1 files changed, 0 insertions, 45 deletions
diff --git a/results/classifier/deepseek-2-tmp/reasoning/KVM/2392 b/results/classifier/deepseek-2-tmp/reasoning/KVM/2392
deleted file mode 100644
index 9616f730..00000000
--- a/results/classifier/deepseek-2-tmp/reasoning/KVM/2392
+++ /dev/null
@@ -1,45 +0,0 @@
-<think>
-Okay, so I need to classify this bug report: "Ability to use KVM on Windows" into one of the given categories. Let me see what each category means.
-
-First, let's look at the categories provided:
-
-1. **mistranslation**: Incorrect mapping from source architecture to IR/target in user-mode.
-2. **assembly**: Issues during assembly lowering.
-3. **other**: Any bug that doesn't fit into other specific categories.
-4. **device**
-5. **graphic**
-6. **socket**
-7. **network**
-8. **KVM**: Probably related to the Kernel-based Virtual Machine, a hypervisor in Linux.
-9. **boot**
-10. **vnc**
-11. **debug**
-12. **files**
-13. **permissions**
-14. **performance**
-15. **kernel**
-16. **peripherals**
-17. **hypervisor**
-
-The bug report mentions "KVM on Windows." KVM is typically associated with Linux, as it's a hypervisor that runs on Linux kernels. The term "KVM" itself falls under the hypervisor category since it's used for virtualization.
-
-Now, the question is whether this is about using KVM specifically or another aspect of virtualization. Since the user is asking about KVM on Windows, and KVM is a hypervisor technology primarily for Linux, I need to see if there's an appropriate category here.
-
-Looking at the list, "KVM" is one of the categories, so even though it's being used in the context of Windows, which might be non-standard, the bug report is still about KVM functionality. Therefore, the most fitting category is "hypervisor," but since "KVM" is a specific hypervisor type listed as its own category, I think that's where it belongs.
-
-Wait, no. Let me double-check: The categories include both "hypervisor" and "KVM." But since KVM is part of the hypervisor family, maybe they are separate categories. Hmm, perhaps the bug is about enabling KVM on Windows, which might not be supported natively, so it's under the "hypervisor" category.
-
-Wait again. The user provided a list where "KVM" is a separate option. So if someone mentions using KVM specifically, even on another OS like Windows, then the category would be "KVM." Alternatively, maybe "hypervisor" is a broader category that includes KVM and others.
-
-But looking back at the categories given, I see both "hypervisor" and "KVM" listed as separate options. So if the bug is about using KVM on Windows, which might involve its own specific issues or features related to KVM's functionality, then it should be classified under "KVM."
-
-Alternatively, since Windows doesn't natively support KVM in the same way Linux does, this could be a feature request or bug related to adding KVM support to Windows, but perhaps that falls under the hypervisor category.
-
-Wait, I'm getting confused. Let me clarify: The categories are separate options, so if the bug is about KVM functionality regardless of OS, it's "KVM." If it's about virtualization in general on any platform, it might be "hypervisor."
-
-But the report specifically mentions "KVM," so perhaps it's best to go with "KVM" as the category.
-
-Wait no, I'm overcomplicating. The categories are listed separately, so if "KVM" is an option, then that's where it should go even if it's on Windows. So the answer is "KVM."
-</think>
-
-KVM
\ No newline at end of file