Research/Terra/ 130168
Task evidence / spatial-analysis

Facilities in negative-migration countries

PassComputational taskUnpublished draft
Download evidence JSON ↓

The question

130168
How many mineral extraction facilities in Africa are located in countries with negative net migration?
Exact submitted task and declared adaptations
How many mineral extraction facilities in Africa are located in countries with negative net migration?

Task conventions: Use 2023 net migration and countries classified as Africa in the provided boundaries. Count source facility records once, retaining benchmark_row_id; repeated FeatureUID values are not a deduplication instruction. Use point-within-polygon membership (boundary points are excluded). Resolve country identity using the supplied fields; differing country-name spellings are not evidence that migration data is missing. Report any records in countries with unresolved migration as unknown. Offshore or otherwise outside-country points do not satisfy within.



Compute the answer using only the supplied immutable fixtures. Save the selected features with their benchmark_row_id and original geometry as an inspectable data artifact. In your accepted final answer include one JSON code block with count (integer), unknown_count (integer), coverage_note (string), and selection (an object with collectionId, itemId, assetKey for that artifact). Maps are optional. Do not request clarification: the task conventions are fixed. Do not use live substitutes, shrink the study question, or use external benchmark answers.

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

Supplied immutable inputs:
[
  {
    "name": "African mineral extraction facilities",
    "edition": "USGS 2021 benchmark snapshot",
    "units": {},
    "collectionId": "blue-generated--[resource id withheld]",
    "itemId": "[resource id withheld]",
    "assetKey": "data"
  },
  {
    "name": "World Bank country boundaries",
    "edition": "GeoBenchX harmonized names",
    "units": {},
    "collectionId": "blue-generated--[resource id withheld]",
    "itemId": "[resource id withheld]",
    "assetKey": "data"
  },
  {
    "name": "Net migration, World Development Indicators",
    "edition": "2024-11-13 snapshot; use 2023",
    "units": {
      "2023": "people (net migration)"
    },
    "collectionId": "blue-generated--[resource id withheld]",
    "itemId": "[resource id withheld]",
    "assetKey": "data"
  }
]

Outcome & verification

Independent artifact and delivery checks passed.

Duration
31m 53s
Recorded Blue tool calls
63
Total tokens
5,049,230
Model cost
Not recorded
Application revision
d50497ea9084f29c91b05406688f87035df98d8a
Release
terra-geobenchx-v1

Recorded final answer

I found 1,642 mineral extraction facility records in Africa that are strictly within an African country polygon and in countries with negative 2023 net migration. Unknown count is 0. Important limit: 192 source facility points fell outside every African country polygon under the strict within rule, so they were excluded from the within-country count. Next: open the attached saved selection to inspect the records; the source facility ID is kept in `benchmark_row_id_target`. Sources used: the supplied USGS 2021 facilities snapshot, World Bank Official Boundaries with GeoBenchX harmonized names, and the supplied WDI snapshot dated 2024-11-13 using 2023 net migration. ### Limitations - 192 source facility points fall outside every African country polygon under the strict within-country rule and are excluded from the within-country count. - The saved counted-features artifact preserves the source facility benchmark row ID under benchmark_row_id_target because joined field suffixes are applied. - The final selected artifact preserves the source facility benchmark row ID under benchmark_row_id_target. - Source records are counted once; repeated FeatureUID values are not used as a deduplication rule. - Strict within-country membership excludes facilities outside every African country polygon. - Country identity is resolved with the supplied code fields using ISO_A3 to Country Code.

Independent checks

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

Expected count
1642
Reported count
1642
Computation verified
Yes
Answer fulfilled
Yes
Full grading and rubric record
{
  "expectedCount": 1642,
  "actualCount": 1642,
  "expectedMetrics": null,
  "actualMetrics": null,
  "computationCorrect": true,
  "answerFulfilled": true,
  "adjudication": null,
  "qualification": null,
  "reasons": []
}

Recorded investigation findings

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

run_trial · completed

Which fields in the supplied facility, boundary, and migration fixtures support strict African country membership and the 2023 net migration join?

run_trial · completed

Does the full immutable-fixture method produce a clean strict within-country assignment for African facilities and a usable 2023 migration join for negative and unknown counts?

assess_trial · completed · assessment: sufficient

The fixture inspection answered the schema question. The facility fixture has 2,408 point records and includes benchmark_row_id, Country, FeatureUID, Latitude, Longitude, and original point geometry. The boundary fixture has 251 country polygons and includes CONTINENT, REGION_UN, NAME_EN, WB_A3, ISO_A3, and benchmark_row_id, which is enough to identify countries classified as Africa and join country codes. The migration fixture has 266 table rows and includes Country Code, Country Name, and a numeric 2023 field for net migration.

assess_trial · completed · assessment: insufficient

The full-area trial established the main method structure and strict within-country behavior. Filtering CONTINENT='Africa' produced 52 African country polygons. A strict within spatial join matched 2,216 of 2,408 facility points to African country polygons and left 192 facilities outside strict within-country membership, so those points do not count as within. The migration join using WB_A3 to Country Code was not sufficient because 115 matched facilities remained unmatched with legacy country code ZAR, and the join diagnostics showed exact alternative matches on ISO_A3 for those same records.

run_trial · completed

After correcting the country-code join to ISO_A3, what are the final negative-migration and unresolved-migration counts for strictly within-country African facilities?

assess_trial · completed · assessment: sufficient

The corrected join answered the final count question. Reusing the strict within-country African facilities set, joining ISO_A3 to Country Code matched all 2,216 within-country African facilities to 2023 migration records with zero unmatched features. Filtering 2023 < 0 selected 1,642 facilities. Filtering 2023 is null selected 0 facilities. The saved counted-features artifact preserves original point geometry and the source facility benchmark row ID under benchmark_row_id_target.

assess_result · failed · requested assessment: sufficient

Using only the supplied immutable fixtures, I filtered the supplied World Bank boundary fixture to 52 African country polygons, applied a strict within spatial join to the supplied USGS 2021 facilities fixture, and joined the supplied WDI 2023 migration table by ISO_A3 to Country Code after the trial showed WB_A3 carried a legacy Congo code. This matched 2,216 of 2,408 source facility records to an African country polygon and excluded 192 offshore or otherwise outside-country points from within-country counting. All 2,216 within-country facilities resolved a 2023 migration value after the corrected code join. Filtering 2023 < 0 selected 1,642 facility records, and filtering 2023 is null selected 0 records. The selected derived artifact preserves original point geometry and the source facility benchmark row ID under benchmark_row_id_target.

assess_result · completed · assessment: sufficient

Using only the supplied immutable fixtures, the final saved workflow filtered the supplied boundary fixture to 52 African country polygons, assigned facilities with a strict within spatial join, and joined 2023 net migration by ISO_A3 to Country Code. The strict within step matched 2,216 of 2,408 source facilities to an African country polygon and excluded 192 offshore or otherwise outside-country points from within-country counting. The corrected country-code join matched all 2,216 within-country African facilities to migration records with zero unmatched features and no null 2023 values. Filtering 2023 < 0 produced the final selected artifact with 1,642 facility records. The saved output preserves original point geometry and the source facility benchmark row ID under benchmark_row_id_target.

Recorded workflow

  1. 01

    africa boundaries

    Recorded vector-filter · succeeded

  2. 02

    boundaries src

    Recorded source · succeeded

  3. 03

    Facilities in African countries with negative 2023 net migration

    Recorded output · succeeded

  4. 04

    facilities migration

    Recorded table-attribute-join · succeeded

  5. 05

    facilities src

    Recorded source · succeeded

  6. 06

    migration src

    Recorded source · succeeded

  7. 07

    negative selection

    Recorded vector-filter · succeeded

  8. 08

    unknown selection

    Recorded vector-filter · skipped

  9. 09

    within africa

    Recorded vector-spatial-join · succeeded

  10. 10

    facilities migration iso

    Recorded table-attribute-join · succeeded

  11. 11

    migration src

    Recorded source · succeeded

  12. 12

    negative selection

    Recorded vector-filter · succeeded

  13. 13

    facilities migration iso

    Recorded output · succeeded

  14. 14

    negative selection

    Recorded output · succeeded

  15. 15

    unknown selection

    Recorded output · succeeded

  16. 16

    unknown selection

    Recorded vector-filter · succeeded

  17. 17

    within africa src

    Recorded source · succeeded

  18. 18

    africa boundaries

    Recorded vector-filter · succeeded

  19. 19

    boundaries src

    Recorded source · succeeded

  20. 20

    facilities migration

    Recorded table-attribute-join · succeeded

  21. 21

    facilities src

    Recorded source · succeeded

  22. 22

    migration src

    Recorded source · succeeded

  23. 23

    negative selection

    Recorded vector-filter · succeeded

  24. 24

    africa boundaries

    Recorded output · succeeded

  25. 25

    within africa

    Recorded output · succeeded

  26. 26

    facilities migration

    Recorded output · succeeded

  27. 27

    negative selection

    Recorded output · succeeded

  28. 28

    unknown selection

    Recorded output · succeeded

  29. 29

    unknown selection

    Recorded vector-filter · succeeded

  30. 30

    within africa

    Recorded vector-spatial-join · succeeded

  31. 31

    boundaries src

    Recorded source · succeeded

  32. 32

    facilities src

    Recorded source · succeeded

  33. 33

    migration src

    Recorded source · succeeded

  34. 34

    facilities src

    Recorded output · succeeded

  35. 35

    boundaries src

    Recorded output · succeeded

  36. 36

    migration src

    Recorded output · succeeded

Activity

Recorded actions

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

  1. Progress update

    I’ll inspect the retained analysis context and the exact Blue operations for fixture inspection, private trials, workflow drafting, and final assessment.

  2. get_analysis

    Recorded tool call · completed

  3. Progress update

    I’ve confirmed there isn’t an existing saved analysis for this task. Next I’m reading the three immutable fixtures so I can use their exact fields and authorized input selections.

  4. get_collection

    Recorded tool call · completed

  5. get_collection

    Recorded tool call · completed

  6. get_collection

    Recorded tool call · completed

  7. Progress update

    I have the fixture metadata. Next I’m checking sample rows and field names so I can match countries correctly and enforce the strict point-within-polygon rule.

  8. get_collection

    Recorded tool call · completed

  9. get_collection

    Recorded tool call · completed

  10. get_collection

    Recorded tool call · completed

  11. get_tool_help

    Recorded tool call · completed

  12. get_tool_help

    Recorded tool call · completed

  13. update_analysis_brief

    Recorded tool call · completed

  14. Progress update

    I’ve saved the analysis goal. Now I’m materializing the three fixtures privately so I can inspect their actual schemas and verify which country fields support the strict count.

  15. run_trial

    Recorded tool call · completed

  16. Progress update

    The source trial finished. I found usable country and migration identity fields, and now I’m checking the detailed report so I can confirm the exact 2023 field and build the strict full-area selection method.

  17. get_trial_report

    Recorded tool call · completed

  18. Progress update

    I’ve confirmed the fixtures expose the needed country and facility identifiers, but I still need the exact 2023 field and the right processors for strict point-in-polygon plus country-code joining. I’m checking those next before I save the full workflow draft.

  19. inspect_artifact

    Recorded tool call · completed

  20. inspect_artifact

    Recorded tool call · completed

  21. list_processors

    Recorded tool call · completed

  22. inspect_artifact

    Recorded tool call · completed

  23. inspect_artifact

    Recorded tool call · completed

  24. Progress update

    I found the likely processor path. Next I’m verifying the exact schemas for Africa filtering, point-in-polygon joining, and country-code joining so the saved workflow matches the tested method exactly.

  25. describe_processors

    Recorded tool call · completed

  26. run_trial

    Recorded tool call · completed

  27. Progress update

    I’ve got the method. I’m testing the full count privately now: Africa-only country filter, strict point-within-polygon join, country-code migration join, then separate negative and unknown selections.

  28. assess_trial

    Recorded tool call · completed

  29. Progress update

    The first full trial found an avoidable join problem, not missing migration data. The Africa country code WB_A3 includes legacy ZAR for Congo, Dem. Rep., and the trial itself showed ISO_A3 matches the migration table’s Country Code for those records. I’m correcting the join key now instead of treating those 115 facilities as unknown.

  30. assess_trial

    Recorded tool call · completed

  31. Progress update

    I’ve isolated the only real uncertainty now: the final country-code join. I’m reusing the exact strict-within African facility set from the prior trial and correcting just the join key to ISO_A3 so the final count is based on the best supported country identity field in the supplied fixtures.

  32. run_trial

    Recorded tool call · completed

  33. get_trial_report

    Recorded tool call · completed

  34. get_tool_help

    Recorded tool call · completed

  35. inspect_artifact

    Recorded tool call · completed

  36. Progress update

    The corrected trial finished cleanly. I’m checking the exact workflow-drafting and final-assessment tool shapes now so I can save the final selected features as the inspectable artifact and attach the answer object to the accepted result.

  37. inspect_artifact

    Recorded tool call · completed

  38. get_tool_help

    Recorded tool call · completed

  39. get_tool_help

    Recorded tool call · completed

  40. Progress update

    I already have the corrected final counts from the tested method. Before I record the accepted result, I’m checking the exact assess_result shape so I attach the derived selected-features artifact correctly rather than guessing the final reference format.

  41. list_processors

    Recorded tool call · completed

  42. Progress update

    I have the final negative count and unknown count already. I’m doing one last check for a lightweight field-selection step so the saved output keeps the original facility benchmark_row_id cleanly in the derived artifact instead of relying on the join-suffixed name.

  43. Progress update

    I’ve finished the corrected method. Now I’m checking the stored artifact/reference format so I can file the accepted result against the exact derived output instead of guessing at the final artifact_ref string.

  44. get_analysis

    Recorded tool call · completed

  45. get_analysis

    Recorded tool call · completed

  46. get_tool_help

    Recorded tool call · completed

  47. Progress update

    I’ve got the artifact references now. I’m making one last private check that the selected output visibly contains the original facility ID field and that the empty unknown set is a real zero, then I’ll save the tested workflow draft and record the accepted final result.

  48. inspect_artifact

    Recorded tool call · completed

  49. inspect_artifact

    Recorded tool call · completed

  50. get_tool_help

    Recorded tool call · completed

  51. Progress update

    I’m verifying the final artifact contents now. Then I’ll record the accepted result with the attached selection object and finish with the plain-language count.

  52. inspect_artifact

    Recorded tool call · completed

  53. inspect_artifact

    Recorded tool call · completed

  54. update_analysis_brief

    Recorded tool call · completed

  55. assess_trial

    Recorded tool call · completed

  56. get_analysis

    Recorded tool call · completed

  57. Progress update

    I’ve recorded the corrected trial as sufficient. I’m refreshing the artifact list once so the final assessment references the exact current inspected outputs, then I’ll file the accepted answer.

  58. assess_result

    Recorded tool call · failed

  59. get_tool_help

    Recorded tool call · completed

  60. get_tool_help

    Recorded tool call · completed

  61. get_tool_help

    Recorded tool call · completed

  62. Progress update

    The final result needs a verified workflow output, not a private trial artifact. I’m promoting the tested method into a saved workflow now and will execute that exact corrected computation before I file the accepted answer.

  63. get_tool_help

    Recorded tool call · completed

  64. get_tool_help

    Recorded tool call · completed

  65. get_tool_help

    Recorded tool call · completed

  66. get_tool_help

    Recorded tool call · completed

  67. get_tool_help

    Recorded tool call · completed

  68. get_tool_help

    Recorded tool call · completed

  69. Progress update

    I’ve moved from private testing to the final saved workflow. It will rerun the corrected computation from the supplied fixtures so the attached result points to a proper final output artifact.

  70. propose_workflow

    Recorded tool call · failed

  71. Progress update

    The workflow draft only needed one small bookkeeping fix: the migration requirement must point to processors that feed the selected final deliverable. I’m correcting that now and keeping the tested computation unchanged.

  72. propose_workflow

    Recorded tool call · completed

  73. Progress update

    The workflow is saved. The only remaining step before running it is to record that the earlier code-mismatch finding is resolved by the corrected ISO_A3 trial, so the saved workflow can use that exact fix.

  74. assess_plan

    Recorded tool call · completed

  75. execute_workflow

    Recorded tool call · completed

  76. inspect_workflow_results

    Recorded tool call · completed

  77. Progress update

    I’m verifying the final saved output directly: one quick check of the deliverable rows to confirm the retained source ID field, and one check that the final unknown set is truly zero in the workflow run.

  78. inspect_artifact

    Recorded tool call · completed

  79. inspect_artifact

    Recorded tool call · failed

  80. Progress update

    The saved workflow has finished. I’m refreshing its outputs, then I’ll attach the final deliverable artifact and the verified zero-unknown check to the accepted result.

  81. inspect_workflow_results

    Recorded tool call · completed

  82. Progress update

    I’m confirming one last final-workflow fact: the saved deliverable keeps the source facility ID field, and the final joined workflow has no null 2023 migration values. Then I can file the accepted answer cleanly.

  83. inspect_artifact

    Recorded tool call · completed

  84. inspect_artifact

    Recorded tool call · completed

  85. inspect_artifact

    Recorded tool call · completed

  86. inspect_artifact

    Recorded tool call · failed

  87. Progress update

    I’ve already verified the final deliverable count and the retained source ID field. I’m fetching the final workflow’s empty unknown-selection receipt now so the accepted answer cites both the selected output and the verified zero unknowns.

  88. assess_result

    Recorded tool call · completed

  89. Progress update

    I’ve verified the final saved selection artifact and the workflow join coverage. I’m recording the accepted result now with the final output’s selection object attached.

|||

© 2026 Exia Labs, Inc.