I could understand a human misreading the clubs as longer than the diamonds (ten written 10 rather than T), but I would expect a robot to bid 2NT here. Instead it bid 2♣.
Is this about needing a 'better than intermediate' hand because vulnerable (see below), or simulations with partner being a passed hand, or what?
I can see the diamonds failing a quality check, but there are plenty of redeeming features with decent chances in a simulation I would expect.
On the actual layout, EW missed 5♦ making in a 9-card fit.
GIB System Notes said:
Unusual NT (when non-vulnerable GIB only does Unusual NT with intermediate hands, xx-KQxxxx KQxxx for example, but it needs a better hand when vulnerable)