feat(seaborn): implement radar-basic

[github-actions]

Implementation: radar-basic - python/seaborn

Implements the python/seaborn version of radar-basic.

File: plots/radar-basic/implementations/python/seaborn.py

Parent Issue: #744

---

🤖 impl-generate workflow

[claude]

AI Review - Attempt 1/3

Image Description

Light render (plot-light.png): Warm off-white (#FAF8F1) background. A polar radar chart occupies the top ~70% of the canvas showing two series across six axes (Price, Quality, Durability, Usability, Design, Warranty): "Budget Model" in #009E73 (green) and "Premium Model" in #C475FD (violet), both filled at alpha≈0.25 with the polygon closed. Radial gridlines at 20/40/60/80/100 are labeled in a gap between the Price and Quality spokes. A legend box sits top-right with green/purple swatches on an elevated cream background and dark text. Below, a companion horizontal grouped bar chart repeats the same six categories with matching colors and a "Score" x-axis (0-100). Title "radar-basic · python · seaborn · anyplot.ai" is dark ink, clearly legible. All text (title, axis category labels, tick labels, bar labels) is dark against the light background — fully readable.

Dark render (plot-dark.png): Warm near-black (#1A1A17) background. Identical geometry and identical data colors (#009E73 green, #C475FD violet) — only chrome flipped: title/axis-category labels/legend text render in light ink, tick labels and bar-axis labels in a lighter soft gray, gridlines and spines subtle against the dark surface, legend box uses the dark elevated background with a light border. No dark-on-dark issues found — all text remains clearly legible against the near-black surface, and the brand green reads well on both surfaces.

Both renders pass the theme-readability checklist; no clipped elements found at any edge (AR-09 not triggered), and no fake/simulated interactivity present (AR-08 not triggered — this is a static matplotlib/seaborn chart with genuine filled polygons and bars).

Score: 90/100

Category	Score	Max
Visual Quality	27	30
Design Excellence	15	20
Spec Compliance	15	15
Data Quality	15	15
Code Quality	10	10
Library Mastery	8	10
Total	90	100

Visual Quality (27/30)

• VQ-01: Text Legibility (7/8) — explicit font sizes throughout, all readable in both themes; radial tick labels (8pt) are slightly small but legible
• VQ-02: No Overlap (5/6) — radial tick labels (20/40/60/80/100), placed in the Price↔Quality gap via set_rlabel_position, sit close to the Budget Model's descending edge between those two spokes — borderline soft overlap, not severe
• VQ-03: Element Visibility (5/6) — markers (s=60) and linewidth=3 are adequate for the 6-point sparse series; could be pushed slightly larger given the generous 2400×2400 canvas
• VQ-04: Color Accessibility (2/2) — green/violet pairing avoids the red-green confusion axis, adequate contrast on both surfaces
• VQ-05: Layout & Canvas (4/4) — square canvas correctly chosen for the symmetric radar, gate passed, no cutoff, good proportions
• VQ-06: Axis Labels & Title (2/2) — mandated title format correct, axis categories clearly labeled at outer edge
• VQ-07: Palette Compliance (2/2) — first series #009E73, second #C475FD (canonical Imprint order), backgrounds correct in both themes, data colors identical light/dark

Design Excellence (15/20)

• DE-01: Aesthetic Sophistication (6/8) — custom rc theme, intentional two-panel hierarchy (radar dominant at 2.3:1 height ratio over companion bar), Imprint-consistent palette
• DE-02: Visual Refinement (4/6) — bar panel despined, subtle grid alpha, legend padding reasonable; polar spine kept (expected for radar) but only lightly softened
• DE-03: Data Storytelling (5/6) — companion horizontal bar chart gives a direct numeric ranking alongside the radar's holistic shape comparison — genuinely reinforces the story rather than just decorating

Spec Compliance (15/15)

• SC-01: Plot Type (5/5) — radar/spider chart is the dominant element, correctly implemented via polar projection
• SC-02: Required Features (4/4) — filled polygons alpha≈0.25, gridlines at 20/40/60/80/100, axis labels at outer edge, distinct colors + legend, polygon explicitly closed
• SC-03: Data Mapping (3/3) — categories on axes, values 0-100 scale, all axes shown
• SC-04: Title & Legend (3/3) — title matches mandated format exactly; legend labels "Budget Model"/"Premium Model" match data

Data Quality (15/15)

• DQ-01: Feature Coverage (6/6) — multi-series comparison, radial gridlines, closed polygons, distinct colors, legend all present
• DQ-02: Realistic Context (5/5) — plausible, neutral product-comparison scenario (budget vs. premium across attributes)
• DQ-03: Appropriate Scale (4/4) — 0-100 scale as recommended by the spec

Code Quality (10/10)

• CQ-01: KISS Structure (3/3) — flat script, no functions/classes
• CQ-02: Reproducibility (2/2) — fully deterministic hardcoded data, no randomness to seed
• CQ-03: Clean Imports (2/2) — os, matplotlib.pyplot, numpy, pandas, seaborn all used
• CQ-04: Code Elegance (2/2) — appropriate complexity for a radar+companion-bar composite, no fake UI
• CQ-05: Output & API (1/1) — saves plot-{THEME}.png, no bbox_inches='tight', current matplotlib/seaborn API

Library Mastery (8/10)

• LM-01: Idiomatic Usage (4/5) — correctly falls back to matplotlib's polar projection (seaborn has no native radar geom) while using seaborn's high-level API (sns.barplot, sns.despine, sns.set_theme) for the companion panel
• LM-02: Distinctive Features (4/5) - Good combination of sns.barplot(hue=..., palette=...) + sns.despine alongside the polar companion, though the radar itself is pure matplotlib since seaborn has no radar primitive

Score Caps Applied

• None

Strengths

• Two-panel composition (radar dominant + companion bar ranking) reinforces the comparison without diluting the primary radar chart type
• Correct closed-polygon geometry, alpha=0.25 fills, and canonical Imprint palette order (#009E73 first)
• Clean theme-adaptive chrome — both light and dark renders fully legible, data colors identical across themes
• Deterministic, realistic budget-vs-premium product dataset

Weaknesses

• Radial tick labels (20/40/60/80/100), positioned via set_rlabel_position(180/n_vars) in the Price↔Quality gap, sit close to the Budget Model's descending polygon edge in that gap — nudge further into the gap or reduce label opacity slightly to fully clear the line
• Markers (s=60) could be sized slightly larger (e.g. 70-80) given the generous square canvas and only 6 points per series
• Companion bar chart repeats the same six category labels already shown on the radar spokes — a reasonable trade-off for numeric-ranking clarity, but adds some label redundancy

Issues Found

1. VQ-02 MINOR: Radial tick labels sit close to the Budget Model polygon edge between the Price and Quality spokes
   • Fix: Increase set_rlabel_position offset slightly (e.g. to ~35-40° instead of 30°) or lower tick label alpha
2. DE-02 LOW-MEDIUM: Visual refinement is solid but not maximal — polar spine remains only lightly softened
   • Fix: Consider a lower spine alpha or removing the outer polar spine entirely for a more minimal frame

AI Feedback for Next Attempt

Solid, well-executed radar chart with a genuinely useful companion bar breakdown. Minor polish opportunities: nudge the radial tick label position further from the Price→Quality polygon edge to fully clear any visual overlap, and consider slightly larger markers given the square canvas's generous real estate.

Verdict: APPROVED