Why did the kitchen temperature sensor report None twice (18:59, 19:43)? Was there a sensor fault, battery issue, or power cycle?",
    "Were there any smoke alarm, CO alarm, or water leak detector events during or before the evening period? (No such events appear in the focused chunks.)",
    "Is the cook surface a gas or electric model? Does it have automatic shutoff or temperature sensors that could explain the spike?",
    "What is the reason the kitchen window was opened at 19:42:30? Was it to ventilate after cooking, or was there a smell of smoke/gas?"
  ]
}
```

Front door unlocked at 18:28, lights turned on, AC activated — consistent with someone arriving home.

Living room occupancy is continuously occupied from 18:28 onward, indicating the resident was present in the living room.

Kitchen temperature peaked before the cook surface was turned on (18:58), suggesting the spike was from earlier use, not the current cooking event.

Cook surface turned off at 19:42, kitchen window opened at 19:42:30, dishwasher started at 19:57 — plausible post-dinner cleanup.

Kitchen temperature returned to ~22.7°C by 19:45 and remained stable, no further anomalies.

Morning routine (C04): lights off, door unlocked, then auto-locked within seconds — consistent with a normal departure.

Does not explain why the kitchen was 27.19°C at 18:30 when the resident had just arrived; no prior cooking event is logged in the chunks before 18:28.

Does not explain why the kitchen temperature sensor read None at 18:59 and 19:43 — could be a brief sensor communication issue or power cycle.

No explicit event showing the cook surface being used before 18:28.

Kitchen temperature at 18:30 = 27.19°C, while living room was 22.99°C and bedroom 22.19°C — a 4.2°C differential, well outside normal ambient variance.

No prior cook surface on event before 18:58, so the spike at 18:30 is unexplained by the logged cooking activity.

Kitchen temperature sensor reported None at 18:59 and 19:43, which could indicate power loss, disconnection, or a sensor glitch possibly related to heat stress.

The spike decays from 27.19°C at 18:30 to 22.70°C by 19:35, consistent with a heat source being removed or cooling down after a hazard was addressed.

The spike could be from residual heat of earlier cooking not captured in these focused chunks (e.g., oven or cook surface used before 18:28).

No smoke or CO alarm event is logged in the chunks — if there was a fire risk, the alarm would likely have triggered.

The resident turned on the cook surface at 18:58, suggesting they were cooking normally, not reacting to an emergency.

If the door remained unlocked for hours, it could allow unauthorized entry while the resident was in the living room.

The door may have been manually locked later without triggering a LockOperation event (e.g., manual thumb turn may not be logged).

The auto-lock may have been delayed or scheduled; absence of an event is not definitive proof of an unlocked door.

Kitchen temperature = 27.19°C at 18:30 while living room occupancy = occupied, with no prior cooking event logged before 18:58.

Front door unlocked at 18:28 with no subsequent LockOperation or door contact closed event in the evening chunks.

Kitchen temperature sensor reported None at 18:59 and 19:43 — possible transient fault or disconnection.

Living room occupancy is continuously occupied after 18:28, indicating resident was in living room during the kitchen temperature spike.

What was the kitchen temperature in the hour before 18:28? Was there any cooking event (oven, cook surface) before the resident returned?

Did the front door auto-lock after the resident entered at 18:28? Is there a schedule for auto-lock that would cover this?

Why did the kitchen temperature sensor report None twice (18:59, 19:43)? Was there a sensor fault, battery issue, or power cycle?

Were there any smoke alarm, CO alarm, or water leak detector events during or before the evening period? (No such events appear in the focused chunks.)

Is the cook surface a gas or electric model? Does it have automatic shutoff or temperature sensors that could explain the spike?

What is the reason the kitchen window was opened at 19:42:30? Was it to ventilate after cooking, or was there a smell of smoke/gas?

Living room temperature remained stable at ~23°C throughout, indicating the heat was localized to the kitchen and not indicative of a spreading fire.

The cook surface was turned on (18:58:30) and off (19:42:00), and the kitchen window was opened at 19:42:30 for ventilation, suggesting controlled, attended cooking.

Living room occupancy was continuously 'occupied' from 18:28 to 21:15, meaning the resident was home and likely aware of kitchen activity.

No prior cooking event (e.g., cook surface 'on' in the afternoon) is present in the available chunks to explain pre-18:28 heat buildup.

Occupancy was 'unoccupied' in the kitchen and 'unoccupied' in the living room until 18:28:21, meaning the home was empty during the initial temperature spike.

At 19:42:30, the kitchen window was opened, indicating the resident felt the need to ventilate, consistent with smoke, steam, or excessive heat.

No smoke/CO alarm events are reported, which would be expected if the heat source caused smoke or burning.

The resident was home and present, so the risk is primarily from external intrusion when the resident is asleep or distracted.

Evening chunks (C12, C13) are not available—a later auto-lock or manual lock event may exist but was not reviewed.

```json
{
  "on_topic": true,
  "evidence_sufficient": false,
  "risk_of_false_alarm": "medium",
  "recommended_action": "refine_investigation",
  "needs_more_chunks": ["C00", "C01", "C02", "C09", "C12", "C13"],
  "missing_checks": [
    "Missing pre-18:28 kitchen temperature data or cooking events to determine if the 27.19°C spike was residual heat from earlier use or a new hazard.",
    "No check on whether smoke/CO alarm events or water leak events appear in any chunks, even though these are target devices in the query.",
    "No verification of the kitchen temperature sensor fault (None readings at 18:59, 19:43) against sensor diagnostic events or battery alerts in other chunks.",
    "Missing analysis of cook surface type (gas vs electric) and whether it has auto-shutoff or temperature sensors—this could affect risk assessment.",
    "No check on front door auto-lock schedule or if auto-lock was triggered later in C12/C13 evening chunks.",
    "No evaluation of whether the kitchen window being opened (19:42:30) correlates with ventilation need vs. emergency response.",
    "The investigator did not check if the front door contact sensor ever reported StateValue=true after 18:28:02, which is critical for door security assessment.",
    "Missing check on whether the resident could have manually locked the door via thumb turn (which may not log as a LockOperation event)."
  ],
  "supervisor_notes": [
    "The kitchen temperature spike to 27.19°C is notable but scaled values are correctly interpreted—not a false-alarm scaling error.",
    "The investigator's N1 hypothesis reasonably explains the spike as residual heat, but weaknesses are valid: no prior cooking event in focused chunks. Unfocused chunks (C00-C02, C09) could contain the missing evidence.",
    "The door security anomaly (A2) has medium strength—absence of auto-lock event is weak evidence without knowing the system's auto-lock configuration. Need chunks showing evening door events.",
    "Risk of false alarm is medium because both anomalies could have benign explanations, but the evidence base is incomplete—several key device types (smoke/CO alarm, water leak) and time periods (before 18:28, after 21:15) are excluded.",
    "Recommend refine investigation to pull broader temporal context (C00-C03 for morning baseline, C09 for pre-return kitchen state, C12-C13 for late evening door status) and to include all target device types mentioned in the query."
  ]
}
```

Missing pre-18:28 kitchen temperature data or cooking events to determine if the 27.19°C spike was residual heat from earlier use or a new hazard.

No check on whether smoke/CO alarm events or water leak events appear in any chunks, even though these are target devices in the query.

No verification of the kitchen temperature sensor fault (None readings at 18:59, 19:43) against sensor diagnostic events or battery alerts in other chunks.

Missing analysis of cook surface type (gas vs electric) and whether it has auto-shutoff or temperature sensors—this could affect risk assessment.

No check on front door auto-lock schedule or if auto-lock was triggered later in C12/C13 evening chunks.

No evaluation of whether the kitchen window being opened (19:42:30) correlates with ventilation need vs. emergency response.

The investigator did not check if the front door contact sensor ever reported StateValue=true after 18:28:02, which is critical for door security assessment.

Missing check on whether the resident could have manually locked the door via thumb turn (which may not log as a LockOperation event).

The kitchen temperature spike to 27.19°C is notable but scaled values are correctly interpreted—not a false-alarm scaling error.

## 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": 396,
    "bedroom": 355,
    "kitchen": 298,
    "bathroom": 55,
    "entrance": 14
  },
  "attribute_frequency": {
    "MeasuredValue": 866,
    "Occupancy": 216,
    "OnOff": 18,
    "StateValue": 5,
    "LockState": 4,
    "CurrentPositionLiftPercent100ths": 2,
    "SystemMode": 1,
    "OperationalState": 1,
    "CurrentLevel": 1
  },
  "lock_state_flips": 4,
  "occupancy_events": 216,
  "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": "2026-06-09T00:00:00",
    "end_ts": "2026-06-09T01:50:00",
    "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": "none",
  "query_anchor": {
    "target_rooms": ["living_room", "bedroom", "kitchen", "bathroom", "entrance"],
    "target_devices": ["water_leak_detector", "smoke_co_alarm", "door_lock", "contact_sensor", "cook_surface", "temperature_sensor", "occupancy_sensor"],
    "target_question": "综合分析家庭当前的安全状况，指出任何潜在风险"
  },
  "focus_rooms": ["kitchen", "living_room", "entrance", "bedroom"],
  "focus_devices": ["kitchen_temp_sensor", "smoke_co_alarm", "water_leak_detector", "front_door_lock", "cook_surface", "living_room_temp_sensor", "bedroom_temp_sensor"],
  "focus_chunk_ids": ["C10", "C11", "C04"],
  "suspected_patterns": [
    "kitchen temperature spike (27.19°C) at 18:30 while other rooms cool, possible cook surface left on or fire risk",
    "front door unlocked at 18:28 (C10), then auto-locked at 07:11 (C04) – inconsistent daily pattern, possible user habit risk",
    "occupancy absent in kitchen during high temperature but present in living room suggests unattended cooking",
    "no explicit leak/smoke alarm events yet but kitchen temp anomaly warrants attention"
  ],
  "why_these_chunks": [
    "C10 shows the critical kitchen temperature spike (27.19°C) at 18:30 with living_room occupancy only, indicating unattended cooking or fire risk.",
    "C11 shows continuing elevated kitchen temp falling gradually and dishwasher turned on later, possibly masking a cook surface issue.",
    "C04 provides a baseline for normal lock behavior and morning routine for comparison with C10's unlocked door event."
  ]
}

## Investigator
```json
{
  "normal_hypotheses": [
    {
      "id


灶具开启状态 + 厨房无人（occupancy=0）持续超过5分钟
厨房温度持续异常上升
最终烟雾报警器触发

立即提醒住户关闭灶具，如无法联系则自动关闭（如支持远程关闭）

```json
{
  "is_anomaly": true,
  "confidence": "medium",
  "threat_type": "unattended_cooking",
  "threat_description": "The kitchen experienced a significant temperature rise consistent with unattended cooking, and the smoke/CO alarm produced no events during that period, raising a concern for potential fire risk even though the cook surface was eventually turned off and the window opened.",
  "reasoning": [
    "The kitchen temperature peaked at 26.14°C (2614 centi-degrees) at 18:50, far exceeding concurrent living room (22.99°C) and bedroom (22.00°C) temperatures, indicating an active heat source in the kitchen.",
    "The kitchen temperature remained elevated (25.33–26.14°C) from 18:50 to 19:00 and then declined slowly over approximately 40 minutes, consistent with unattended or prolonged cooking that was not shut off until 19:40.",
    "The cook surface off event at 19:40 and kitchen window opening at 19:40:30 show deliberate end-of-cooking actions, but no smoke/CO alarm events appear in the provided chunks—this absence is a concern if smoke was generated during cooking.",
    "The supervisor allowed a final verdict with medium false-alarm risk but did not abstain, and the investigation provides coherent temporal and cross-device evidence for an unattended-cooking anomaly.",
    "Anomaly A1 (fire_risk) is the best-supported non-device-fault hypothesis; the temperature rise, cooking inference, and absent alarm events support a cautionary safety concern."
  ],
  "key_evidence": [
    "C12: Kitchen temperature peaks at 26.14°C at 18:50 while living room is 22.99°C and bedroom is 22.00°C.",
    "C12: Kitchen temperature declines slowly from 18:50 to 19:40, from 26.14°C down to 22.84°C, then the cook surface is turned off.",
    "C12: No smoke_co_alarm events are logged in the focused chunks despite cooking activity and elevated temperature.",
    "C12: Kitchen window contact opens at 19:40:30, suggesting ventilation was needed."
  ],
  "recommended_actions": [
    "Verify that the smoke/CO alarm is operational and has recorded events outside the provided chunks; consider installing additional smoke detection if coverage is insufficient.",
    "Review a full timeline of smoke_co_alarm events across the entire day to confirm no alarm events were triggered.",
    "Monitor kitchen temperature and cook surface usage patterns to ensure cooking is not left unattended, and consider adding an automatic cook surface shutoff timer if not present."
  ]
}
```

C12: Kitchen window contact opens at 19:40:30, suggesting ventilation was needed.

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.

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

living_room bedroom kitchen bathroom entrance

综合分析家庭安全状况，指出任何潜在风险

厨房温度异常升高可能意味着灶具或火灾风险 夜间门锁状态变化需确认 卫生间漏水传感器未触发但需结合水渍逻辑核实

C03包含厨房温度上升趋势及潜在烹饪活动，需检查烟雾报警器相关事件 C12中厨房温度显著高于其他房间（26.14°C），可能表明烹饪或设备异常 C14含有入口门锁和入户门传感器事件，为门锁安全的核心时段

综合分析家庭安全状况，指出任何潜在风险

```json
{
  "normal_hypotheses": [
    {
      "id": "N1",
      "description": "Normal household activity with cooking and after-work routines. The kitchen temperature rise in C12 is consistent with a cooking event that ended, with the cook surface turned off at 19:40 and the kitchen window opened at 19:40:30 to ventilate. The door lock event at 21:51:32 is a routine auto-lock after the front door closed, part of an evening wind-down sequence.",
      "evidence": [
        "C12: kitchen_temp_sensor peaks at 26.14°C at 18:50, then steadily decreases to ~22.84°C by 19:40, consistent with cooling after cooking.",
        "C12: kitchen_cook_surface is off at 19:40, and kitchen_window_contact opens at 19:40:30, indicating active ventilation.",
        "C14: front_door_lock transitions to locked (LockState=1) via Auto source at 21:51:32, right after front_door_contact closes at 21:51:31, consistent with an auto-lock feature.",
        "C14: lights and AC turned off in living room, bedroom light on, bedroom window closed, consistent with preparing for sleep around 21:51."
      ],
      "weaknesses": [
        "No direct log of the cook surface being turned on; the event is inferred from temperature patterns.",
        "The kitchen temperature sensor reports None at 19:41 (C12), which could be a transient communication glitch but does not persist."
      ]
    }
  ],
  "anomaly_hypotheses": [
    {
      "id": "A1",
      "description": "Unattended cooking in the kitchen causing a temperature anomaly that could indicate a fire risk. The kitchen temperature reached 26.14°C at 18:50 while living room and bedroom remained near 22-23°C, and the temperature took nearly 50 minutes to return to baseline, suggesting a heat source (likely the cook surface) was active. The smoke/CO alarm is in the device list but no events from it are present in these chunks, which is concerning if cooking generated smoke.",
      "threat_type": "fire_risk",
      "evidence": [
        "C12: Kitchen temperature rapidly rose to 26.14°C at 18:50, significantly higher than living room (22.99°C) and bedroom (22.00°C), indicating a strong heat source.",
        "C12: Kitchen temperature remained elevated (25.33-26.14°C) from 18:50 to 19:00, then slowly declined over ~40 minutes, consistent with unattended or prolonged cooking.",
        "C12: Cook surface is turned off only at 19:40, but no event shows it was turned on earlier, leaving the heat source unlogged until shutdown.",
        "C12: No smoke_co_alarm events are present in the focused chunks, even though cooking occurred; this absence raises concern for potential smoke detection failure or risk of unnoticed fire."
      ],
      "weaknesses": [
        "The smoke_co_alarm may not have triggered because cooking was controlled (no smoke), or its events are outside these chunks.",
        "The cook surface off event at 19:40 and window opening at 19:40:30 suggest a deliberate end to cooking, not an emergency."
      ]
    },
    {
      "id": "A2",
      "description": "Potential intrusion or tailgating at the front door. The sequence at 21:51 shows the front door contact closing (StateValue=true) and then the door locking automatically via 'Auto' source, but the living room occupancy sensor shows 'occupied' both before and after (21:49:10 and 21:54:10), and the bedroom occupancy remains 'occupied' throughout. No unusual entry/exit detected by contact sensor opening event, but the auto-lock event could indicate a door closure that wasn't preceded by a recorded opening, suggesting a possible tailgating or sensor manipulation.",
      "threat_type": "intrusion / tailgating",
      "evidence": [
        "C14: At 21:51:31, front_door_contact reports StateValue=true (closed), but no corresponding front_door_contact opening event (StateValue=false) is seen in the chunk, even though earlier logs (e.g., C03) show contact sensor events exist in the system.",
        "C14: Immediately after contact close, front_door_lock locks automatically (LockOperationType=0, OperationSource=Auto) at 21:51:32, suggesting a door that just closed—but no opening event is logged.",
        "C14: Living room occupancy remains 'occupied' at 21:49:10 and 21:54:10, and bedroom remains 'occupied', but there is a gap where an undetected entry could have occurred."
      ],
      "weaknesses": [
        "The missing door contact opening event could be due to data logging gaps or sensor communication issues, not necessarily an intrusion.",
        "Auto-lock triggers on door closure, and the door may have been opened earlier outside the chunk's timeframe."
      ]
    },
    {
      "id": "A3",
      "description": "Possible water leak in the kitchen. The focused chunks do not include any water_leak_detector events, but the structured signals list water_leak_detector as a target device. The kitchen temperature sensor showed a None reading at 19:41 (C12) right after the cook surface was turned off and window opened. A water leak near the sensor could cause a short or reading failure. Additionally, the dishwasher was turned on at 19:59, which could indicate a cleanup of a spill, but no leak alarm is present.",
      "threat_type": "water_leak",
      "evidence": [
        "C12: kitchen_temp_sensor reports 'None' at 19:41, which is an anomalous reading that could indicate a sensor fault or moisture exposure.",
        "C12: kitchen_dishwasher is turned on at 19:59, which could be a response to cleaning up a leak or spill after cooking, though speculative.",
        "Structured signals indicate water_leak_detector is a target device, but no events from it appear in the focused chunks, which could mean no leak or a missed event."
      ],
      "weaknesses": [
        "No explicit water_leak_detector alarm or state change evidence in the provided chunks.",
        "The None temperature reading at 19:41 could be a transient network issue rather than a sensor fault."
      ]
    }
  ],
  "most_discriminative_evidence": [
    "C12: Kitchen temperature peak of 26.14°C at 18:50 with slow decay over 50 minutes, suggesting a significant heat source like unattended cooking.",
    "C12: No smoke_co_alarm events present despite cooking activity, raising concern for sensor absence or failure.",
    "C14: Auto-lock event at 21:51:32 without a prior door contact open event, suggesting a possible undetected door opening or tailgating.",
    "C14: Normal evening wind-down pattern with lights off, AC off, bedroom light on, window closed, consistent with routine sleep preparations."
  ],
  "missing_information": [
    "Events from smoke_co_alarm across the entire day, especially during the cooking period in C12.",
    "Events from water_leak_detector sensors in kitchen or bathroom.",
    "A broader log of front_door_contact and front_door_lock events before 21:19:10 to confirm if a door opening occurred just before the chunk.",
    "Cook surface OnOff or mode events before 19:40 to confirm whether cooking was actually active.",
    "Bathroom water_leak_detector data, as bathroom occupancy was low but no leak detection is logged."
  ]
}
```

Events from water_leak_detector sensors in kitchen or bathroom.

```json
{
  "on_topic": true,
  "evidence_sufficient": true,
  "risk_of_false_alarm": "medium",
  "recommended_action": "allow_final_verdict",
  "needs_more_chunks": ["C04", "C11"],
  "missing_checks": [
    "All anomaly hypotheses correctly avoid device-fault conclusions without direct evidence (no stuck values, repeated non-recovery, or explicit alarms).",
    "The None reading from kitchen_temp_sensor at 19:41 is interpreted plausibly as transient issue, not a device fault.",
    "The auto-lock intrusion hypothesis (A2) is speculative; the missing opening event could be a logging gap."
  ],
  "supervisor_notes": [
    "Investigation is on-topic and covers the requested safety analysis.",
    "Evidence is sufficient to distinguish plausible normal routines from potential concerns (e.g., unattended cooking).",
    "False-alarm risk is medium due to the speculative intrusion hypothesis (A2) and the inference of cooking without a cook-surface on event.",
    "Recommended to allow final verdict but advise cautious wording on the intrusion hypothesis."
  ]
}
```

Investigation is on-topic and covers the requested safety analysis.

## 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": 403,
    "bedroom": 508,
    "kitchen": 304,
    "bathroom": 55,
    "entrance": 14
  },
  "attribute_frequency": {
    "MeasuredValue": 868,
    "Occupancy": 376,
    "OnOff": 19,
    "StateValue": 5,
    "LockState": 4,
    "CurrentPositionLiftPercent100ths": 2,
    "SmokeState": 1,
    "ExpressedState": 1,
    "SystemMode": 1,
    "OperationalState": 1,
    "CurrentLevel": 1
  },
  "lock_state_flips": 4,
  "occupancy_events": 376,
  "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": "2026-06-02T00:00:00",
    "end_ts": "2026-06-02T01:40:00",
    "event_count": 80,
    "rooms": {
      "living_room": 26,
      "bedroom": 24,
      "kitchen": 26,
      "bath

## 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": "behavior-sequence",
  "query_anchor": {
    "target_rooms": ["living_room", "bedroom", "kitchen", "bathroom", "entrance"],
    "target_devices": ["water_leak_detector", "onoff_light", "occupancy_sensor", "temperature_sensor", "dimmable_light", "window_covering", "contact_sensor", "door_lock", "cook_surface", "smoke_co_alarm", "dishwasher", "air_conditioner"],
    "target_question": "综合分析家庭安全状况，指出任何潜在风险"
  },
  "focus_rooms": ["kitchen", "living_room", "bathroom", "entrance"],
  "focus_devices": ["smoke_co_alarm", "water_leak_detector", "door_lock", "cook_surface", "occupancy_sensor", "contact_sensor"],
  "focus_chunk_ids": ["C03", "C12", "C14"],
  "suspected_patterns": ["厨房温度异常升高可能意味着灶具或火灾风险", "夜间门锁状态变化需确认", "卫生间漏水传感器未触发但需结合水渍逻辑核实"],
  "why_these_chunks": ["C03包含厨房温度上升趋势及潜在烹饪活动，需检查烟雾报警器相关事件", "C12中厨房温度显著高于其他房间（26.14°C），可能表明烹饪或设备异常", "C14含有入口门锁和入户门传感器事件，为门锁安全的核心时段"]
}

## Investigator
```json
{
  "normal_hypotheses": [
    {
      "id": "N1",
      "description": "Normal household activity with cooking and after-work routines. The kitchen temperature rise in C12 is consistent with a cooking event that ended, with the cook surface turned off at 19:40 and the kitchen window opened at 19:40:30 to ventilate. The door lock event at 21:51:32 is a routine auto-lock after the front door closed, part of an evening wind-down sequence.",
      "evidence": [
        "C12: kitchen_temp_sensor peaks at 26.14°C at 18:50, then steadily decreases to ~22.84°C by 19:40, consistent with cooling after cooking.",
        "C12: kitchen_cook_surface is off at 19:40, and kitchen_window_contac


温度异常上升但无合理热源（空调关闭/制冷模式，灶具关闭） 上升速度超过正常烹饪或日照导致的范围

火灾风险警报，建议住户检查该区域电器

当前数据不足，无充分证据表明家庭存在任何安全威胁或设备异常。

Explanation: 所有已检查的chunk中，温度变化正常（夜间无人时缓慢上升<2°C，符合HVAC循环规律），无局部过热或异常热源。

Explanation: 烟雾/CO报警器、水泄漏检测器均无任何报警或事件触发，排除火灾、燃气泄漏和水漏风险。

Explanation: 门锁翻转5次，但仅2次有可视化chunk佐证为正常进出（16:04和18:01手动解锁），其余3次缺乏数据，无法判断是否为异常事件，但无相关报警或冲突事件支持入侵结论。

Explanation: 厨房灶具在18:20打开后，温度无异常上升，且室内有人，属于正常烹饪活动，无安全风险。

Explanation: 厨房温度传感器在18:21单次读取为None后立即恢复，非持续性故障，不构成设备异常。

Explanation: 根据supervisor指示，证据不充分但非拒绝判断，因无任何实质异常证据，判断为无异常，但置信度低。

所有烟雾/CO/水漏报警器均无事件触发 夜间所有房间无人，温度缓慢上升<2°C，符合HVAC正常循环 门锁翻转5次，但可见的2次均为手动解锁后正常进出，无异常模式 厨房灶具开启后温度未上升，厨房无人时无异常温度

补充检查剩余chunk（C02、C04-C13、C15等）以确认剩余3次门锁翻转详情

确认厨房灶具在18:40之后是否有关闭事件

检查entrance_occupancy每5分钟重复上报是否为传感器心跳机制所致

若需更高置信度，可补充温度阈值和HVAC设定点信息

当前数据不足，无充分证据表明家庭存在任何安全威胁或设备异常。

确认厨房灶具在18:40之后是否有关闭事件

若需更高置信度，可补充温度阈值和HVAC设定点信息

家庭当前的安全状况和潜在风险

夜间温度持续上升 无人时段温度变化 门锁状态翻转

家庭当前的安全状况和潜在风险

夜间温度持续上升 无人时段温度变化 门锁状态翻转

正常夜间温度波动，所有房间无人，温度缓慢上升约0.5°C后回落，属于HVAC系统正常循环。

厨房温度在夜间始终与其他房间一致（差距＜0.3°C），没有局部加热迹象

上升幅度虽小，但所有房间同步上升，不能完全排除环境因素影响，但无警报事件佐证异常

在C16（17:55-18:40）中，18:01:00再次手动解锁，随后门口占用、客厅灯和空调开机，是回家流程

entrance_occupancy在C14和C16中每5分钟重复触发（如16:19:03、16:24:03等），但每次均为raw=1，且前后有门锁和接触事件，不表示多人进出

总共5次锁翻转，但当前chunks只能看到2次（C14和C16各1次），剩余3次未提供，无法确认是否合理

厨房灶具在18:20打开，属于正常烹饪活动，温度未异常升高且无烟雾/CO报警。

C16中18:20:30厨房灶具打开（OnOff.OnOff = on），同时厨房灯也打开（18:20），是正常烹饪

厨房温度在灶具打开前后变化微弱（18:20的23.22°C vs 18:25的23.18°C，仅-0.04°C），没有过热

烟雾/CO报警器（SmokeState）在整个数据中仅出现1次且无具体事件，无火灾风险证据

厨房温度传感器在18:21时读取为None，可能是传感器偶发无响应，但未持续，不是故障

夜间连续6小时（00:00-05:30）所有房间无人，但温度缓慢上升0.5°C，持续到05:25才出现日峰值24.64°C（live_room），可能暗示空调/加热系统在无人时无效运行或遗留加热设备，但幅度过小不足以构成火险。

C00到C03期间所有房间occupancy均为0（无人在家），但所有温度传感器同步从22.75°C上升到24.64°C（24.64 - 22.75 = 1.89°C），上升幅度虽小但持续5小时

厨房温度在05:10达到24.37°C（2437），仅次于卧室，但无灶具或烟雾事件

温度上升幅度（<2°C）在夏季夜间HVAC循环或建筑散热的正常范围内

整个数据中无任何烟雾、CO或灶具相关事件（SmokeState仅1次，OperationalState仅1次），排除火险

门锁状态翻转共5次，但目前只观察到2次正常回家操作，余下3次可能涉及未授权开锁或入侵，但缺乏证据。

Structured Signals中lock_state_flips = 5，但C14和C16合计只有2次解锁（16:04和18:01），剩余3次无对应chunks

缺少剩余3次翻转的时间与锁状态信息，无法判断是多次进出、误报还是重复事件 已知的2次解锁都有接触传感器开门和占用传感器跟踪，是正常流程 传感器每5分钟重复上报占用是典型的心跳/保持活动机制，不表示多次通过

厨房温度传感器在18:21返回None，但灶具刚打开且其他房间温度正常，可能是传感器临时通信故障，不影响安全结论。

同一时刻其他房间温度传感器正常工作（living：23.07，master：23.08）

后续18:25及之后厨房传感器恢复读数（23.18、23.08），未持续故障

仅单次None读数，且立即恢复，不是stuck或持续性故障 灶具打开后附近温度未异常升高，传感器恢复后正常，无实际风险

整个数据中SmokeState仅出现1次且无具体事件值，OperationalState仅1次，缺乏任何烟雾、CO、水漏警报，排除火灾与泄漏风险

门锁翻转5次但只有2次有可视化事件，无法判断其余3次是否为重复或未授权

所有房间在00:00-05:30持续无人，温度上升<2°C，属于正常HVAC循环，无异常热源

厨房灶具在有人时短时使用，温度未上升，无危险

需要检查C01、C03、C16之外的其他chunk（如C02、C04-C13、C15等）以获取剩余的3次锁状态翻转（时间、锁状态值），以及任何烟雾/CO/水漏/灶具事件

需要确认夜间厨房温度传感器是否在无人时记录到局部高温（与C00-C03对比）

需要知道整栋房屋的居住者数量，以判断entrance_occupancy重复是否对应多人进出

缺乏温度阈值或HVAC设置点信息，无法判断0.5°C上升是否由空调设定造成

厨房温度在夜间始终与其他房间一致（差距＜0.3°C），没有局部加热迹象

厨房灶具在18:20打开，属于正常烹饪活动，温度未异常升高且无烟雾/CO报警。

温度上升幅度（<2°C）在夏季夜间HVAC循环或建筑散热的正常范围内

后续18:25及之后厨房传感器恢复读数（23.18、23.08），未持续故障

门锁翻转5次但只有2次有可视化事件，无法判断其余3次是否为重复或未授权

厨房灶具在有人时短时使用，温度未上升，无危险

需要确认夜间厨房温度传感器是否在无人时记录到局部高温（与C00-C03对比）

缺乏温度阈值或HVAC设置点信息，无法判断0.5°C上升是否由空调设定造成

```json
{
  "on_topic": true,
  "evidence_sufficient": false,
  "risk_of_false_alarm": "low",
  "recommended_action": "refine_investigation",
  "needs_more_chunks": ["C02", "C04", "C05", "C06", "C07", "C08", "C09", "C10", "C11", "C12", "C13", "C15"],
  "missing_checks": [
    "需检查C02、C04-C13等缺失chunk，以确认剩余的3次门锁状态翻转的具体时间和锁状态值",
    "需要查看C02、C04等夜间时段是否有任何烟雾/CO报警器事件或异常事件",
    "需要确认厨房灶具在18:20之后是否有关闭事件，当前C16在18:40截止时灶具仍为打开状态",
    "需要检查是否有水泄漏检测器事件或状态变化",
    "需要确认夜间时段（如C02、C03）厨房温度与其它房间对比是否有异常局部升温",
    "需要检查entrance_occupancy在C14和C16中每5分钟重复上报是否因传感器心跳机制而非真实占用变化"
  ],
  "supervisor_notes": [
    "温度读数使用Matter标准表示（centi-Celsius），Investigator正确解读，无false-alarm风险。",
    "夜间温度上升<2°C，无局灶异常或报警事件，排除火灾风险，分析合理。",
    "门锁翻转5次但仅2次有chunk可查，剩余3次仍未知，证据不足，不可过早得出正常结论。",
    "厨房温度传感器单次None读数立即恢复，不是故障，结论合理。",
    "整体分析思路正确，但受限于chunk样本覆盖不全（仅4个chunk），需扩展查更多chunk方可做最终判断。"
  ]
}
```

需检查C02、C04-C13等缺失chunk，以确认剩余的3次门锁状态翻转的具体时间和锁状态值

需要查看C02、C04等夜间时段是否有任何烟雾/CO报警器事件或异常事件

需要确认厨房灶具在18:20之后是否有关闭事件，当前C16在18:40截止时灶具仍为打开状态

需要检查是否有水泄漏检测器事件或状态变化

需要确认夜间时段（如C02、C03）厨房温度与其它房间对比是否有异常局部升温

夜间温度上升<2°C，无局灶异常或报警事件，排除火灾风险，分析合理。

门锁翻转5次但仅2次有chunk可查，剩余3次仍未知，证据不足，不可过早得出正常结论。

厨房温度传感器单次None读数立即恢复，不是故障，结论合理。

正常家庭活动模式：凌晨无人活动，温度稳定；下午有人回家并进入主卧室，门锁由手动开锁，符合正常回家流程。

C00显示00:00-01:20所有房间无人，温度在22.6-23.1°C之间小幅波动，符合夜间无人空调稳定状态。

C14中15:54:21入口有人，随后16:04:00门锁手动解锁，16:04:02前门接触传感器显示打开，然后入口继续显示有人，符合正常开门进入。

C14中16:00-16:50主卧室持续有人，可能是住户在室内活动。

所有温度传感器在15:55达到日高峰约24.0-24.1°C后逐渐下降至23.7°C，符合下午气温自然变化。

未能解释门口占用传感器在16:04之后每5分钟重复触发‘有人’事件，可能为传感器过于灵敏或重复报告。

未提供烟雾、一氧化碳、水浸等安全传感器的任何事件，可能被忽略而非真的安全。

可能的尾随入侵：16:04门锁手动解锁后频繁触发入口占用事件，可能有人闯入且多次通过门口。

16:04:00门锁手动打开，16:04:02前门接触传感器状态变为false（门打开），之后入口占用传感器在16:04:03、16:09:03、16:14:03、16:19:03等每5分钟重复报告‘有人’，频率异常（共8次占用事件）。

入口占用传感器在16:04之后持续报告有人，但客厅、次卧、浴室占用为0，只有主卧室有人的同时入口仍反复触发，可能表示有除住户外的另一个人多次经过门口。

没有直接证据显示多个不同的人或未授权行为（如无钥匙开锁事件）。 占用传感器可能过于灵敏或由于门开合气流导致反复触发。

无人时段温度持续上升——凌晨01:05-01:20温度从约22.7°C升至约23.1°C，可能异常（如电器未关或火源）。

厨房温度在01:10达到23.00°C，高于午夜平均值，怀疑有热源在凌晨工作。

温度上升幅度很小（约0.3-0.4°C），可能在正常空调波动范围内。

没有烟雾报警器或厨房灶具有开关事件的直接记录。

无人时段厨房温度异常上升——凌晨00:35-00:50厨房温度达到22.94-22.96°C，比其他房间偏高，可能电器未关或遗忘灶具。

C00中00:35-00:50厨房温度从22.78°C升至22.96°C（raw=2296），且其他房间温度未同步升高，存在局部升温。

所有房间在00:30和01:00仍然无人，可能灶具被遗忘。

温度差异极小（0.2°C），可能是传感器测量偏差。

无灶具或烟雾报警事件记录。

C14中16:04:00门锁手动解锁，16:04:02前门接触打开，然后入口占用事件每5分钟重复频繁报告有人（共8次），与正常单一进入不符。

C00中01:05至01:20温度在无人时段缓慢上升约0.3°C，且厨房局部升温0.2°C。

无任何烟雾、一氧化碳、水浸传感器的事件，无法排除这些隐患。 无厨房灶具（cook_surface）的事件，无法确认是否无人时段使用。 门锁5次翻转的具体时间分布未知，无法判断是否为正常进出。 入口占用事件的时间戳完整序列未知，无法确认是否有人在门口走动。

C14中16:00-16:50主卧室持续有人，可能是住户在室内活动。

未提供烟雾、一氧化碳、水浸等安全传感器的任何事件，可能被忽略而非真的安全。

厨房温度在01:10达到23.00°C，高于午夜平均值，怀疑有热源在凌晨工作。

温度上升幅度很小（约0.3-0.4°C），可能在正常空调波动范围内。

没有烟雾报警器或厨房灶具有开关事件的直接记录。

所有房间在00:30和01:00仍然无人，可能灶具被遗忘。

温度差异极小（0.2°C），可能是传感器测量偏差。

无灶具或烟雾报警事件记录。

厨房温度在夜间始终与其他房间一致（差距＜0.3°C），没有局部加热迹象

厨房灶具在18:20打开，属于正常烹饪活动，温度未异常升高且无烟雾/CO报警。

烟雾/CO报警器（SmokeState）在整个数据中仅出现1次且无具体事件，无火灾风险证据

厨房温度在05:10达到24.37°C（2437），仅次于卧室，但无灶具或烟雾事件

温度上升幅度（<2°C）在夏季夜间HVAC循环或建筑散热的正常范围内

同一时刻其他房间温度传感器正常工作（living：23.07，master：23.08）

后续18:25及之后厨房传感器恢复读数（23.18、23.08），未持续故障

门锁翻转5次但只有2次有可视化事件，无法判断其余3次是否为重复或未授权

厨房灶具在有人时短时使用，温度未上升，无危险

需要确认夜间厨房温度传感器是否在无人时记录到局部高温（与C00-C03对比）

缺乏温度阈值或HVAC设置点信息，无法判断0.5°C上升是否由空调设定造成

厨房温度在夜间始终与其他房间一致（差距＜0.3°C），没有局部加热迹象

厨房灶具在18:20打开，属于正常烹饪活动，温度未异常升高且无烟雾/CO报警。

温度上升幅度（<2°C）在夏季夜间HVAC循环或建筑散热的正常范围内

后续18:25及之后厨房传感器恢复读数（23.18、23.08），未持续故障

门锁翻转5次但只有2次有可视化事件，无法判断其余3次是否为重复或未授权

厨房灶具在有人时短时使用，温度未上升，无危险

需要确认夜间厨房温度传感器是否在无人时记录到局部高温（与C00-C03对比）

缺乏温度阈值或HVAC设置点信息，无法判断0.5°C上升是否由空调设定造成

No smoke/CO alarm events or cook_surface events during the entire day, cannot confirm fire/CO risk.

No water_leak_detector events appear in available data.

Exact timing of 5 lock state flips unknown (only 1 flip visible).

Entrance occupancy events might be due to sensor repetition (timer-based reporting), not repeated real entries.

No evidence of multiple distinct individuals.

Overnight temperature rise less than 0.5°C, within normal HVAC drift.

Missing chunks C01/C03 to check for any smoke/CO/cook events or other lock activity.

Investigator correctly focuses on device-health and composite-safety, on-topic.

A1 intrusion hypothesis is weak: repeated entrance occupancy after door open is likely sensor re-trigger (every 5 minutes, same raw=1), not evidence of multiple passes. No unauthenticated entry events.

A2/A3 temperature anomalies are very small (< 0.5°C) and could be normal fluctuations; no direct fire evidence.

No smoke/CO/water-leak events in focused chunks and missing chunks; large evidence gap.

False-alarm risk high because anomaly claims rely on speculative temporal patterns without corroborating safety device events.

Recommend refine: request chunks with smoke/CO/lock/cook events before final verdict.

需要查看C02、C04等夜间时段是否有任何烟雾/CO报警器事件或异常事件

需要检查是否有水泄漏检测器事件或状态变化

需要确认夜间时段（如C02、C03）厨房温度与其它房间对比是否有异常局部升温

夜间温度上升<2°C，无局灶异常或报警事件，排除火灾风险，分析合理。

厨房温度传感器单次None读数立即恢复，不是故障，结论合理。

## 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: 两室一厅 (2BR)
- balcony: 洗衣机<laundry_washer>, 阳台灯<onoff_light>, 阳台门传感器<contact_sensor>
- 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>
- entrance: 入户门传感器<contact_sensor>, 入户门锁<door_lock>, 玄关灯<onoff_light>, 玄关运动传感器<occupancy_sensor>
- 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>, 客厅落地灯<onoff_light>, 客厅运动传感器<occupancy_sensor>
- master_bedroom: 主卧温度传感器<temperature_sensor>, 主卧灯<dimmable_light>, 主卧空调<air_conditioner>, 主卧窗帘<window_covering>, 主卧窗户传感器<contact_sensor>, 主卧运动传感器<occupancy_sensor>
- second_bedroom: 次卧温度传感器<temperature_sensor>, 次卧灯<dimmable_light>, 次卧窗帘<window_covering>, 次卧窗户传感器<contact_sensor>, 次卧运动传感器<occupancy_sensor>

## Deterministic Signals
{
  "room_activity": {
    "living_room": 403,
    "master_bedroom": 515,
    "second_bedroom": 336,
    "kitchen": 304,
    "bathroom": 48,
    "entrance": 228
  },
  "attribute_frequency": {
    "MeasuredValue": 1158,
    "Occupancy": 640,
    "OnOff": 15,
    "StateValue": 7,
    "LockState": 5,
    "SmokeState": 1,
    "SystemMode": 1,
    "OperationalState": 1,
    "CurrentPositionLiftPercent100ths": 1
  },
  "lock_state_flips": 5,
  "occupancy_events": 640,
  "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 +

## 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": "device-health",
  "secondary_task_profile": "composite-safety",
  "query_anchor": {
    "target_rooms": ["living_room", "master_bedroom", "second_bedroom", "kitchen", "bathroom", "entrance"],
    "target_devices": ["temperature_sensor", "occupancy_sensor", "onoff_light", "contact_sensor", "door_lock", "water_leak_detector", "smoke_co_alarm", "cook_surface", "dishwasher", "air_conditioner", "window_covering"],
    "target_question": "家庭当前的安全状况和潜在风险"
  },
  "focus_rooms": ["kitchen", "living_room", "master_bedroom", "bathroom", "entrance"],
  "focus_devices": ["kitchen_temp_sensor", "cook_surface", "smoke_co_alarm", "water_leak_detector", "door_lock", "contact_sensor"],
  "focus_chunk_ids": ["C00", "C14"],
  "suspected_patterns": ["夜间温度持续上升", "无人时段温度变化", "门锁状态翻转"],
  "why_these_chunks": [
    "C00提供基线数据（00:00-01:20），显示所有传感器初始状态和温度起点约22.7°C，所有房间无人，便于后续对比异常。",
    "C14（15:54-16:50）展示温度达到日最高峰后开始下降，且仍保持有人状态，配合其他chunk可分析全天温度曲线是否合理。",
    "需结合多个chunk检测厨房灶具/烟雾报警器是否在无人时段（如C00-C03）有异常事件，以及门锁状态翻转次数（5次）是否意味着异常出入。"
  ]
}

## Investigator
{
  "normal_hypotheses": [
    {
      "id": "N1",
      "description": "正常夜间温度波动，所有房间无人，温度缓慢上升约0.5°C后回落，属于HVAC系统正常循环。",
      "evidence": [
        "从C00 00:00的22.75°C（2275）到C01 02:30的23.53°C（2353）上升不足1°C，且02:40后开始回落，符合夜间空调/供暖周期性工作",
        "所有房间在C00（00:00-01:20）、C01（01:30-02:30）和C03（04:30-05:00）的occupancy均为未占用（0），持续无人，因此没有行为异常",
        "厨房温度在夜间始终与其他房间一致（差距＜0.3°C），没有局部加热迹象"
      ],
      "weaknesses": [
        "上升幅度虽小，但所有房间同步上升，不能完全排除环境因素影响，但无警报事件佐证异常"
      ]
    },
    {
      "id": "N2",
      "description": "门锁翻转5次为正常出入事件，每次锁操作后均有关联的接触传感器状态变化和占用事件，无暴力闯入迹象。",
      "evidence": [


凌晨2:30-2:40短时间内多房间连续活动 活动轨迹：客厅→厨房→玄关（像在搜索什么） 卧室全程无活动（住户在睡觉），这些活动不是住户产生的 注意区分：如果卧室先有活动再到其他房间，则可能是住户起夜

厨房温度升高与灶具使用、开窗降温一致，无火灾风险；烟雾/CO报警器无事件但缺乏故障证据，属信息缺失而非异常；整体安全状况正常。

Explanation: 厨房温度在18:10（25.15°C）已高于其他房间（约23.1°C）约2°C，但灶具于18:56才开启，温度提前上升可能源于其他未记录的热源（如烤箱预热、微波炉使用等），且峰值仅27.17°C，远低于火灾临界值。

Explanation: 18:56灶具开启后温度持续上升至27.17°C峰值，随后自然回落，19:54灶具关闭，19:54:30窗户打开，温度迅速恢复正常，形成完整的烹饪—通风—恢复过程，符合正常烹饪行为。

Explanation: 烟雾/CO报警器在整个18:10-20:05期间无任何事件记录，但无事件不等于设备故障，且缺乏报警器自检、状态或故障事件，不能推断为安全设备失效。

Explanation: 18:57和19:55厨房温度传感器出现两次None值，但均无伴随故障码或恢复事件，根据Matter notes，不能仅凭温度和None值推断传感器故障。

Explanation: 调查员提出的A1（火灾风险）、A2（传感器故障）、A3（全局行为异常）假设均缺乏直接、确凿的证据，且N1（正常烹饪）解释与时空事件链一致，故优先采纳正常假设。

Explanation: 全局温度缓升（00:00-06:40约2.4°C）同步且平稳，属于正常昼夜节律或供暖运行，无异常风险。

19:54灶具关闭，19:54:30厨房窗户打开，19:55后厨房温度降至22.62°C与其他房间一致

烟雾/CO报警器全天无事件或故障记录

厨房温度传感器在18:57和19:55出现None值，无伴随故障事件

确认烟雾/CO报警器设备状态及自检日志，确保功能正常 检查厨房温度传感器通信稳定性，确认None值是否由网络瞬断引起 查看厨房是否有其他未记录的热源（如烤箱、微波炉）日志 建议维护设备日志完整性，确保未来事件可追溯

烟雾/CO报警器全天无事件或故障记录

厨房温度传感器在18:57和19:55出现None值，无伴随故障事件

综合所有信息判断家庭当前的安全状况，指出任何潜在风险

厨房温度异常升高（18:10-19:10 厨房温度从25.15C升至25.78C，明显高于其他房间）

厨房温度回落缓慢（19:10后仍维持在24.55C）

其他房间温度平稳，无全局异常

综合所有信息判断家庭当前的安全状况，指出任何潜在风险

厨房温度回落缓慢（19:10后仍维持在24.55C）

其他房间温度平稳，无全局异常

```json
{
  "normal_hypotheses": [
    {
      "id": "N1",
      "description": "厨房温度升高是由于正常的烹饪活动。用户于18:10进入厨房，启动灶具，烹饪导致短时温度上升，随后灶具关闭、开窗通风，温度恢复正常。整个过程中烟雾/一氧化碳报警器未触发，说明无危险情况。",
      "evidence": [
        "18:10:03 entrance_occupancy=occupied，18:10:08 living_room_occupancy=occupied，表明有人进入房间并可能前往厨房。",
        "18:56:30 kitchen_cook_surface=on，确认启动灶具，与温度上升时间窗口一致。",
        "厨房温度从18:10的25.15C升至18:30的27.17C峰值，随后开始回落，符合烹饪后散热模式。",
        "19:54:00 kitchen_cook_surface=off，灶具关闭。",
        "19:54:30 kitchen_window_contact=StateValue false（窗户打开），表明有人主动通风降温。",
        "19:55后厨房温度快速降至22.62C，与其他房间（~22.6C）一致，恢复正常。",
        "在18:10-19:54期间，living_room_occupancy和entrance_occupancy持续为occupied，表明有人在活动并可能监控烹饪过程。",
        "没有烟雾报警器或一氧化碳报警器被触发的记录。"
      ],
      "weaknesses": [
        "缺少烟雾/一氧化碳报警器在任何时间点的状态事件报告，无法确认报警器是否正常工作。",
        "厨房温度在灶具启动前（18:10已25.15C vs 其他房间23.1C）就已经异常升高，难以用灶具开启解释。",
        "厨房温度传感器在18:57和19:55两次出现None值，原因不明。",
        "没有厨房占用传感器的直接数据来确认18:10-18:56期间是否有烹饪操作。"
      ]
    }
  ],
  "anomaly_hypotheses": [
    {
      "id": "A1",
      "description": "存在未看管烹饪或火灾风险：厨房温度在灶具开启前已显著高于其他房间（18:10时25.15C vs 其他房间23.1-23.2C），且灶具直到18:56才开启，温度提前上升可能另有热源（如遗忘的慢炖锅/保温设备）或传感器故障。同时，烟雾/一氧化碳报警器在整个事件中无任何状态记录，可能故障或未安装。",
      "threat_type": "fire_risk",
      "evidence": [
        "18:10 kitchen_temp=25.15C，其他房间均为23.13-23.18C，温差约2C，且在灶具开启前18:56就已存在。",
        "18:15-18:30厨房温度持续上升至27.17C峰值，而其他房间稳定在23.0C左右，温差达4C。",
        "烟雾/一氧化碳报警器在18:00-20:05期间无任何事件记录，无法确认是否正常工作或存在。",
        "厨房温度在19:55后快速恢复正常（22.62C）并伴随开窗事件，表明可能是在事件后才采取通风措施。",
        "18:57和19:55 kitchen_temp_sensor出现None值，可能表明传感器受高温影响或连接不稳定。"
      ],
      "weaknesses": [
        "温度峰值27.17C远低于火灾临界温度，仅凭温度不足以确认火灾。",
        "灶具在19:54关闭且窗户打开，温度迅速恢复，未造成实际损害。",
        "缺乏厨房占用传感器数据，无法确认18:10-18:56期间是否有人在场看管。",
        "温度提前上升可能是其他未记录的事件（如使用微波炉、烤箱预热），但日志中无相关记录。"
      ]
    },
    {
      "id": "A2",
      "description": "厨房温度传感器可能存在间歇性故障，导致读数异常偏高，尤其体现在灶具开启前温差就已存在、以及两次None值。",
      "threat_type": "sensor_malfunction",
      "evidence": [
        "18:10厨房传感器读数25.15C，远高于其他房间的23.13-23.17C，而此时灶具尚未开启（18:56才开启）。",
        "18:57和19:55厨房温度传感器两次报告None值，同时段其他房间传感器正常工作，表明该传感器存在通信或硬件问题。",
        "温度上升模式不典型：在灶具开启前就已偏高，且在灶具开启后上升速率并非剧烈（25.15→27.17在20分钟内），可能与实际烹饪热源不完全匹配。"
      ],
      "weaknesses": [
        "温度偏差仅约2C，未超出合理误差范围，且传感器在其余时段读数与其他房间一致（如05:00-06:00期间约24.4-24.9C）。",
        "None值可能由网络瞬断导致，无伴随错误码或故障事件，无法确认为硬件故障。",
        "Matter notes明确指出‘scaled temperature values alone are not enough to infer device fault’。"
      ]
    },
    {
      "id": "A3",
      "description": "家庭全局温度在凌晨至清晨期间持续缓慢上升（约从22.7C升至25.0C），虽属正常昼夜节律，但可能与供暖系统、人员活动或气候有关，需排除异常持续加热或系统故障。",
      "threat_type": "behavioral_anomaly",
      "evidence": [
        "00:00-06:40期间所有房间温度从约22.6C逐步上升至约25.0C，升幅约2.4C。",
        "02:30-03:00期间living_room_occupancy和entrance_occupancy有活动，且living_room_light_1和kitchen_light开启，表明有人活动可能导致升温。",
        "02:35后温度持续上升，但未超过舒适范围上限。"
      ],
      "weaknesses": [
        "温度上升平滑且所有房间同步，更符合自然昼夜升温或供热系统运行。",
        "无烟雾/CO报警触发，无异常高温点，风险低。"
      ]
    }
  ],
  "most_discriminative_evidence": [
    "18:10 kitchen_temp=25.15C vs other rooms ~23.1C, with cook surface OFF until 18:56 - suggests either pre-existing heat source or sensor anomaly",
    "No smoke/CO alarm events during entire 18:10-20:05 period - safety device status unknown",
    "18:57 and 19:55 kitchen_temp_sensor reports None - potential sensor communication issue",
    "19:54:30 kitchen_window_contact=StateValue false (window opened) - mitigation action taken"
  ],
  "missing_information": [
    "烟雾/一氧化碳报警器的设备状态（正常/故障/低电量）及18:10-19:55期间是否触发过警戒事件",
    "厨房占用传感器在18:10-19:50期间的状态，是否显示有人在场",
    "厨房温度传感器两次None值是否伴随错误码、故障事件或恢复事件",
    "灶具在18:56开启前的运行模式记录（如保温、慢炖等），以及当前烹饪状态",
    "厨房窗户在19:54:30之前的完整状态历史",
    "所有传感器设备的自检日志和电池状态"
  ]
}
```

厨房温度从18:10的25.15C升至18:30的27.17C峰值，随后开始回落，符合烹饪后散热模式。

19:55后厨房温度快速降至22.62C，与其他房间（~22.6C）一致，恢复正常。

没有烟雾报警器或一氧化碳报警器被触发的记录。

缺少烟雾/一氧化碳报警器在任何时间点的状态事件报告，无法确认报警器是否正常工作。

厨房温度传感器在18:57和19:55两次出现None值，原因不明。

没有厨房占用传感器的直接数据来确认18:10-18:56期间是否有烹饪操作。

18:15-18:30厨房温度持续上升至27.17C峰值，而其他房间稳定在23.0C左右，温差达4C。

烟雾/一氧化碳报警器在18:00-20:05期间无任何事件记录，无法确认是否正常工作或存在。

厨房温度在19:55后快速恢复正常（22.62C）并伴随开窗事件，表明可能是在事件后才采取通风措施。

温度峰值27.17C远低于火灾临界温度，仅凭温度不足以确认火灾。

灶具在19:54关闭且窗户打开，温度迅速恢复，未造成实际损害。

缺乏厨房占用传感器数据，无法确认18:10-18:56期间是否有人在场看管。

温度提前上升可能是其他未记录的事件（如使用微波炉、烤箱预热），但日志中无相关记录。

None值可能由网络瞬断导致，无伴随错误码或故障事件，无法确认为硬件故障。

00:00-06:40期间所有房间温度从约22.6C逐步上升至约25.0C，升幅约2.4C。

02:35后温度持续上升，但未超过舒适范围上限。

温度上升平滑且所有房间同步，更符合自然昼夜升温或供热系统运行。 无烟雾/CO报警触发，无异常高温点，风险低。

烟雾/一氧化碳报警器的设备状态（正常/故障/低电量）及18:10-19:55期间是否触发过警戒事件

厨房占用传感器在18:10-19:50期间的状态，是否显示有人在场

厨房温度传感器两次None值是否伴随错误码、故障事件或恢复事件

灶具在18:56开启前的运行模式记录（如保温、慢炖等），以及当前烹饪状态

厨房窗户在19:54:30之前的完整状态历史

所有传感器设备的自检日志和电池状态

```json
{
  "on_topic": true,
  "evidence_sufficient": false,
  "risk_of_false_alarm": "high",
  "recommended_action": "refine_investigation",
  "needs_more_chunks": ["C14", "C17", "C18", "C19", "C20"],
  "missing_checks": [
    "厨房温度传感器在18:10之前（例如C14）的读数记录，用于确认温差是突发的还是积累的",
    "烟雾/一氧化碳报警器在全天（尤其是C14-C17时段）的任何事件记录或状态更新",
    "厨房占用传感器在18:10-19:54期间的状态，以确认是否有人在场看管",
    "厨房灶具在18:56之前是否有其他烹饪设备（如烤箱、微波炉）的相关记录",
    "厨房窗户在19:54:30之前的完整状态历史，以判断是否为临时通风措施",
    "温度传感器None值是否伴随任何故障码或恢复事件",
    "C17-C20时段厨房温度及灶具的后续状态，确认温度是否彻底恢复正常且无复燃风险"
  ],
  "supervisor_notes": [
    "初始温度异常（18:10 kitchen_temp=25.15C vs 其他房间~23.1C）在灶具开启（18:56）前就已存在，若未查C14之前的基线数据，则温度异常可能被过度解读为火灾风险。",
    "烟雾/CO报警器在整个事件窗口内无事件，但无事件不等于故障——报警器可能正常运行但未触发。需要检查其全天状态日志或自检事件。",
    "Matter notes明确指出单纯缩放温度值不足以判定设备故障（sensor malfunction），但A2假设的核心依据是温度异常和None值，缺少具体故障事件佐证。",
    "厨房灶具在18:56开启、19:54关闭，温度峰值仅27.17C，远低于火灾临界值（通常>50C），且温度回落配合开窗行为合理，火灾风险被高估。",
    "全局温度缓升（00:00-06:40从~22.6C升至~25.0C）所有房间同步，属于正常昼夜节律或供暖系统运行，A3假设证据不足且风险低，可忽略。",
    "需要更多时段（C14之前、C17之后）来确认厨房温度异常是否持续、传感器None值是否孤立事件，以及烟雾报警器是否正常工作。",
    "调查员对全局温度异常（A3）的重视程度过高，且对灶具开启前温度异常的解释（N1 weakness中提到）被正确识别，但应优先补充数据而非直接下结论。"
  ]
}
```

厨房温度传感器在18:10之前（例如C14）的读数记录，用于确认温差是突发的还是积累的

烟雾/一氧化碳报警器在全天（尤其是C14-C17时段）的任何事件记录或状态更新

厨房占用传感器在18:10-19:54期间的状态，以确认是否有人在场看管

厨房灶具在18:56之前是否有其他烹饪设备（如烤箱、微波炉）的相关记录

厨房窗户在19:54:30之前的完整状态历史，以判断是否为临时通风措施

温度传感器None值是否伴随任何故障码或恢复事件

C17-C20时段厨房温度及灶具的后续状态，确认温度是否彻底恢复正常且无复燃风险

厨房温度升高是正常烹饪活动所致，家人随后采取措施排烟降温，最终恢复正常。

18:56厨房灯和灶具先后开启，直接表明有人在烹饪。

18:10至18:30厨房温度从25.15°C升至27.17°C，与其他房间（~23.1°C）的温差合理，符合烹饪加热特征。

19:10至19:55，厨房温度从24.55°C持续降至22.62°C，显示热量正在消散。

19:54灶具关闭，19:54:30厨房窗户打开（接触传感器为false，表示开启），主动通风降温。

19:55后厨房温度与其他房间趋于一致（~22.6°C），表明环境已恢复。

18:57和19:55厨房温度传感器短暂报告None，可能是系统正常的数据缺失，不影响整体趋势。

厨房温度传感器在18:57和19:55出现两次None值，虽短暂但缺乏故障或恢复日志以完全排除传感器间歇性问题。

烟雾报警器和一氧化碳报警器在此时间段无任何事件，如果烹饪产生烟雾，报警理应在灶具开启后触发。缺少这些报警记录是正常假设的潜在漏洞。

厨房存在灶具无人看管且通风不足的火灾风险：厨房温度异常陡升后，虽有关闭行为，但缺乏烟雾/一氧化碳报警响应，可能报警器故障或损坏。

18:10-18:30厨房温度从25.15°C快速升至27.17°C，升温速率约1.0°C/5分钟，远超其他房间（波动<0.2°C），表明灶具持续加热。

18:30-18:40厨房温度维持在27°C左右，未见立即降温措施。

18:56灶具和灯才开启，但温度在此之前已剧烈上升，暗示灶具可能在更早（18:10前）已开启，存在无人看管时段。

整个烹饪期间（18:10-19:54）无烟雾报警器或一氧化碳报警器任何事件，若报警器正常工作，高温烹饪应触发警报，异常沉默暗示报警器失效或不存在。

19:54才关闭灶具，距离温度峰值已超过1小时，响应延迟。

19:54:30窗户开启，但此前厨房温度虽已回落但仍高于室温，通风依赖单一窗户，排烟效率存疑。

烟雾/一氧化碳报警可能因传感器故障或位置不佳而未触发，但无直接故障日志。

灶具18:56才被记录为开启，与温度早期上升矛盾，可能日志记录延迟或灶具之前在其他模式下运行（如慢炖）。

厨房温度回落曲线与自然冷却或开窗后降温吻合，未达到火灾临界值（如>50°C）。

居住者可能因跌倒或健康问题导致烹饪后长时间未响应：烹饪结束时（19:54）厨房无人操作，但此前温度高企，可能居住者不适。

18:30-18:40厨房温度最高达27.17°C，但此后一个多小时才关闭灶具（19:54），期间无厨房占用传感器事件记录，假设有人在厨房却无额外触发。

19:30卧室占用为unoccupied，但厨房和客厅无占用事件变化，居住者可能停留在厨房以外区域或失去意识。

19:54灶具关闭后窗户被打开，但动作时间点较晚，表明居住者可能行动迟缓或需要帮助。

19:55厨房温度传感器再次显示None，可能因设备不稳定或人为触碰导致异常。

无跌倒检测传感器或紧急按钮触发，厨房占用传感器未提供额外数据。

居住者可能只是短暂离开厨房（如回客厅），且客厅占用始终为occupied（18:10至20:05持续），因此人可能在客厅休息。

厨房占用传感器数据缺失，无法确认是否真有人在厨房内。

灶具在18:56被记录为开启，但温度在此之前已明显上升。

整个烹饪期间无烟雾报警器或一氧化碳报警器任何事件。

19:54灶具关闭，19:54:30窗户打开，温度随后回落至正常。

厨房烟雾报警器和一氧化碳报警器的状态事件。 厨房占用传感器在18:10-19:54期间的具体读数。 灶具开启时间（18:56）之前是否已有其他热源。 厨房窗户状态在19:54:30之前是否已开启。 厨房温度传感器在18:57和19:55的None值是否伴随错误代码。 居住者的身份或位置确认（是否有人在厨房监控烹饪）。

厨房温度升高是正常烹饪活动所致，家人随后采取措施排烟降温，最终恢复正常。

18:56厨房灯和灶具先后开启，直接表明有人在烹饪。

19:55后厨房温度与其他房间趋于一致（~22.6°C），表明环境已恢复。

18:30-18:40厨房温度维持在27°C左右，未见立即降温措施。

19:54才关闭灶具，距离温度峰值已超过1小时，响应延迟。

烟雾/一氧化碳报警可能因传感器故障或位置不佳而未触发，但无直接故障日志。

厨房温度回落曲线与自然冷却或开窗后降温吻合，未达到火灾临界值（如>50°C）。

19:55厨房温度传感器再次显示None，可能因设备不稳定或人为触碰导致异常。

无跌倒检测传感器或紧急按钮触发，厨房占用传感器未提供额外数据。

厨房占用传感器数据缺失，无法确认是否真有人在厨房内。

灶具在18:56被记录为开启，但温度在此之前已明显上升。

整个烹饪期间无烟雾报警器或一氧化碳报警器任何事件。

19:54灶具关闭，19:54:30窗户打开，温度随后回落至正常。

18:56:30 kitchen_cook_surface=on，确认启动灶具，与温度上升时间窗口一致。

厨房温度从18:10的25.15C升至18:30的27.17C峰值，随后开始回落，符合烹饪后散热模式。

19:55后厨房温度快速降至22.62C，与其他房间（~22.6C）一致，恢复正常。

没有烟雾报警器或一氧化碳报警器被触发的记录。

厨房温度传感器在18:57和19:55两次出现None值，原因不明。

没有厨房占用传感器的直接数据来确认18:10-18:56期间是否有烹饪操作。

18:15-18:30厨房温度持续上升至27.17C峰值，而其他房间稳定在23.0C左右，温差达4C。

烟雾/一氧化碳报警器在18:00-20:05期间无任何事件记录，无法确认是否正常工作或存在。

厨房温度在19:55后快速恢复正常（22.62C）并伴随开窗事件，表明可能是在事件后才采取通风措施。

温度峰值27.17C远低于火灾临界温度，仅凭温度不足以确认火灾。

灶具在19:54关闭且窗户打开，温度迅速恢复，未造成实际损害。

缺乏厨房占用传感器数据，无法确认18:10-18:56期间是否有人在场看管。

None值可能由网络瞬断导致，无伴随错误码或故障事件，无法确认为硬件故障。

00:00-06:40期间所有房间温度从约22.6C逐步上升至约25.0C，升幅约2.4C。

02:35后温度持续上升，但未超过舒适范围上限。

厨房占用传感器在18:10-19:50期间的状态，是否显示有人在场

厨房温度传感器两次None值是否伴随错误码、故障事件或恢复事件

灶具在18:56开启前的运行模式记录（如保温、慢炖等），以及当前烹饪状态

厨房窗户在19:54:30之前的完整状态历史

所有传感器设备的自检日志和电池状态

```json
{
  "on_topic": true,
  "evidence_sufficient": false,
  "risk_of_false_alarm": "medium",
  "recommended_action": "refine_investigation",
  "needs_more_chunks": ["C00", "C01", "C02", "C03", "C04", "C05", "C06", "C07", "C08", "C09", "C10", "C11", "C12", "C13", "C14", "C17", "C18", "C19", "C20"],
  "missing_checks": [
    "烟雾/一氧化碳报警器的历史状态和故障自检事件",
    "厨房占用传感器在18:10-19:54期间的状态，确认是否有人在场",
    "灶具在18:56开启之前的运行模式或状态记录（如慢炖、保温等），以解释温度提前上升",
    "厨房温度传感器两次None值是否伴随错误码或恢复事件，确认是否为正常数据缺失",
    "厨房窗户在19:54:30之前的状态是否被记录，确认通风是否持续",
    "所有设备（特别是烟雾/一氧化碳报警器）的自检或电池低电量/故障日志",
    "厨房灯在18:56开启后是否持续亮着，确认是否被关闭或异常"
  ],
  "supervisor_notes": [
    "Investigator's normal hypothesis N1 is well-supported by evidence but has a significant weakness: lack of smoke/CO alarm events despite cooking. This is a coherent pattern that could indicate either normal activity or a sensor fault - the ambiguity needs more data.",
    "Anomaly hypothesis A1 (unattended cooking/fire risk) is based on reasonable cross-device inference, but the temperature rise (max 27.17°C) is far from fire-critical levels. The real risk is unattended operation and possible alarm failure, not imminent fire.",
    "The temperature rise pattern (25.15 to 27.17°C in 20 minutes) and early rise before cook surface ON event are noteworthy but not extreme. The 18:56 cook surface ON event is slightly delayed from temperature rise, which could be timing or mode issues.",
    "Critical missing data: smoke/CO alarm state events for the entire period, kitchen occupancy sensor readings, and kitchen window contact sensor history before 19:54:30. These gaps prevent definitive safety assessment.",
    "The 'None' temperature readings at 18:57 and 19:55 are suspicious but without error codes or recovery logs they remain ambiguous. This should not be used as primary evidence for device fault.",
    "Recommend requesting all available chunks (C00-C14, C17-C20) to fill evidence gaps before final verdict. Current evidence supports investigation refinement rather than final conclusion."
  ]
}
```

烟雾/一氧化碳报警器的历史状态和故障自检事件

厨房占用传感器在18:10-19:54期间的状态，确认是否有人在场

灶具在18:56开启之前的运行模式或状态记录（如慢炖、保温等），以解释温度提前上升

厨房温度传感器两次None值是否伴随错误码或恢复事件，确认是否为正常数据缺失

厨房窗户在19:54:30之前的状态是否被记录，确认通风是否持续

所有设备（特别是烟雾/一氧化碳报警器）的自检或电池低电量/故障日志

厨房灯在18:56开启后是否持续亮着，确认是否被关闭或异常

烟雾/一氧化碳报警器在全天（尤其是C14-C17时段）的任何事件记录或状态更新

厨房占用传感器在18:10-19:54期间的状态，以确认是否有人在场看管

厨房灶具在18:56之前是否有其他烹饪设备（如烤箱、微波炉）的相关记录

厨房窗户在19:54:30之前的完整状态历史，以判断是否为临时通风措施

温度传感器None值是否伴随任何故障码或恢复事件

## 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: 两室一厅 (2BR)
- balcony: 洗衣机<laundry_washer>, 阳台灯<onoff_light>, 阳台门传感器<contact_sensor>
- 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>
- entrance: 入户门传感器<contact_sensor>, 入户门锁<door_lock>, 玄关灯<onoff_light>, 玄关运动传感器<occupancy_sensor>
- 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>, 客厅落地灯<onoff_light>, 客厅运动传感器<occupancy_sensor>
- master_bedroom: 主卧温度传感器<temperature_sensor>, 主卧灯<dimmable_light>, 主卧空调<air_conditioner>, 主卧窗帘<window_covering>, 主卧窗户传感器<contact_sensor>, 主卧运动传感器<occupancy_sensor>
- second_bedroom: 次卧温度传感器<temperature_sensor>, 次卧灯<dimmable_light>, 次卧窗帘<window_covering>, 次卧窗户传感器<contact_sensor>, 次卧运动传感器<occupancy_sensor>

## Deterministic Signals
{
  "room_activity": {
    "living_room": 404,
    "master_bedroom": 336,
    "second_bedroom": 336,
    "kitchen": 299,
    "bathroom": 58,
    "entrance": 232
  },
  "attribute_frequency": {
    "MeasuredValue": 1154,
    "Occupancy": 480,
    "OnOff": 16,
    "StateValue": 5,
    "LockState": 4,
    "SystemMode": 1,
    "OperationalState": 1
  },
  "lock_state_flips": 4,
  "occupancy_events": 480,
  "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",

## 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": "none",
  "query_anchor": {
    "target_rooms": ["living_room", "master_bedroom", "second_bedroom", "kitchen", "bathroom", "entrance"],
    "target_devices": ["temperature_sensor", "occupancy_sensor", "contact_sensor", "door_lock", "smoke_co_alarm", "cook_surface", "water_leak_detector"],
    "target_question": "综合所有信息判断家庭当前的安全状况，指出任何潜在风险"
  },
  "focus_rooms": ["kitchen", "living_room"],
  "focus_devices": ["kitchen_temp_sensor", "living_room_temp_sensor", "kitchen_smoke_alarm", "cook_surface"],
  "focus_chunk_ids": ["C15", "C16"],
  "suspected_patterns": ["厨房温度异常升高（18:10-19:10 厨房温度从25.15C升至25.78C，明显高于其他房间）", "厨房温度回落缓慢（19:10后仍维持在24.55C）", "其他房间温度平稳，无全局异常"],
  "why_these_chunks": ["C15显示厨房温度在18:10达到25.15C，18:15升至25.78C，远高于其他房间约23.1-23.2C，可能存在灶具未关或烹饪过热风险；C16中厨房温度在19:10仍为24.55C，回落缓慢，需检查是否持续加热或设备故障。"]
}

## Investigator
```json
{
  "normal_hypotheses": [
    {
      "id": "N1",
      "description": "厨房温度升高是由于正常的烹饪活动。用户于18:10进入厨房，启动灶具，烹饪导致短时温度上升，随后灶具关闭、开窗通风，温度恢复正常。整个过程中烟雾/一氧化碳报警器未触发，说明无危险情况。",
      "evidence": [
        "18:10:03 entrance_occupancy=occupied，18:10:08 living_room_occupancy=occupied，表明有人进入房间并可能前往厨房。",
        "18:56:30 kitchen_cook_surface=on，确认启动灶具，与温度上升时间窗口一致。",
        "厨房温度从18:10的25.15C升至18:30的27.17C峰值，随后开始回落，符合烹饪后散热模式。",
        "19:54:00 kitchen_cook_surface=off，灶具关闭。",
        "19:54:30 kitchen_window_contact=StateValue false（窗户打开），表明有人主动通风降温。",
        "19:55后厨房温度快速降至22.62C，与其他房间（~22.6C）一致，恢复正常。",
        "在18:10-19:54期间，living_room_occupancy和entrance_occupancy持续为occupied，表明有人在活动并可能监控烹饪过程。",
        "没有烟雾报警器或一氧化碳报警器被触发的记录。"
      ],
      "weaknesse