Use this Spreads teaching case as a presentation pattern, then adapt it to my brief.
Layout family: S11 / Treatment comparison; reviewed variation treatment-comparison.
AI entry point: https://tdw-spreads.choiceoak6.chatgpt.site/LLM_ENTRYPOINT.md
Working geometry: https://tdw-spreads.choiceoak6.chatgpt.site/cases/sc-2d5a4790f1754d18b8e1a7708f3a49fd/spread.html
Meaning and slot map: https://tdw-spreads.choiceoak6.chatgpt.site/cases/sc-2d5a4790f1754d18b8e1a7708f3a49fd/case.json
Counts and limits: https://tdw-spreads.choiceoak6.chatgpt.site/cases/sc-2d5a4790f1754d18b8e1a7708f3a49fd/reuse.json

Question: Which visual treatment best expresses the same agreed proposition for the intended audience?
Reasoning: distinct layout alternatives compared in equivalent outer frames using the same message and source material
Before: Agree the proposition and selection criteria; show enough of each direction to make its rules understandable.
After: Choose or refine a direction, then check accessibility, real content and implementation.
Preserve: Keep the agreed message, factual claims, supplied assets and proposed action equivalent. Give alternatives equivalent outer frames and readable views. Internal arrangement, image scale, grouping and reading order may differ. When comparing layouts, show genuinely different compositions. If only colour changes, label it a colour comparison. Label alternatives neutrally; do not imply before/after or ranked performance. Explain the recommendation through the intended audience and brief.
Required inputs: An agreed brief and criteria for judging the treatments. The same message and source material presented through legible examples in comparable outer frames. Relevant accessibility and implementation constraints.
Counts: Comparable alternatives may vary in number; this visual instance supports two. For three or four directions, use a readable grid or linked comparison passage and recheck comparable outer frames and legibility. Those instances are untested.
Use my real audience, intended decision, content, evidence, brand and requested format. Ask only for missing information that changes the outcome. Do not turn the fictional example into evidence.
Explain why this pattern fits, map my content to the real slots, preserve qualifications, and check both narrative transitions. If the required relationship is missing, explain the mismatch and suggest an alternative.
HTML is editable; native PowerPoint export is unverified. Inspect the actual populated result in its delivery format. Select this named option in the main gallery; use its supplied HTML and case slot map.