EL-07-FP: 老人散步时间稍长但正常回家

虽然比平时晚了30分钟回来，但最终正常解锁回家并有后续活动

No abnormal behavior patterns detected in the provided logs; observed sequences align with a normal daily routine and transient sensor dropouts are consistent with expected thermal interference.

Explanation: The overnight and morning logs (01:40-12:00) demonstrate a coherent, normal daily routine: all rooms remain unoccupied overnight with a gradual passive temperature rise, followed by a sequential wake-up pattern and supervised cooking events.

Explanation: Transient `None` readings on the kitchen temperature sensor occur immediately around cook surface activation/deactivation but recover within minutes without stuck values or explicit fault alarms, aligning with expected thermal interference or brief network refresh rather than a device malfunction.

Explanation: Occupancy transitions across all monitored rooms are consistent with typical household activity, and no safety or security anomalies (e.g., unattended cooking, intrusion) are present in the analyzed timeframe.

Explanation: Confidence is rated low because the provided logs only cover the first half of the 24-hour period, missing critical afternoon/evening data and door lock access logs required to fully verify the complete daily cycle and security context.

Overnight unoccupied states (01:40-05:05) with stable, gradual temperature drift (~22-24°C) indicating passive heating without active HVAC or human presence.

Supervised cooking events at 06:09 and 11:01 with continuous kitchen occupancy (1) and immediate sensor recovery after transient `None` dropouts.

Consistent daytime occupancy distribution across bedroom, kitchen, entrance, and living room matching standard household routines.

Request remaining afternoon and evening log chunks (C10-C23) to complete the 24-hour behavioral and security verification.

Obtain door lock state transitions and auto-lock configuration logs to assess access patterns and cross-chunk consistency.

entrance bedroom kitchen living_room bathroom

分析过去24小时日志中是否存在异常行为模式

entrance bedroom kitchen living_room bathroom

分析过去24小时日志中是否存在异常行为模式

Overnight (01:40-05:05): All rooms report unoccupied (0), with temperatures gradually rising from ~22-23°C to ~24°C, consistent with passive heating and no active HVAC or human presence.

Morning wake-up sequence (05:31-06:19): Sequential occupancy transitions (bathroom -> bedroom -> kitchen) with lights turning on, matching a standard wake-up routine.

Supervised cooking events: Kitchen cook surface activates at 06:09 and 11:01:30. In both instances, kitchen_occupancy is 1 (occupied) at the time of activation, and occupants remain in adjacent rooms (bedroom/kitchen) throughout the cooking window, ruling out unattended cooking.

Daytime occupancy (07:20-12:00): High and distributed occupancy across bedroom, kitchen, entrance, and living room, with intermittent bathroom use, consistent with normal household activity.

Sensor recovery: Transient `None` readings on the kitchen temperature sensor immediately resolve within 1-3 minutes, indicating temporary network refresh or thermal interference rather than hardware failure.

Relies on the assumption that occupancy sensors accurately reflect human presence without false positives/negatives during rapid transitions.

Does not account for afternoon/evening patterns (C10-C23) which are not yet analyzed.

Transient telemetry dropout on kitchen temperature sensor coinciding with cook surface state changes.

Kitchen temperature sensor reports `None` at 06:10:03, 11:02:00, and 11:39:00.

Each `None` reading occurs within 1-3 minutes of the kitchen cook surface being turned on (06:09, 11:01:30) or off (11:38).

The pattern suggests a correlation between high-heat appliance activation/deactivation and temporary sensor telemetry loss.

Readings recover immediately (1-3 minutes) with no persistent stuck values or explicit fault alarms.

Consistent with expected thermal interference or brief network refresh during high-activity periods, not a persistent device fault.

Does not indicate safety risks (e.g., fire or unattended cooking) as occupants remain present in the kitchen/bedroom during all cook surface events.

The tight temporal correlation between cook surface state changes and transient `None` telemetry, followed by immediate recovery, alongside consistent occupied states in the kitchen during cooking events.

Full 24-hour lock state logs to verify auto-lock timer configuration, access patterns, and cross-chunk consistency of door operations.

Afternoon and evening occupancy/temperature logs (C10-C23) to confirm the daily routine continues normally and to rule out overnight security or HVAC anomalies.

HVAC setpoint logs to correlate with the steady overnight temperature rise and daytime stabilization.

Network/device reboot logs to definitively attribute the transient `None` readings to thermal interference versus network refresh.

Afternoon and evening occupancy/activity patterns to complete the 24-hour cycle

Door lock state transitions, auto-lock timer configuration, and access correlation

HVAC setpoint logs to explain overnight temperature drift

Network/device logs to attribute transient sensor dropouts

The investigation only covers ~01:40 to 12:00, missing the required afternoon/evening data for a 24-hour analysis.

The proposed anomaly (kitchen temp sensor `None` readings) is transient, recovers within minutes, and lacks explicit fault alarms. Per protocol, this triggers a high false-alarm risk for sensor_malfunction.

The analysis drifts into debating telemetry quality rather than verifying the full daily behavior sequence and security context (door locks).

Request the remaining chunks (C10-C23) and explicitly analyze door lock states and auto-lock behavior to assess security and routine completeness.

Standard daily household routine with coherent occupancy and temperature transitions.

C00 establishes a stable nighttime baseline (00:00-01:35) with all rooms unoccupied and temperatures fluctuating normally between 21.6°C and 23.2°C.

C04 captures a logical morning wake-up sequence: bedroom and kitchen occupancy transitions at 06:24, followed by a coherent departure event at 07:09 (manual unlock, door contact opens, entrance occupied, auto-lock engages).

C06 and C13 show sustained daytime occupancy across living room, bedroom, kitchen, and entrance, consistent with residents being home.

Temperature readings across all sensors remain within a realistic residential range (21-25°C) and correlate with occupancy and time of day without impossible jumps or stuck values.

Relies on aggregate occupancy patterns rather than individual user verification, though the sequence is highly consistent with typical smart-home telemetry.

Brief kitchen sensor telemetry dropout and rapid lock engagement sequence.

At 06:29, immediately after the kitchen cook surface is turned off, the kitchen temperature sensor reports a `None` value.

At 07:09, the front door lock is manually unlocked and automatically re-locks within 11 seconds, with the door contact sensor toggling open/closed rapidly.

The `None` reading is isolated and recovers at 06:30, failing the persistence/repetition threshold required for a sensor malfunction or drift classification.

The rapid lock sequence aligns with standard auto-lock functionality or a quick exit, lacking evidence of forced entry, stuck actuators, or contradictory lock/contact states.

No heat spikes, smoke alarms, or prolonged unattended cooking periods are present to suggest a safety risk.

Kitchen temperature sensor reporting `None` at 06:29 followed by immediate recovery at 06:30.

Front door lock manual unlock at 07:09:04 followed by auto-lock at 07:09:15, with contact sensor confirming door closure.

Consistent temperature fluctuations (21-25°C) and occupancy transitions across all chunks without contradictory states.

Long-term baseline for typical front-door auto-lock timing and user exit habits.

Specific cook surface type (induction vs. gas) to fully assess thermal risk context.

Confirmation of whether the 06:29 `None` reading correlates with a known network refresh or device reboot cycle.

Full 24-hour temporal coverage (current analysis covers only ~4 hours)

Correlation of 06:29 `None` reading with network refresh or device reboot logs

Verification of auto-lock timer configuration vs observed 11-second delay

Cross-chunk consistency of occupancy transitions during unlogged gaps

Investigator correctly interprets Matter-scaled temperatures (centi-degrees C) and occupancy booleans, avoiding protocol-format misunderstandings.

Properly identifies the 06:29 `None` telemetry as a transient dropout that recovers immediately, correctly classifying it as non-faulty and avoiding a false alarm.

However, the investigation samples only 4 specific chunks (~4 hours total) out of the requested 24-hour window. Large temporal gaps (01:35-06:20, 07:20-08:25, 09:17-14:43, 15:37-24:00) remain unexamined, which could hide overnight security events, HVAC anomalies, or repeated telemetry failures.

Request coverage of the missing chunks to confirm the 'normal routine' hypothesis across the full day and ensure no critical security or safety events were missed during the unlogged periods.

## Query
以下是过去 24 小时的设备活动日志。请分析是否存在异常行为模式，并说明推理过程。

## 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: 独居老人 (Elderly Living Alone)
- 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>, 床头灯<onoff_light>
- 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>, 厨房漏水传感器<water_leak_detector>, 厨房灯<onoff_light>, 厨房灶具<cook_surface>, 厨房烟雾报警器<smoke_co_alarm>, 厨房运动传感器<occupancy_sensor>
- living_room: 客厅温度传感器<temperature_sensor>, 客厅灯<dimmable_light>, 客厅烟雾报警器<smoke_co_alarm>, 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": 499,
    "bedroom": 530,
    "kitchen": 532,
    "bathroom": 64,
    "entrance": 232
  },
  "attribute_frequency": {
    "Occupancy": 947,
    "MeasuredValue": 870,
    "OnOff": 21,
    "CurrentPositionLiftPercent100ths": 4,
    "LockState": 4,
    "StateValue": 4,
    "CurrentLevel": 1
  },
  "lock_state_flips": 4,
  "occupancy_events": 947,
  "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": "2026-06-15T00:00:00",
    "end_ts": "2026-06-15T01:35:00",
    "event_count": 80,
    "rooms": {
      "living_room": 24,
      "bedroom": 24,
      "kitchen": 24,
      "bathroom": 4,
      "entran

## Query
以下是过去 24 小时的设备活动日志。请分析是否存在异常行为模式，并说明推理过程。

## 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": "behavior-sequence",
  "secondary_task_profile": "none",
  "query_anchor": {
    "target_rooms": [
      "entrance",
      "bedroom",
      "kitchen",
      "living_room",
      "bathroom"
    ],
    "target_devices": [
      "occupancy_sensor",
      "temperature_sensor",
      "door_lock",
      "contact_sensor"
    ],
    "target_question": "分析过去24小时日志中是否存在异常行为模式"
  },
  "focus_rooms": [
    "entrance",
    "bedroom",
    "kitchen",
    "living_room",
    "bathroom"
  ],
  "focus_devices": [
    "occupancy_sensor",
    "temperature_sensor",
    "door_lock",
    "contact_sensor"
  ],
  "focus_chunk_ids": [
    "C00",
    "C04",
    "C06",
    "C13"
  ],
  "suspected_patterns": [
    "daily_routine_verification",
    "access_pattern_analysis",
    "occupancy_consistency"
  ],
  "why_these_chunks": [
    "C00 establishes the nighttime baseline with unoccupied states and stable temperatures.",
    "C04 captures the morning transition from unoccupied to occupied, verifying wake-up routine.",
    "C06 and C13 contain the door lock operation events to assess access patterns and correlate with occupancy changes.",
    "Together, these chunks cover the full daily cycle to determine if the observed sequences align with a normal routine or indicate anomalies."
  ],
  "latent_task_profile": "behavior-sequence",
  "query_intent_profile": "behavior-sequence"
}

## Investigator

{
  "normal_hypotheses": [
    {
      "id": "N1",
      "description": "Normal daily routine with supervised cooking and expected overnight temperature drift.",
      "evidence": [
        "Overnight (01:40-05:05): All rooms report unoccupied (0), with te


EL-03-FP: 老人在旁边慢慢做饭

虽然老人短暂离开了厨房，但5分钟后回来检查，不是忘了关火

The available log sequence shows a normal circadian routine and supervised activity, with no evidence of hazardous or abnormal patterns despite incomplete 24-hour coverage.

Explanation: The provided logs (01:40-11:06) demonstrate a coherent and standard daily routine: nighttime unoccupied periods, a sequential morning wake-up/hygiene/cooking pattern, and continuous daytime occupancy across multiple rooms.

Explanation: The suspected unattended cooking event at 10:52 is effectively refuted by continuous kitchen occupancy (raw=1) throughout the window, indicating the subject is present and supervising the activity.

Explanation: The transient `None` temperature reading at 10:53 is a known environmental artifact caused by proximity to heat sources and immediately recovers, lacking any direct evidence of device fault or safety escalation.

Explanation: While the logs are truncated before completing the full 24-hour cycle, the observed sequence contains no contradictory, hazardous, or abnormal behavioral markers. The persistent entrance occupancy is likely a sensor reporting delay or lingering behavior, not an anomaly.

Continuous kitchen occupancy (raw=1) from 10:52 to 11:06 during cook surface activation.

Immediate recovery of kitchen temperature sensor from `None` to 25.53 C at 10:55, confirming transient heat interference rather than failure.

Standard morning sequence (05:37-06:32) showing logical transitions from bedroom to bathroom to kitchen with supervised cooking.

Request the remaining log chunks (C09-C22) to verify afternoon/evening routines and confirm cook surface deactivation time.

Monitor entrance occupancy sensor calibration or reporting delay if the persistent `1` state continues beyond the subject's departure.

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

分析过去24小时日志，判断独居老人的日常活动是否存在异常行为模式。

entrance living_room kitchen bedroom bathroom

夜间至清晨的静默期与白天的活跃期转换
入户门锁操作与门磁状态联动（08:31手动开锁）
各区域 occupancy 的持续性与卫生间使用频率
温度传感器的平稳变化与无异常告警

C00 提供夜间基准状态，确认设备正常上报且无异常活动

C06 包含关键的门锁操作与门磁开合事件，用于验证出入行为是否合理

C10 展示日间持续 occupancy 与常规活动节奏，排查长时间无人或异常滞留

C22 覆盖深夜时段，确认作息规律及是否出现异常晚归或设备离线

分析过去24小时日志，判断独居老人的日常活动是否存在异常行为模式。

C00 提供夜间基准状态，确认设备正常上报且无异常活动

C06 包含关键的门锁操作与门磁开合事件，用于验证出入行为是否合理

C22 覆盖深夜时段，确认作息规律及是否出现异常晚归或设备离线

01:40-05:37: All rooms report unoccupied, consistent with a normal sleep cycle.

06:01-06:32: Cook surface remains on for ~31 minutes with continuous kitchen occupancy, confirming supervised cooking.

07:00: Manual unlock followed by contact opening and auto-lock engagement 10 seconds later, demonstrating correct security protocol compliance for departure.

Temperature `None` readings at 06:02, 06:33, and 10:53 are brief, immediately recover, and correlate temporally with cook surface activation, indicating transient heat interference rather than device failure.

Does not account for post-11:06 activities or confirm the full 24-hour bathroom usage frequency needed for comprehensive health monitoring.

Does not explain why entrance occupancy remains `1` continuously from 07:00 to 08:25 despite the door being auto-locked.

Potential unattended cooking or heat-induced telemetry gap at 10:52.

Kitchen cook surface activates at 10:52.

Kitchen temperature sensor immediately reports `None` at 10:53, shortly after activation.

Provided logs end at 11:06 with the cook surface still active and kitchen occupancy still `1`; no deactivation event is recorded in this window.

If the subject were to leave the kitchen area after 10:53, the heat-induced sensor dropout could mask rising temperatures or fire risk escalation.

Kitchen occupancy remains `1` throughout the 10:52-11:06 window, strongly suggesting the subject is present and supervising the activity.

The `None` reading is a known transient environmental effect on Matter temperature sensors near heat sources, not a confirmed hardware fault.

Lacks post-11:06 data to verify whether the cook surface was turned off or if the subject remained in the kitchen.

The 10:52 cook surface activation paired with the immediate `None` telemetry dropout on the kitchen temp sensor, contrasted with the 07:00 door lock sequence which confirms normal security protocol compliance and rules out intrusion.

Continuous kitchen occupancy during both cooking windows (06:01-06:32 and 10:52-11:06) supports supervised activity but leaves the 10:52 event unverified due to log cutoff.

Post-11:06 logs to confirm cook surface deactivation time and verify subject location.

Full 24-hour bathroom occupancy transition logs to properly assess toileting frequency, a critical health metric for elderly monitoring.

Clarification on the persistent `1` state for entrance occupancy from 07:00-08:25 to determine if the subject lingered, the sensor has a delay, or there is a reporting artifact.

Logs truncated at 11:06; missing afternoon, evening, and night cycles required for a 24-hour analysis.

Triage references C00, C06, C10, C22 but provided chunks are C01-C08; verify chunk alignment and request missing ones.

Confirm cook surface deactivation time and verify full 24h bathroom/occupancy transition patterns.

Investigator correctly interprets Matter semantics and appropriately uses continuous kitchen occupancy to mitigate the unattended cooking hypothesis.

However, the provided logs end at 11:06, making a 24-hour behavioral pattern analysis impossible.

The triage output references chunks (C00, C10, C22) that are not currently provided in the context.

Request the remaining sequence chunks to verify the cook surface outcome, assess afternoon/evening routines, and complete the 24-hour pattern analysis.

Standard daily routine for an elderly person living alone, showing normal circadian rhythm and household operations.

C00 (00:00-01:35) shows complete house unoccupancy with stable temperatures (21-23°C), consistent with a normal sleep period.

C06 (08:26-09:17) displays a logical morning wake-up sequence: kitchen and bedroom occupancy precede a manual door unlock at 08:31, followed by living room light activation and movement into the living room/entrance.

C10 and C22 show continued daytime and evening occupancy with normal environmental adjustments (e.g., bedroom window fully opened at 12:28).

Temperature readings across all chunks remain within a safe, comfortable range (21-25°C) with gradual, physically plausible changes, ruling out environmental hazards or sensor drift.

Log gaps between chunks (e.g., 01:35-08:26, 09:17-12:02) prevent full 24-hour verification, though the sampled windows are internally consistent and physiologically plausible.

Minor behavioral irregularity or unmonitored door access at 08:31, potentially indicating a routine deviation or brief external interaction.

At 08:31:00, the front door is manually unlocked and opened (contact=false) while the resident is already confirmed inside the house (kitchen and bedroom occupancy recorded at 08:26-08:27).

The rapid succession of events (unlock -> open -> entrance occupied -> kitchen occupied -> light on) suggests either an external visitor, a delivery, or a routine deviation (e.g., checking the door, letting in a pet, or ventilation).

No subsequent prolonged entrance/living room occupancy or contact sensor reopening is observed to indicate a sustained visitor or security breach.

The resident was already present in the house, making forced intrusion highly unlikely.

The sequence is too brief and lacks corroborating evidence of distress, wandering, or security compromise (e.g., no forced entry indicators, alarms, or erratic state transitions).

Manual door operations while indoors are common for ventilation, mail collection, or pet access, and do not inherently indicate a safety risk.

C06 08:26-08:31 sequence: Pre-existing indoor occupancy (kitchen/bedroom) combined with a manual door unlock and immediate light activation.

C00 vs C06/C10/C22 occupancy transitions: Clear, logical shift from unoccupied (sleep) to occupied (wake/activity) without erratic or overlapping states that would suggest confusion or wandering.

Temperature stability across all chunks: Rules out environmental hazards, unattended cooking, or sensor drift.

Full 24-hour continuous logs to verify sleep duration, exact wake-up time, and evening wind-down routine.

Bathroom occupancy logs to assess toileting frequency, which is a key metric for elderly health monitoring.

Explicit lock state transitions (e.g., auto-lock engagement) to confirm door security post-08:31.

Context on the resident's baseline routine to distinguish between a minor deviation and a true anomaly.

Verify continuity and device status in the unobserved intervals (01:35-08:26, 09:17-12:02, 12:55-22:51) to rule out prolonged unmonitored periods, device offline events, or unrecorded activities.

Obtain full 24-hour bathroom occupancy logs to properly assess toileting frequency, a critical health metric for elderly monitoring.

Confirm post-08:31 door lock state transitions (e.g., auto-lock engagement) to verify security protocol compliance.

Protocol handling is correct: Matter temperature scaling (centi-degrees C), occupancy booleans, and lock states are accurately interpreted. No false-alarm risk from protocol misunderstandings.

The investigator correctly identifies the 08:31 door event as a low-risk routine deviation rather than a security breach, demonstrating good contextual reasoning.

However, the query explicitly requests a 24-hour analysis. The current sampled chunks (C00, C06, C10, C22) leave significant unobserved gaps. A complete behavioral sequence assessment requires bridging these intervals to ensure no prolonged absences, device offline periods, or unrecorded incidents occurred.

Request the intermediate chunks to verify continuity, confirm device health across the full day, and validate the circadian rhythm hypothesis before finalizing the verdict.

## Query
以下是过去 24 小时的设备活动日志。请分析是否存在异常行为模式，并说明推理过程。

## 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: 独居老人 (Elderly Living Alone)
- 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>, 床头灯<onoff_light>
- 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>, 厨房漏水传感器<water_leak_detector>, 厨房灯<onoff_light>, 厨房灶具<cook_surface>, 厨房烟雾报警器<smoke_co_alarm>, 厨房运动传感器<occupancy_sensor>
- living_room: 客厅温度传感器<temperature_sensor>, 客厅灯<dimmable_light>, 客厅烟雾报警器<smoke_co_alarm>, 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": 497,
    "bedroom": 529,
    "kitchen": 538,
    "bathroom": 57,
    "entrance": 231
  },
  "attribute_frequency": {
    "Occupancy": 943,
    "MeasuredValue": 870,
    "OnOff": 22,
    "CurrentPositionLiftPercent100ths": 4,
    "LockState": 4,
    "StateValue": 4,
    "CurrentLevel": 1
  },
  "lock_state_flips": 4,
  "occupancy_events": 943,
  "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": "2026-06-12T01:35:00",
    "event_count": 80,
    "rooms": {
      "living_room": 24,
      "bedroom": 24,
      "kitchen": 24,
      "bathroom": 4,
      "entran

## Query
以下是过去 24 小时的设备活动日志。请分析是否存在异常行为模式，并说明推理过程。

## 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": "behavior-sequence",
  "secondary_task_profile": "none",
  "query_anchor": {
    "target_rooms": [
      "living_room",
      "bedroom",
      "kitchen",
      "bathroom",
      "entrance"
    ],
    "target_devices": [
      "occupancy_sensor",
      "door_lock",
      "contact_sensor",
      "temperature_sensor"
    ],
    "target_question": "分析过去24小时日志，判断独居老人的日常活动是否存在异常行为模式。"
  },
  "focus_rooms": [
    "entrance",
    "living_room",
    "kitchen",
    "bedroom",
    "bathroom"
  ],
  "focus_devices": [
    "front_door_lock",
    "contact_sensor",
    "occupancy_sensor",
    "temperature_sensor"
  ],
  "focus_chunk_ids": [
    "C00",
    "C06",
    "C10",
    "C22"
  ],
  "suspected_patterns": [
    "夜间至清晨的静默期与白天的活跃期转换",
    "入户门锁操作与门磁状态联动（08:31手动开锁）",
    "各区域 occupancy 的持续性与卫生间使用频率",
    "温度传感器的平稳变化与无异常告警"
  ],
  "why_these_chunks": [
    "C00 提供夜间基准状态，确认设备正常上报且无异常活动",
    "C06 包含关键的门锁操作与门磁开合事件，用于验证出入行为是否合理",
    "C10 展示日间持续 occupancy 与常规活动节奏，排查长时间无人或异常滞留",
    "C22 覆盖深夜时段，确认作息规律及是否出现异常晚归或设备离线"
  ],
  "latent_task_profile": "behavior-sequence",
  "query_intent_profile": "behavior-sequence"
}

## Investigator

{
  "normal_hypotheses": [
    {
      "id": "N1",
      "description": "Standard circadian rhythm and supervised daily routine for an elderly person living alone.",
      "evidence": [
        "01:40-05:37: All rooms report unoccupied, consistent with a normal sleep cycle.",
        "05:37-06:02: Sequential transitions from bedroom (light on, window closed) to bathroom (light on) to kitchen (light on, cook surface on), indicating a typical morning hygiene and breakfast preparation routine.",
        "06:01-0


No abnormal behavior patterns detected; the logs reflect a standard, coherent evening routine with normal appliance usage and occupancy transitions.

Explanation: The activity sequence follows a logical evening routine: user arrival at 18:29, a 52-minute cooking cycle (18:53-19:45), immediate dishwasher activation (19:55), and a standard wind-down period starting at 22:00 with lights/AC off and the front door auto-locked.

Explanation: Continuous `living_room_occupancy` logs confirm the occupant was present throughout the evening, directly refuting the unattended cooking hypothesis despite the missing `kitchen_occupancy` telemetry.

Explanation: The transient `None` reading from the kitchen temperature sensor and the absence of kitchen occupancy logs are consistent with device configuration or telemetry gaps rather than hazardous behavior, as corroborated by the normal cooking duration, subsequent cleanup, and lack of any safety alarms or impossible state transitions.

Cooking surface active 18:53-19:45 followed by dishwasher at 19:55, indicating a complete and supervised cycle.

Continuous living room occupancy (raw=1) from 18:29 to 23:55 confirms presence and negates unattended risk.

Front door auto-locked at 22:00 with normal wind-down sequence and stable temperature readings (21-27°C).

No immediate action required; system behavior is normal.

Consider verifying kitchen sensor configuration or placement if telemetry gaps are operationally concerning.

分析过去6小时是否存在异常行为模式

living_room bedroom kitchen bathroom entrance

温度传感器高频上报 占用状态频繁切换 alarmish事件数量递增趋势 疑似自动化脚本或传感器轮询

覆盖17:55至23:30的核心活动时段，便于纵向对比传感器上报频率、占用状态流转及报警类事件密度，识别偏离正常居家作息的序列模式。

分析过去6小时是否存在异常行为模式

Standard evening routine with standard polling cadence and normal appliance usage.

Evening wind-down: living room lights/AC off at 22:00, bedroom occupancy = occupied at 22:00, front door auto-locked at 22:00.

Temperature sensors report stable, realistic values (21-27 C) every 5 minutes with no impossible transitions or stuck values.

Living room occupancy is continuously logged throughout the evening, confirming the occupant was present in the home.

Does not account for the complete absence of `kitchen_occupancy` logs, though this is likely a device configuration or physical absence issue rather than a behavioral anomaly.

Unattended cooking risk / sensor blind spot due to missing kitchen telemetry.

Kitchen cook surface was active from 18:53 to 19:45.

No `kitchen_occupancy` events are logged during or after the cooking window, creating a supervision gap.

Kitchen temperature sensor reported `None` at 18:52 and 19:46, indicating a telemetry dropout or configuration gap in the kitchen.

The cook surface was turned off after a normal cooking duration (~50 mins), and the dishwasher was started shortly after, indicating a complete and supervised cycle.

Continuous `living_room_occupancy` logs confirm the occupant was present in the home, likely in the adjacent living room or kitchen.

Per supervisor feedback, missing telemetry should not be equated with unattended activity without corroborating power draw or explicit safety alarms. The absence of kitchen occupancy logs is highly likely due to the sensor being unconfigured, disabled, or physically absent.

No fire alarms, smoke detectors, or hazardous temperature spikes were recorded to support a safety escalation.

The 52-minute active window of `kitchen_cook_surface` (18:53-19:45) combined with the complete absence of `kitchen_occupancy` logs.

The `kitchen_temp_sensor` reporting `None` at 18:52 and 19:46, confirming a telemetry/configuration gap in the kitchen rather than a device fault.

Continuous `living_room_occupancy` logs throughout the evening, corroborating that the home was occupied and the user was present nearby, negating the unattended risk.

Confirmation of whether the `kitchen_occupancy` sensor is physically present, configured, or disabled in the Matter network.

Power meter data for `kitchen_cook_surface` to verify actual energy draw vs. standby state and distinguish active heating from idle.

Presence and status of smoke/heat detectors or smart plugs that could corroborate cooking activity and safety.

Protocol-format check: The investigator correctly interprets Matter-scaled temperatures (raw values divided by 100) and occupancy booleans (0/1), with no misunderstandings detected.

False-alarm risk: The investigator correctly downplays the 'unattended cooking' hypothesis by cross-referencing adjacent room occupancy, normal appliance duration, and the absence of safety alarms. The missing `kitchen_occupancy` logs and transient `None` temperature readings are appropriately attributed to configuration/telemetry gaps rather than hazardous behavior.

Evidence sufficiency: The investigation covers the full 6-hour window, establishes a coherent evening routine sequence, and addresses the query's request for abnormal pattern analysis. No additional chunks or checks are required.

Standard evening routine with standard Matter hub polling cadence.

Logical sequence of events: arrival at 18:29 (manual unlock, lights/AC on), cooking session 18:51-19:45, dishwasher at 19:55, bedroom routine at 22:00, auto-lock at 22:00:55.

Temperature values are stable and realistic (21-27°C), with no stuck values or impossible transitions.

Isolated `None` readings for kitchen temp (18:52, 19:46) are transient and immediately recover, consistent with normal telemetry dropouts.

The rigid 5-minute reporting interval for temperature and occupancy is a common default for Matter hubs to manage bandwidth/battery, not necessarily a script anomaly.

Assumes the 53-minute cook surface duration was supervised, which is not explicitly corroborated by kitchen occupancy logs.

Relies on the assumption that the 5-minute polling interval is benign and not masking real-time event-driven reporting.

Unattended cooking / potential fire risk due to prolonged cook surface activation without kitchen supervision.

Kitchen cook surface was active for 53.5 minutes (18:51:30 to 19:45:00).

No kitchen occupancy or interaction logs are present during this window to confirm human supervision.

Living room occupancy remains consistently high throughout the cooking period, suggesting the occupant may have been in another room rather than the kitchen.

The cook surface was turned off at 19:45:00, but the lack of intermediate supervision logs leaves a gap in safety verification.

A ~1-hour cooking duration is normal for meal preparation; the absence of kitchen occupancy logs may be due to sensor blind spots or logging configuration rather than actual absence.

No fire alarms, heat spikes, or hazardous escalation occurred; the device was eventually turned off.

Does not account for potential kitchen occupancy sensor logging gaps or delayed reporting.

Cook surface activation window (18:51:30-19:45:00) vs. absence of kitchen occupancy/interaction logs during that period.

Consistent 5-minute reporting cadence across all sensors vs. event-driven expectations.

Transient `None` values for kitchen temp coinciding with cook surface on/off events.

Kitchen occupancy sensor logs or motion data to verify supervision during the cooking window.

Smoke/heat alarm logs or smart plug power draw data for the cook surface to confirm actual usage vs. standby.

Hub polling configuration or automation scripts to explain the rigid 5-minute reporting intervals.

User confirmation of the cooking activity and supervision status.

Kitchen cook surface was active from 18:53 to 19:45.

Verify kitchen_occupancy sensor presence and logging configuration (is it missing from logs or physically absent?)

Check for smart plug/power meter data on kitchen_cook_surface to distinguish active heating from standby

Assess if the 5-minute polling cadence masks event-driven triggers for the cook surface

The investigator correctly interprets Matter-scaled temperatures, occupancy booleans, and lock states without protocol misunderstandings.

The unattended_cooking hypothesis relies primarily on the absence of kitchen occupancy logs and the presence of living_room occupancy, which per guidelines triggers a high false-alarm risk. Missing telemetry should not be equated with unattended activity without corroborating power draw or explicit safety alarms.

The investigation is on-topic and covers the full 6-hour window, but the safety conclusion is speculative. Refine the assessment to explicitly classify the unattended cooking risk as likely false due to sensor blind spots/logging gaps, and focus the final verdict on the confirmed normal evening routine and standard polling cadence.

No additional chunks are needed; the gap is in device configuration/telemetry rather than time coverage.

## Query
以下是过去 6 小时的设备活动日志。请分析是否存在异常行为模式，并说明推理过程。

## 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": 145,
    "bedroom": 98,
    "kitchen": 81,
    "bathroom": 12,
    "entrance": 8
  },
  "attribute_frequency": {
    "MeasuredValue": 221,
    "Occupancy": 100,
    "OnOff": 12,
    "StateValue": 3,
    "LockState": 2,
    "SystemMode": 1,
    "OperationalState": 1,
    "CurrentPositionLiftPercent100ths": 1,
    "CurrentLevel": 1
  },
  "lock_state_flips": 2,
  "occupancy_events": 100,
  "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": "2026-06-24T17:55:00",
    "end_ts": "2026-06-24T19:20:00",
    "event_count": 80,
    "rooms": {
      "living_room": 33,
      "bedroom": 20,
      "kitchen": 20,
      "bathroom": 3,
      "entrance": 4
    },
    "top_devices":

## Query
以下是过去 6 小时的设备活动日志。请分析是否存在异常行为模式，并说明推理过程。

## 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": "behavior-sequence",
  "secondary_task_profile": "none",
  "query_anchor": {
    "target_rooms": [
      "living_room",
      "bedroom",
      "kitchen",
      "bathroom",
      "entrance"
    ],
    "target_devices": [
      "temperature_sensor",
      "occupancy_sensor",
      "alarmish_events"
    ],
    "target_question": "分析过去6小时是否存在异常行为模式"
  },
  "focus_rooms": [
    "living_room",
    "bedroom",
    "kitchen",
    "bathroom",
    "entrance"
  ],
  "focus_devices": [
    "temperature_sensor",
    "occupancy_sensor",
    "alarmish_events"
  ],
  "focus_chunk_ids": [
    "C00",
    "C01",
    "C02",
    "C03"
  ],
  "suspected_patterns": [
    "温度传感器高频上报",
    "占用状态频繁切换",
    "alarmish事件数量递增趋势",
    "疑似自动化脚本或传感器轮询"
  ],
  "why_these_chunks": [
    "覆盖17:55至23:30的核心活动时段，便于纵向对比传感器上报频率、占用状态流转及报警类事件密度，识别偏离正常居家作息的序列模式。"
  ],
  "latent_task_profile": "behavior-sequence",
  "query_intent_profile": "behavior-sequence"
}

## Investigator

{
  "normal_hypotheses": [
    {
      "id": "N1",
      "description": "Standard evening routine with standard polling cadence and normal appliance usage.",
      "evidence": [
        "User arrival sequence at 18:29 (door unlock, entrance/living room lights on, living room AC on, living room occupancy = occupied).",
        "Cooking cycle: kitchen light on at 18:51, cook surface on at 18:53, turned off at 19:45 (52-minute duration).",
        "Post-cooking activity: kitchen dishwasher turned on at 19:55, indicating a complete meal preparation and cleanup sequence.",
        "Evening wind-down: living room lights/AC off at 22:00, bedroom occupancy = occupied at 22:00, front door auto-locke


伪装开锁（被盗/复制凭证）

合法凭证开锁，但进入后的行为模式与住户不符 不开灯（住户通常到家后开灯） 进入后的移动路径和设备操作模式与住户日常习惯不一致 本场景的难点：单看门锁事件是合法的，需要结合行为模式判断

中等可信度警报，建议住户确认是否本人操作

The logs depict a normal daily routine with scheduled sensor polling, supervised cooking, and a coherent evening security sequence.

Explanation: Temperature and occupancy sensors report on a strict 5-minute cadence, indicating a scheduled system heartbeat rather than erratic or stuck reporting.

Explanation: The kitchen cook surface was active for ~55 minutes, but continuous 'occupied' reports from the living room occupancy sensor throughout this window confirm the area was supervised, ruling out unattended cooking risks.

Explanation: Brief 'None' values in the kitchen temperature sensor coincided exactly with cook surface activation and recovered immediately, consistent with transient thermal interference rather than a persistent device fault.

Explanation: The evening sequence (lights/AC off, bedroom light on, window open, front door auto-lock) forms a logical and coherent bedtime/secure-home routine without contradictory states or failed lock commands.

Continuous living_room_occupancy = occupied (raw=1) from 18:20 to 23:10, covering the entire cooking window.

Synchronized 5-minute polling cadence across all temperature and occupancy sensors.

Brief kitchen_temp_sensor = None at 18:48 and 19:43, immediately recovering to normal values.

Coherent 22:04 bedtime routine: lights/AC off, bedroom light on, auto-lock engaged.

No immediate action required; logs indicate normal operation.

Monitor kitchen temperature sensor for recurring transient dropouts during high-heat cooking to rule out hardware degradation over time.

分析过去12小时日志中是否存在异常行为模式

Living room occupancy repeatedly reporting 'occupied' at high frequency

Alarmish event count increases significantly from afternoon to night

C04-C07 cover the 19:00-23:55 window where occupancy transitions and alarmish counts peak

Allows tracing the progression from unoccupied to occupied states and correlating with alarm events to determine if the pattern is abnormal or routine

分析过去12小时日志中是否存在异常行为模式

Standard daily routine with scheduled 5-minute polling heartbeat. Cooking is supervised, and the evening security routine is coherent.

Temperature and occupancy sensors report on a strict 5-minute cadence from 11:55 to 23:10, indicating a scheduled system heartbeat rather than erratic or stuck reporting.

The kitchen cook surface is active from 18:47 to 19:42, but `living_room_occupancy` continuously reports `occupied (raw=1)` throughout this entire window, confirming supervision.

The 22:04 sequence (living room/entrance lights off, AC off, bedroom light on, bedroom window open, front door auto-locks) forms a logical and coherent bedtime/secure-home routine.

Lock operations align with expected entry/exit patterns: manual unlock at 16:07 and 18:20, followed by an automatic lock at 22:04.

The high-frequency 5-minute occupancy reporting could be misinterpreted as a looping state without recognizing the synchronized polling cadence with temperature sensors.

Transient thermal interference causing brief kitchen temperature sensor dropout during cooking.

The `kitchen_temp_sensor` reports `None` at 18:48:00 and 19:43:00.

These dropouts occur precisely when the `kitchen_cook_surface` is active (18:47:30 - 19:42:00).

The sensor recovers immediately after 1-2 minutes, suggesting temporary heat/steam interference or sensor overload rather than a permanent failure.

The dropout is extremely brief and recovers without explicit fault codes or repeated non-recovery, making it a transient telemetry glitch rather than a persistent device fault.

Potential unattended cooking risk, evaluated and dismissed by occupancy data.

The cook surface remains active for approximately 55 minutes (18:47 to 19:42), which could initially raise a safety concern for unattended cooking.

No smoke or CO alarm events are logged during or after the cooking period.

Directly contradicted by continuous `living_room_occupancy = occupied` reports every 5 minutes throughout the cooking window, proving the area was supervised.

Lack of alarm triggers and immediate post-cooking dishwasher activation (19:59) further supports a normal, supervised cooking session.

Continuous `living_room_occupancy = occupied` reports during the 55-minute cooking window definitively rule out unattended cooking.

Synchronized 5-minute polling cadence across all temperature and occupancy sensors confirms a scheduled heartbeat, explaining the high-frequency occupancy logs.

Brief `None` values in the kitchen temperature sensor strictly coinciding with cook surface activation point to transient thermal interference.

Historical baseline logs to verify if the 22:04 auto-lock timing and window-opening sequence match typical daily patterns.

Smoke/CO alarm event logs to definitively confirm no fire risk occurred during the cooking session.

Configuration mapping for `kitchen_window_contact` boolean states (whether `false` indicates closed or open) to fully interpret the 19:42 state change.

Historical baseline for routine comparison

Smoke/CO alarm event logs to confirm no fire risk during cooking

Configuration mapping for `kitchen_window_contact` boolean states

Investigator correctly interprets Matter-scaled temperatures and occupancy booleans, avoiding naive natural-language assumptions.

Transient `None` values in the kitchen temperature sensor are properly classified as telemetry glitches rather than device faults, aligning with the benchmark's requirement for direct fault evidence (e.g., stuck values, repeated non-recovery, or explicit alarms).

Unattended cooking risk is correctly dismissed using cross-device occupancy correlation, demonstrating appropriate composite-safety reasoning.

Focus on C04-C06 adequately covers the evening routine and cooking window. C07 was referenced in the triage but not provided in the logs; however, the analysis concludes within the available data without relying on it.

No protocol-format misunderstandings detected. The evidence chain is coherent and sufficient to support a normal behavior verdict.

Standard evening routine with regular sensor polling and coordinated device state changes.

Temperature sensors report gradual, realistic fluctuations within normal indoor ranges (21.4°C–25.4°C) with no stuck values or impossible transitions.

Living room occupancy reports at a strict ~5-minute interval, consistent with a configured heartbeat or polling schedule rather than erratic detection.

Kitchen activity concludes logically: cook surface turns off at 19:42, followed by dishwasher activation at 19:59.

A coherent evening routine occurs at 22:04: common area lights and AC turn off, bedroom light turns on, bedroom window opens, and the front door briefly opens before immediately auto-locking. This sequence aligns with typical pre-sleep behavior (securing the home, preparing the bedroom).

Assumes the 5-minute occupancy reporting is an intentional system configuration rather than a misconfigured or stuck sensor loop.

Does not account for the exact reason behind the 1-second front door contact, though it is likely benign.

Potential sensor bounce or brief security event at the front door, combined with high-frequency occupancy polling that may indicate misconfiguration.

Front door contact opens at 22:04:36 and immediately triggers an auto-lock event at 22:04:37, resulting in a ~1-second open interval. This is too brief for normal human passage, suggesting a sensor bounce, misconfiguration, or a quick unauthorized peek/check.

Living room occupancy reports `occupied` exactly every 5 minutes without variation, which could indicate a stuck reporting loop or an overly aggressive polling interval.

The bedroom window opens at 22:04:32, followed by the front door contact at 22:04:36. If this was a security check, opening the window before verifying/locking the main entry is atypical, or if it was an entry attempt, the 1-second door contact does not support successful entry.

The auto-lock triggered immediately, fully mitigating any potential security risk from the door contact event.

The 1-second contact could simply be a benign sensor artifact or a quick visual check through a peephole/window.

The 5-minute occupancy cadence could be a standard, intentional system setting rather than a fault.

The 1-second front door contact event at 22:04:36-37 and immediate auto-lock.

The rigid, unvarying 5-minute interval of living room occupancy reports throughout the entire window.

The tightly clustered state changes at 22:04 (lights/AC off, bedroom light on, window open, door contact) indicating a single coordinated routine.

Device configuration logs (polling intervals, auto-lock delay settings, occupancy sensor sensitivity thresholds).

Full 12-hour log data (only 19:00-23:55 is provided) to establish baseline behavior for the rest of the day.

User presence verification (e.g., smartphone location, manual check-ins) to confirm the evening routine and rule out unauthorized presence.

Historical baseline for door contact events and occupancy reporting frequency to determine if the 1-second contact or 5-minute polling is typical for this household.

Establish baseline for occupancy polling cadence and device state transitions across the full 12-hour window

Verify if the 22:04 coordinated routine matches historical patterns or represents a one-off deviation

Check for any explicit fault events, stuck values, or alarm triggers in the earlier time segments

Protocol interpretation is accurate; scaled temperatures and booleans are handled correctly, minimizing false-alarm risk.

The investigation is truncated to C04-C07 (19:00-23:55), which covers only ~5 of the requested 12 hours. This gap prevents validating whether the 5-minute occupancy heartbeat and the 22:04 routine are consistent with normal daily operation.

Request C00-C03 to establish a full baseline. If the cadence and routines are identical in the earlier chunks, the current conclusion of 'normal evening routine' can be confirmed. If they differ, the pattern may indicate a configuration change or partial system fault.

## Query
以下是过去 12 小时的设备活动日志。请分析是否存在异常行为模式，并说明推理过程。

## 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": 232,
    "bedroom": 183,
    "kitchen": 153,
    "bathroom": 24,
    "entrance": 10
  },
  "attribute_frequency": {
    "MeasuredValue": 437,
    "Occupancy": 139,
    "OnOff": 13,
    "StateValue": 4,
    "LockState": 2,
    "SystemMode": 1,
    "OperationalState": 1,
    "CurrentPositionLiftPercent100ths": 1,
    "CurrentLevel": 1
  },
  "lock_state_flips": 2,
  "occupancy_events": 139,
  "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": "2026-06-17T11:55:00",
    "end_ts": "2026-06-17T13:45:00",
    "event_count": 80,
    "rooms": {
      "living_room": 27,
      "bedroom": 27,
      "kitchen": 22,
      "bathroom": 4
    },
    "top_devices": [
      "living_

## Query
以下是过去 12 小时的设备活动日志。请分析是否存在异常行为模式，并说明推理过程。

## 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": "behavior-sequence",
  "secondary_task_profile": "none",
  "query_anchor": {
    "target_rooms": [
      "living_room",
      "bedroom",
      "kitchen",
      "bathroom",
      "entrance"
    ],
    "target_devices": [
      "occupancy_sensor",
      "temperature_sensor",
      "onoff_light",
      "door_lock",
      "window_covering",
      "contact_sensor",
      "air_conditioner",
      "cook_surface",
      "smoke_co_alarm",
      "dishwasher",
      "water_leak_detector"
    ],
    "target_question": "分析过去12小时日志中是否存在异常行为模式"
  },
  "focus_rooms": [
    "living_room",
    "bedroom",
    "kitchen",
    "bathroom",
    "entrance"
  ],
  "focus_devices": [
    "living_room_occupancy",
    "bedroom_occupancy",
    "bathroom_occupancy",
    "living_room_temp_sensor",
    "bedroom_temp_sensor",
    "kitchen_temp_sensor",
    "living_room_light_1",
    "bedroom_light",
    "living_room_ac",
    "bedroom_window",
    "front_door_contact",
    "kitchen_smoke_co_alarm",
    "bathroom_water_leak_detector"
  ],
  "focus_chunk_ids": [
    "C04",
    "C05",
    "C06",
    "C07"
  ],
  "suspected_patterns": [
    "Living room occupancy repeatedly reporting 'occupied' at high frequency",
    "Alarmish event count increases significantly from afternoon to night",
    "Concentrated evening/night device state changes (lights, AC, window covering, door contact)"
  ],
  "why_these_chunks": [
    "C04-C07 cover the 19:00-23:55 window where occupancy transitions and alarmish counts peak",
    "These chunks contain the full sequence of device interactions and state changes needed to evaluate the evening routine",
    "Allows tracing the pr


1分钟内多次灯光开关 可能原因：智能家居系统被入侵/远程控制；设备自动化规则冲突；或电路问题 也可能是恐慌信号（住户通过反复开关灯试图引起注意）

通知住户检查是否有人误操作或系统异常

The logs exhibit normal scheduled telemetry heartbeats and a coherent evening automation routine, with no evidence of security breaches, safety hazards, or device faults.

Explanation: Temperature sensors report at stable, physically plausible ranges with correct centi-degree scaling, showing no drift or scaling errors.

Explanation: Occupancy sensors follow a strict 5-minute polling schedule and bathroom sensors report unoccupied at exact 30-minute intervals, indicating a configured heartbeat routine rather than motion-triggered events or faults.

Explanation: The 23:11 evening routine demonstrates a logically coherent automation sequence (lights/AC off, window closed, door contact closed, auto-lock engaged) without contradictions or failures.

Explanation: Kitchen activity shows proper safety mitigation (cook surface turned off immediately before dishwasher activation), and no intrusion, unattended cooking, or device malfunction patterns are present.

Strict 5-minute occupancy heartbeats and 30-minute bathroom checks across all chunks confirm scheduled telemetry configuration.

Coherent 25-second automation sequence at 23:11:00-23:11:30 with successful lock engagement and window closure.

Cook surface turning off at 18:46:00 preceding dishwasher activation, negating unattended cooking risk.

No immediate action required; system behavior aligns with normal scheduled telemetry and automation routines.

Optionally review device configuration to confirm if 5-minute occupancy polling is intentional or if event-driven reporting could be enabled for more responsive presence detection.

分析过去6小时日志中是否存在异常行为模式

温度传感器规律上报
Occupancy 状态高频切换
门锁单次状态翻转
卫生间 occupancy 频繁 unoccupied 标记

覆盖6小时时间窗的起始、中段和末尾，便于对比行为模式是否一致或出现突变。

各 chunk 均包含完整的温度与 occupancy 上报周期，可验证规律性并判断 occupancy 切换是否属于正常日常活动。

门锁与接触传感器事件稀疏，跨 chunk 确认是否属于正常日常活动。

分析过去6小时日志中是否存在异常行为模式

覆盖6小时时间窗的起始、中段和末尾，便于对比行为模式是否一致或出现突变。

门锁与接触传感器事件稀疏，跨 chunk 确认是否属于正常日常活动。

Normal automated telemetry heartbeats and evening automation routine.

Bathroom occupancy reports `unoccupied` at exact 30-minute intervals (:32:57), consistent with a periodic status check.

Kitchen activity at 18:46 shows a logical sequence: cook surface turns off, followed immediately by dishwasher activation and operational state change.

Security routine at 23:11:00-23:11:30 shows coherent automation: lights and AC turn off, bedroom window closes, front door contact registers closed, and auto-lock engages successfully.

Assumes the rigid 5-minute occupancy reports are intentional configuration rather than a misconfigured device attempting to report motion.

Does not account for potential real-world occupancy changes that may be masked by the fixed reporting interval.

Rigid polling/heartbeat pattern masking real occupancy changes (Behavioral/Config Anomaly).

Occupancy sensors report `occupied` at mathematically exact 5-minute intervals (e.g., 17:58, 18:03, 18:08...) across the entire 6-hour window, with zero variance.

Bathroom sensor reports `unoccupied` at exact 30-minute marks (:32:57) regardless of actual usage patterns.

Supervisor feedback requested verification of continuity; C01 and C03 confirm this rigid periodicity persists without interruption, ruling out transient glitches and pointing to a fixed-interval reporting configuration.

This pattern suggests the devices are configured to poll/report on a schedule rather than event-driven, which could lead to false occupancy readings or missed state changes.

No hardware fault or safety risk is indicated; this is a common Matter device configuration behavior.

Cannot confirm if actual motion occurred between reports without raw motion/millimeter-wave sensor data.

Minor telemetry jitter / clock desync in bedroom occupancy.

In C04, the bedroom occupancy report shifts to :05, :10, :15... offsets (e.g., 23:11:05, 23:16:05, 23:21:05), deviating from the strict :00/:05 pattern seen in C00-C03.

The shift coincides with the 23:11 automation routine, suggesting a brief network latency spike or device clock drift during high-bus activity.

Resolves immediately after the routine completes, with no repeated failures or stuck states.

Isolated to a single device and a short time window.

Lacks evidence of packet loss or communication errors; likely a benign scheduling artifact.

Exact 5-minute and 30-minute periodicity of occupancy reports across C00-C04, confirming continuous polling behavior rather than event-driven motion detection.

Tight 25-second automation sequence at 23:11:00-23:11:30 (lights/AC off, window closed, door contact true, auto-lock engaged) demonstrating coherent system behavior.

Cook surface turning off at 18:46:00 immediately preceding dishwasher activation, negating unattended cooking risk.

Temperature values remaining within a narrow, physically plausible range (21.4–23.2 C) with correct centi-degree scaling.

Raw motion or presence detection logs to verify if the 5-minute occupancy reports are purely heartbeats or if actual movement correlates with them.

Device configuration details (reporting intervals, polling vs. event-driven settings) to confirm if the rigid timing is intentional.

Context on the 23:11 automation trigger (manual, schedule, or geofence) to fully validate the security routine.

Network latency or bus utilization logs during the 23:11:00-23:11:30 window to explain the bedroom occupancy offset shift.

The investigator correctly applied Matter protocol semantics (centi-degree temperature scaling, occupancy booleans, lock states) and avoided false alarms from transient `None` values or rigid polling schedules. The analysis comprehensively covers the 6-hour window, correctly distinguishing between scheduled telemetry (5-min occupancy heartbeats, 30-min bathroom checks) and actual automation sequences. The kitchen activity and evening security routine are logically coherent and show proper mitigation/automation behavior. No protocol misunderstandings or missing checks are detected. The investigation is complete and directly addresses the query.

```json
{
  "normal_hypotheses": [
    {
      "id": "N1",
      "description": "Normal evening routine with automated home securing and comfort management.",
      "evidence": [
        "Temperature readings across living room, bedroom, and kitchen remain stable and within comfortable ranges (21-23°C), showing only minor natural fluctuations consistent with evening cooling.",
        "Kitchen appliance sequence at 18:46 (cook surface off -> dishwasher on -> window closed) aligns with a standard post-dinner routine.",
        "Coherent 'secure home' sequence at 23:11: lights and AC turned off, bedroom window closed, front door contact closed, and door auto-locked within a tight 30-second window, indicating a deliberate or well-configured automation routine.",
        "Isolated `None` value for kitchen temperature at 18:47 recovers immediately at 18:50, indicating a transient telemetry glitch rather than a persistent fault."
      ],
      "weaknesses": [
        "Does not fully explain the highly rigid, machine-like periodicity of occupancy reports, which could indicate a configuration issue rather than natural human activity or standard sensor behavior."
      ]
    }
  ],
  "anomaly_hypotheses": [
    {
      "id": "A1",
      "description": "Rigid telemetry reporting / sensor polling anomaly causing high-frequency, periodic occupancy updates.",
      "threat_type": "behavioral_anomaly",
      "evidence": [
        "Occupancy sensors in the living room and bedroom report `occupied` (raw=1) at exact 5-minute intervals throughout all three chunks (e.g., 17:58, 18:03, 18:08, 18:13...).",
        "Bathroom occupancy reports `unoccupied` (raw=0) at exact 30-minute intervals (:02:57, :32:57) across all chunks.",
        "This mechanical periodicity over 6 hours is inconsistent with typical passive occupancy sensing triggered by natural human movement, suggesting a misconfigured reporting interval, aggressive polling, or a heartbeat mechanism that may be masking actual state changes or generating unnecessary network traffic."
      ],
      "weaknesses": [
        "No negative functional impact, security breach, or safety risk is observed. The system continues to operate normally, and the pattern could simply be a documented polling interval or heartbeat mechanism for these specific Matter devices rather than a malfunction."
      ]
    }
  ],
  "most_discriminative_evidence": [
    "Exact 5-minute interval for living/bedroom occupancy and exact 30-minute interval for bathroom occupancy across all time chunks.",
    "Tight 30-second 'secure home' sequence at 23:11 (lights/AC off, window closed, door auto-locked).",
    "Isolated `None` telemetry dropout for kitchen temperature at 18:47 that immediately recovers."
  ],
  "missing_information": [
    "Device-specific configuration or baseline reporting intervals for the occupancy and temperature sensors.",
    "Context on whether the 5-minute/30-minute occupancy reporting is expected for this household's automation setup.",
    "Logs for the gaps between chunks (19:05-20:25, 21:40-23:00) to confirm if the periodicity holds continuously."
  ]
}
```

Normal evening routine with automated home securing and comfort management.

Rigid telemetry reporting / sensor polling anomaly causing high-frequency, periodic occupancy updates.

Tight 30-second 'secure home' sequence at 23:11 (lights/AC off, window closed, door auto-locked).

Isolated `None` telemetry dropout for kitchen temperature at 18:47 that immediately recovers.

Device-specific configuration or baseline reporting intervals for the occupancy and temperature sensors.

Bathroom sensor reports `unoccupied` at exact 30-minute marks (:32:57) regardless of actual usage patterns.

Resolves immediately after the routine completes, with no repeated failures or stuck states.

Verify continuity of the 5-minute/30-minute occupancy reporting pattern across the full 6-hour window using C01 and C03.

Determine if the occupancy reports reflect actual state changes or are purely periodic heartbeats/polling artifacts.

Check contact_sensor logs for the complete period to ensure no unrecorded access or state transitions occurred during the gaps.

The investigator correctly interprets Matter-scaled temperatures and occupancy states, avoiding common scaling pitfalls.

The identification of rigid polling intervals is a valid behavioral observation, but the conclusion remains speculative due to missing data in C01 and C03.

Without the full timeline, it is impossible to distinguish between a configured heartbeat, a misconfigured polling interval, or a transient telemetry glitch.

Note that C04 shows a slight offset shift in the bedroom occupancy interval (~23:11:05), which should be verified against the missing chunks for consistency.

Request the missing chunks to establish a complete behavioral baseline and confirm whether the pattern persists, changes, or resolves.

## Query
以下是过去 6 小时的设备活动日志。请分析是否存在异常行为模式，并说明推理过程。

## 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": 147,
    "bedroom": 147,
    "kitchen": 78,
    "bathroom": 12,
    "entrance": 3
  },
  "attribute_frequency": {
    "MeasuredValue": 220,
    "Occupancy": 156,
    "OnOff": 5,
    "StateValue": 2,
    "OperationalState": 1,
    "CurrentPositionLiftPercent100ths": 1,
    "LockState": 1
  },
  "lock_state_flips": 1,
  "occupancy_events": 156,
  "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": "2026-06-20T17:55:00",
    "end_ts": "2026-06-20T19:05:00",
    "event_count": 80,
    "rooms": {
      "living_room": 29,
      "bedroom": 29,
      "kitchen": 19,
      "bathroom": 3
    },
    "top_devices": [
      "living_room_temp_sensor",
      "bedroom_temp_sensor",

## Query
以下是过去 6 小时的设备活动日志。请分析是否存在异常行为模式，并说明推理过程。

## 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": "behavior-sequence",
  "secondary_task_profile": "none",
  "query_anchor": {
    "target_rooms": [
      "living_room",
      "bedroom",
      "kitchen",
      "bathroom",
      "entrance"
    ],
    "target_devices": [
      "temperature_sensor",
      "occupancy_sensor",
      "door_lock",
      "contact_sensor"
    ],
    "target_question": "分析过去6小时日志中是否存在异常行为模式"
  },
  "focus_rooms": [
    "living_room",
    "bedroom",
    "kitchen",
    "bathroom",
    "entrance"
  ],
  "focus_devices": [
    "temperature_sensor",
    "occupancy_sensor",
    "door_lock"
  ],
  "focus_chunk_ids": [
    "C00",
    "C02",
    "C04"
  ],
  "suspected_patterns": [
    "温度传感器规律上报",
    "Occupancy 状态高频切换",
    "门锁单次状态翻转",
    "卫生间 occupancy 频繁 unoccupied 标记"
  ],
  "why_these_chunks": [
    "覆盖6小时时间窗的起始、中段和末尾，便于对比行为模式是否一致或出现突变。",
    "各 chunk 均包含完整的温度与 occupancy 上报周期，可验证规律性并判断 occupancy 切换是否属于正常日常活动。",
    "门锁与接触传感器事件稀疏，跨 chunk 确认是否属于正常日常活动。"
  ],
  "latent_task_profile": "behavior-sequence",
  "query_intent_profile": "behavior-sequence"
}

## Investigator

{
  "normal_hypotheses": [
    {
      "id": "N1",
      "description": "Normal automated telemetry heartbeats and evening automation routine.",
      "evidence": [
        "Temperature sensors report every 5 minutes with stable, realistic values (21.4–23.2 C), showing no drift or scaling errors.",
        "Occupancy sensors report `occupied` at strict 5-minute intervals across all chunks (C00-C04), indicating a configured polling/heartbeat schedule rather than motion-triggered events.",
        "Bathroom occupancy reports `unoccupied` at exact 30-minute intervals (:32:57), consistent


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

The 24-hour log sequence reflects a normal daily routine with no anomalous behavior or safety hazards.

Explanation: Nighttime logs (C00-C01) show all rooms unoccupied with stable baseline temperatures (~22-23°C), indicating normal sleep mode.

Explanation: Morning routine (C05) features a brief cook surface activation with expected transient sensor dropouts, consistent with quick breakfast preparation.

Explanation: Evening sequence (C16-C18) shows a coordinated arrival and a 1h12m cooking session; however, the dishwasher activation at 19:23 and manual cook surface shutoff at 19:27 confirm continuous user supervision and routine completion, directly refuting the unattended cooking hypothesis.

Explanation: Transient `None` readings on the kitchen temperature sensor align precisely with cook surface on/off events (18:15, 19:28), indicating expected heat saturation or temporary telemetry dropout rather than hardware failure or safety breaches.

Explanation: Late-night logs (C22) show stable occupancy and temperature patterns consistent with normal evening wind-down, with no hazardous escalations or device faults recorded.

Dishwasher activation at 19:23 and manual cook surface shutoff at 19:27 confirm user presence and supervised meal completion.

Transient `None` sensor readings at 18:15 and 19:28 correlate exactly with cook surface state changes, ruling out device fault.

No smoke/heat alarms or hazardous escalations recorded throughout the 24-hour cycle.

No immediate action required; routine monitoring is sufficient.

Consider adding a dedicated kitchen occupancy sensor to improve supervision granularity for future long-duration cooking events.

分析过去24小时是否存在异常行为模式

Baseline nighttime unoccupied state
Morning kitchen routine activation
Evening arrival and home mode sequence
Late-night occupancy persistence

分析过去24小时是否存在异常行为模式

Standard daily routine with normal appliance usage and expected sensor behavior.

Nighttime logs (00:00-02:30) show all rooms unoccupied with stable baseline temperatures (~22-23°C), indicating normal sleep mode.

Morning routine (06:40-07:35) features a brief 3-minute cook surface activation (06:47-06:50), consistent with quick breakfast preparation.

Evening arrival sequence (17:49) shows coordinated device activation: door unlock, entrance/living room occupancy, lights, and AC on, followed by a ~1h12m cooking session.

Cook surface is manually deactivated at 19:27, immediately followed by dishwasher activation (19:23), confirming a complete, supervised meal preparation cycle.

Transient `None` readings on the kitchen temperature sensor align precisely with cook surface on/off events (06:48, 06:51, 18:15, 19:28), indicating expected heat saturation or temporary telemetry dropout rather than hardware failure.

The 1h12m evening cooking duration is longer than the morning session, and explicit kitchen occupancy logs are absent, leaving a minor gap in confirming continuous supervision during the peak heat period.

Mild unattended cooking / heat saturation risk during the evening meal preparation.

Cook surface remained active for 1 hour and 12 minutes (18:14:30 to 19:27), a significantly longer duration than the morning session.

During this extended period, occupancy logs only confirm presence in the entrance, living room, and master bedroom, with no explicit kitchen occupancy updates to verify continuous supervision.

The kitchen temperature sensor reported `None` at 18:15 and 19:28, suggesting the sensor was temporarily overwhelmed by heat or experienced signal dropout near the active cooktop.

The cook surface was only deactivated after a prolonged interval, raising a concern about potential delayed supervision or unattended operation.

The cook surface was eventually turned off manually, and a dishwasher was started shortly after, strongly suggesting the occupant was present and completed the routine safely.

The `None` readings are isolated to heat events and recover immediately, ruling out permanent sensor failure or monitoring blind spots.

No temperature escalation, smoke/heat alarms, or safety device triggers were recorded, and the overall pattern aligns with a standard dinner preparation cycle.

The exact timing of the cook surface on/off events relative to the kitchen temperature sensor `None` readings, confirming heat saturation rather than device fault.

The 1h12m duration of the evening cook session contrasted with the 3-minute morning session, highlighting the extended heat exposure window.

The manual deactivation at 19:27 and subsequent dishwasher activation confirming user presence and routine completion, mitigating the unattended risk.

Direct kitchen occupancy sensor logs to confirm continuous presence in the cooking area during the 18:14-19:27 window.

Smoke/heat alarm logs to verify no safety thresholds were breached during the extended cook session.

Detailed power draw or current data for the cook surface to confirm stable operation vs. fluctuating load during the long activation.

Explicitly verify kitchen occupancy sensor logs during the 18:14-19:27 cooking window

Check C16-C18 for any smoke/heat alarm or safety device triggers

Confirm whether `None` readings on kitchen_temp_sensor are isolated to heat saturation or indicate broader telemetry dropout

Review C17-C18 to fully map the evening routine completion and check for other device state changes or anomalies

The investigator correctly interprets Matter-scaled temperatures and occupancy booleans, and appropriately identifies mitigating factors (manual shutoff, dishwasher activation).

However, the anomaly hypothesis rests mainly on missing kitchen occupancy logs and a transient `None` telemetry gap without hazardous escalation, which triggers a high false-alarm risk per protocol.

C17 and C18 were omitted from the focus chunks but contain the critical mitigation/outcome events. Explicitly reviewing these chunks is necessary to close the loop on the evening sequence, verify the `None` readings are strictly heat-saturation artifacts, and confirm no other 24-hour behavioral deviations exist.

Do not finalize as normal until the missing occupancy context and telemetry gap are explicitly addressed with the adjacent chunks.

Standard daily smart-home routine with transient sensor effects from heat.

C00 establishes a stable nighttime baseline with all rooms unoccupied and temperatures steady (~22.6-23.0 C).

C05 captures a coherent morning departure: brief cook surface use (~2.5 min), followed by manual unlock, door open, and immediate auto-lock upon exit.

C16 shows a typical evening arrival sequence with coordinated AC/light activation and ~20 min cook surface use for dinner prep.

C22 demonstrates stable late-night occupancy in master/entrance/living rooms with consistent temperatures.

Kitchen temperature sensor `None` readings (06:48, 06:51, 18:15) occur immediately after cook surface activation and recover within minutes, consistent with temporary heat-induced sensor saturation rather than hardware failure.

Relies on the assumption that transient sensor dropouts and ~20-minute cooking durations are within normal operational parameters without explicit safety system (smoke/CO) corroboration.

Does not account for potential user-specific preferences regarding cook surface auto-shutoff timers.

Potential unattended cooking risk with temporary sensor interference.

Kitchen cook surface activated at 06:47 and 18:14, immediately followed by kitchen temperature sensor reporting `None` (06:48, 06:51, 18:15).

In C16, the cook surface remains active for approximately 20 minutes while occupancy shifts primarily to the living room and entrance, potentially leaving the kitchen area unattended.

Repeated `None` telemetry on the kitchen sensor during heat events suggests possible sensor saturation or placement near a heat source.

Occupancy sensors in the entrance and living room remain persistently active during both cooking events, indicating that occupants are present in the home and likely supervising.

Cook surface durations are short and typical for meal preparation; no evidence of heat escalation, smoke, or failed mitigation.

The sensor `None` readings recover quickly (within 4-7 minutes), ruling out permanent malfunction or stuck state.

Correlation between cook surface activation timestamps and kitchen temp sensor `None` readings.

Persistent occupancy in adjacent rooms (entrance/living room) during cooking events, supporting supervision vs. unattended risk.

Consistent lock/contact state transitions during departure/arrival sequences.

Smoke/CO detector logs to confirm absence of fire risk during cooking events.

Cook surface auto-shutoff configuration or power draw logs to verify heat levels.

Full 24-hour occupancy heatmaps to confirm if kitchen supervision is consistently maintained.

User-defined safety thresholds or automation rules for cook surface and temperature sensors.

Cook surface deactivation timestamp and any subsequent temperature/safety device logs following the 18:14 activation.

Corroborate transient `None` readings with actual heat saturation vs. isolated telemetry dropouts.

The investigator correctly interprets Matter-scaled temperatures, occupancy states, and lock transitions. However, the evening cooking sequence in C16 is truncated at 18:35, missing the cook surface off event and any potential safety escalation. The unattended cooking hypothesis (A1) relies heavily on this missing off-log, transient `None` telemetry gaps, and occupancy in adjacent rooms, which significantly elevates the false-alarm risk per protocol guidelines. Request the subsequent chunk to confirm the cooking duration, verify safe deactivation, and check for any downstream safety responses or temperature escalation.

## Query
以下是过去 24 小时的设备活动日志。请分析是否存在异常行为模式，并说明推理过程。

## 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": 406,
    "master_bedroom": 516,
    "second_bedroom": 336,
    "kitchen": 304,
    "bathroom": 48,
    "entrance": 232
  },
  "attribute_frequency": {
    "MeasuredValue": 1156,
    "Occupancy": 649,
    "OnOff": 17,
    "StateValue": 7,
    "LockState": 5,
    "SystemMode": 1,
    "OperationalState": 1,
    "CurrentPositionLiftPercent100ths": 1
  },
  "lock_state_flips": 5,
  "occupancy_events": 649,
  "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

## Query
以下是过去 24 小时的设备活动日志。请分析是否存在异常行为模式，并说明推理过程。

## 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": "behavior-sequence",
  "secondary_task_profile": "none",
  "query_anchor": {
    "target_rooms": [
      "entrance",
      "kitchen",
      "living_room",
      "master_bedroom"
    ],
    "target_devices": [
      "occupancy_sensor",
      "door_lock",
      "cook_surface",
      "temperature_sensor"
    ],
    "target_question": "分析过去24小时是否存在异常行为模式"
  },
  "focus_rooms": [
    "entrance",
    "kitchen",
    "living_room",
    "master_bedroom"
  ],
  "focus_devices": [
    "entrance_occupancy",
    "kitchen_cook_surface",
    "front_door_lock",
    "living_room_ac",
    "temperature_sensor"
  ],
  "focus_chunk_ids": [
    "C00",
    "C05",
    "C16",
    "C22"
  ],
  "suspected_patterns": [
    "Baseline nighttime unoccupied state",
    "Morning kitchen routine activation",
    "Evening arrival and home mode sequence",
    "Late-night occupancy persistence"
  ],
  "why_these_chunks": "C00 establishes baseline nighttime unoccupied state; C05 captures morning kitchen routine and a transient sensor reading; C16 shows evening arrival with coordinated device activation (lock, lights, AC); C22 represents late-night occupancy patterns. Together they span the full 24-hour cycle to evaluate routine consistency and identify deviations.",
  "latent_task_profile": "behavior-sequence",
  "query_intent_profile": "behavior-sequence"
}

## Investigator

{
  "normal_hypotheses": [
    {
      "id": "N1",
      "description": "Standard daily routine with normal appliance usage and expected sensor behavior.",
      "evidence": [
        "Nighttime logs (00:00-02:30) show all rooms unoccupied with stable baseline temperatures (~22-23°C),