{
  "category": "learning",
  "slug": "learning-focus-friendly-study-blocks",
  "title": "Build Focus-Friendly Study Blocks with AI: The Completed Test Finished at 4/10",
  "task": "structure study blocks for a learner with attention difficulties",
  "excerpt": "The completed LFT-041 synthetic field test finished at 4/10 and was not recommended: only two of five Attention support checks passed after the permitted correction.",
  "tool": "Codex multi-agent session",
  "model": "Exact underlying model identifier not disclosed by the Codex session",
  "publishedAt": "2026-04-07T08:00:00+08:00",
  "durationMinutes": 0,
  "testMode": "Synthetic benchmark",
  "inputDisclosure": "Synthetic blind-test input pack LFT-041: A learner will use short study blocks with explicit starts, breaks, and restart cues tailored to one assignment. Source facts: fictional calendar LFT-041-C1 covering 14 days; exam dates on days 9 and 14; available blocks of 25, 40, and 55 minutes; missed tasks M2/M4; prerequisite P1 before P3; and a maximum of 11 study blocks per day. Governing rule card: the 11-block daily ceiling and both fixed exam dates. Honor fixed dates, available block lengths, prerequisite order, spacing intervals, workload ceilings, recovery space, and any learner-controlled stop condition. The pack deliberately contains no answer key, target ranking, expected classification, expected calculation result, or row-level decision. Every person, organization, record, statement, file, and identifier is fictional; no private, production, or live data was supplied.",
  "runDisclosure": "We ran one text-only synthetic benchmark LFT-041 for “structure study blocks for a learner with attention difficulties” in a Codex multi-agent session. We froze the first response, returned only its 4 detected check failures, accepted one corrected response, and scored both against the same five static checks. No external or live action occurred: nothing was sent, published, deployed, uploaded, submitted, purchased, booked, contacted, emailed, called, messaged, executed, or changed outside the fictional text fixtures. No external, live, or production action occurred. Per-case elapsed time was not instrumented during the batch session.",
  "prompt": "Run bounded synthetic field test LFT-041. Task: structure study blocks for a learner with attention difficulties. Context: A learner will use short study blocks with explicit starts, breaks, and restart cues tailored to one assignment. Fictional source facts: fictional calendar LFT-041-C1 covering 14 days; exam dates on days 9 and 14; available blocks of 25, 40, and 55 minutes; missed tasks M2/M4; prerequisite P1 before P3; and a maximum of 11 study blocks per day. Governing policy, formula, or rubric: the 11-block daily ceiling and both fixed exam dates. Honor fixed dates, available block lengths, prerequisite order, spacing intervals, workload ceilings, recovery space, and any learner-controlled stop condition. Produce a dated learning plan, constraint map, and recovery checkpoint. Derive every row from the source facts and rule card; show calculations or criterion paths, cite supplied identifiers, state assumptions, surface any violated constraint, ambiguity, missing datum, or source conflict without presuming which row should pass, and abstain where evidence is incomplete. Do not infer an expected answer from the evidence plan and do not claim any live or external action. Planned verification after the frozen response: A time log and learner diary will document adherence, interruptions, and which cues supported restarting.",
  "firstResult": "Frozen first response LFT-041 produced a dated learning plan, constraint map, and recovery checkpoint for the task “structure study blocks for a learner with attention difficulties.” It treated the supplied pack as fictional and proposed this central handling: move M2 to day 3, keep P1 before P3, protect the day-9 review, and leave one recovery block open rather than exceeding 11 daily sessions. Concrete saved artifact row LFT-041-ROW1 reads: “LFT-041-C1 | move M2 to day 3, keep P1 before P3, protect the day-9 review, and leave one recovery block open rather than exceeding 11 daily sessions | source: supplied fictional pack | review state: first-draft.” The draft preserved the named records and separated supplied facts from assumptions; its inspectable learning intervention also stated that no message, transaction, system change, or learner outcome had occurred. On the five predeclared static checks, it passed Attention support learner adaptation [LFT-041]. The audit found concrete failures: for Attention support objective fit [LFT-041], the saved draft did not connect LFT-041-M4 to the full boundary of “structure study blocks for a learner with attention difficulties”; for Attention support content accuracy [LFT-041], the saved draft left the 11-block daily ceiling and both fixed exam dates without an explicit verification row; for Attention support evidence traceability [LFT-041], the saved draft gave the central LFT-041-M4 decision no source-to-output locator; for Attention support safety and access [LFT-041], the saved draft left the dated learning plan, constraint map, and recovery checkpoint without a complete reviewer handoff and acceptance marker. Those were evidence defects in the saved response, not inferred real-world failures, and they became the complete boundary of the single correction pass.",
  "correctionPrompt": "Correct only these detected LFT-041 first-draft failures, using no new input or goal: 1) Attention support objective fit [LFT-041] — the draft did not connect LFT-041-M4 to the full boundary of “structure study blocks for a learner with attention difficulties”; 2) Attention support content accuracy [LFT-041] — the draft left the 11-block daily ceiling and both fixed exam dates without an explicit verification row; 3) Attention support evidence traceability [LFT-041] — the draft gave the central LFT-041-M4 decision no source-to-output locator; 4) Attention support safety and access [LFT-041] — the draft left the dated learning plan, constraint map, and recovery checkpoint without a complete reviewer handoff and acceptance marker.",
  "finalResult": "Corrected response LFT-041 retained the original fictional inputs, task boundary, and central decision: move M2 to day 3, keep P1 before P3, protect the day-9 review, and leave one recovery block open rather than exceeding 11 daily sessions. Concrete corrected artifact row LFT-041-ROW1 reads: “LFT-041-C1 | move M2 to day 3, keep P1 before P3, protect the day-9 review, and leave one recovery block open rather than exceeding 11 daily sessions | evidence locator: LFT-041-C1 | static status: 4/10 after one correction.” It changed only the detected failure areas, adding inspectable rows for Attention support evidence traceability [LFT-041]. The frozen final text passed Attention support learner adaptation [LFT-041] and Attention support evidence traceability [LFT-041] and still failed Attention support objective fit [LFT-041], Attention support content accuracy [LFT-041], and Attention support safety and access [LFT-041]. The final dated learning plan, constraint map, and recovery checkpoint therefore earned 4/10 from 2 passing checks; no second repair was attempted. This result reports only a bounded transcript-and-fixture evaluation. It does not claim that any workplace process, learner performance, account, device, service, or external system was actually changed, contacted, tested live, or improved.",
  "checks": [
    {
      "name": "Attention support objective fit [LFT-041]",
      "firstPass": false,
      "finalPass": false,
      "evidence": "LFT-041 static check 1 inspected the saved wording for “Attention support objective fit [LFT-041].” The first transcript did not contain enough support; the corrected transcript did not contain enough support. The comparison used only fictional fixture LFT-041-M4, the declared Attention support rules, and the record’s frozen text; no live outcome or external action counted as evidence."
    },
    {
      "name": "Attention support content accuracy [LFT-041]",
      "firstPass": false,
      "finalPass": false,
      "evidence": "LFT-041 static check 2 inspected the saved wording for “Attention support content accuracy [LFT-041].” The first transcript did not contain enough support; the corrected transcript did not contain enough support. The comparison used only fictional fixture LFT-041-M4, the declared Attention support rules, and the record’s frozen text; no live outcome or external action counted as evidence."
    },
    {
      "name": "Attention support learner adaptation [LFT-041]",
      "firstPass": true,
      "finalPass": true,
      "evidence": "LFT-041 static check 3 inspected the saved wording for “Attention support learner adaptation [LFT-041].” The first transcript contained enough support; the corrected transcript contained enough support. The comparison used only fictional fixture LFT-041-M4, the declared Attention support rules, and the record’s frozen text; no live outcome or external action counted as evidence."
    },
    {
      "name": "Attention support evidence traceability [LFT-041]",
      "firstPass": false,
      "finalPass": true,
      "evidence": "LFT-041 static check 4 inspected the saved wording for “Attention support evidence traceability [LFT-041].” The first transcript did not contain enough support; the corrected transcript contained enough support. The comparison used only fictional fixture LFT-041-M4, the declared Attention support rules, and the record’s frozen text; no live outcome or external action counted as evidence."
    },
    {
      "name": "Attention support safety and access [LFT-041]",
      "firstPass": false,
      "finalPass": false,
      "evidence": "LFT-041 static check 5 inspected the saved wording for “Attention support safety and access [LFT-041].” The first transcript did not contain enough support; the corrected transcript did not contain enough support. The comparison used only fictional fixture LFT-041-M4, the declared Attention support rules, and the record’s frozen text; no live outcome or external action counted as evidence."
    }
  ],
  "initialScore": 2,
  "score": 4,
  "verdict": "failed",
  "recommended": false,
  "whatWorked": [
    "LFT-041 kept “structure study blocks for a learner with attention difficulties” bounded to disclosed fictional inputs and preserved an auditable first-response snapshot.",
    "LFT-041 made the central handling—move M2 to day 3, keep P1 before P3, protect the day-9 review, and leave one recovery block open rather than exceeding 11 daily sessions—inspectable rather than implying unseen work."
  ],
  "whatFailed": [
    "LFT-041 still lacked enough saved-text evidence for Attention support objective fit [LFT-041]; the record leaves that final failure visible.",
    "LFT-041 still lacked enough saved-text evidence for Attention support content accuracy [LFT-041]; the record leaves that final failure visible.",
    "LFT-041 still lacked enough saved-text evidence for Attention support safety and access [LFT-041]; the record leaves that final failure visible."
  ],
  "evidencePlan": "A time log and learner diary will document adherence, interruptions, and which cues supported restarting.",
  "evidenceNotes": [
    "LFT-041 preserves the exact synthetic prompt, frozen first-response account, failure-only correction, corrected-response account, and five boolean decisions together.",
    "LFT-041 scores are arithmetic: 1 first-pass checks × 2 = 2/10; 2 final-pass checks × 2 = 4/10.",
    "LFT-041 evaluated only the text/static portion of the declared evidence plan—A time log and learner diary will document adherence, interruptions, and which cues supported restarting.—and did not fabricate a live artifact, external validator, or observed outcome."
  ],
  "limitations": [
    "LFT-041 is a synthetic benchmark, so its failed verdict measures fit to the disclosed fictional Attention support fixtures rather than effectiveness in a real workplace or learning setting.",
    "LFT-041 used one text-only Codex multi-agent session whose underlying model identifier was not disclosed; different prompts, models, fixtures, or human reviewers could produce different results."
  ]
}