{
  "category": "learning",
  "slug": "learning-research-question-refinement",
  "title": "Should AI Help Narrow an Overbroad Student Research Question: A Failed Synthetic Benchmark at 4/10",
  "task": "narrow an overbroad research question for a student",
  "excerpt": "The completed LFT-023 synthetic field test finished at 4/10 and was not recommended: only two of five Research design checks passed after the permitted correction.",
  "tool": "Codex multi-agent session",
  "model": "Exact underlying model identifier not disclosed by the Codex session",
  "publishedAt": "2026-07-27T14:00:00+08:00",
  "durationMinutes": 0,
  "testMode": "Synthetic benchmark",
  "inputDisclosure": "Synthetic blind-test input pack LFT-023: A student will iteratively refine a broad social-science topic into a feasible and contestable research question. Source facts: fictional learner artifacts LFT-023-W01 through LFT-023-W04; rubric criteria R1–R5; passages P2 and P7 as admissible evidence; an unsupported conclusion in W03; a stylistic variation in W04; and a no-rewrite boundary. Governing rule card: consistent rubric application without replacing learner work. Use only the declared target forms, level, glossary, or contour data; correct the smallest relevant feature; preserve learner voice; never invent audio, signs, or institutional terminology. 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-023 for “narrow an overbroad research question for a student” 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-023. Task: narrow an overbroad research question for a student. Context: A student will iteratively refine a broad social-science topic into a feasible and contestable research question. Fictional source facts: fictional learner artifacts LFT-023-W01 through LFT-023-W04; rubric criteria R1–R5; passages P2 and P7 as admissible evidence; an unsupported conclusion in W03; a stylistic variation in W04; and a no-rewrite boundary. Governing policy, formula, or rubric: consistent rubric application without replacing learner work. Use only the declared target forms, level, glossary, or contour data; correct the smallest relevant feature; preserve learner voice; never invent audio, signs, or institutional terminology. Produce a criterion-level feedback table, evidence citations, and next-step prompt. 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: Version history will be evaluated against predefined criteria for scope, clarity, feasibility, and openness.",
  "firstResult": "Frozen first response LFT-023 produced a criterion-level feedback table, evidence citations, and next-step prompt for the task “narrow an overbroad research question for a student.” It treated the supplied pack as fictional and proposed this central handling: cite P2/P7 for LFT-023-W01, diagnose the unsupported W03 conclusion, score W04 by the same R1–R5 criteria, and preserve the no-rewrite boundary. Concrete saved artifact row LFT-023-ROW1 reads: “LFT-023-W01 | cite P2/P7 for LFT-023-W01, diagnose the unsupported W03 conclusion, score W04 by the same R1–R5 criteria, and preserve the no-rewrite boundary | 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 Research design content accuracy [LFT-023]. The audit found concrete failures: for Research design objective fit [LFT-023], the saved draft did not connect LFT-023-W03 to the full boundary of “narrow an overbroad research question for a student”; for Research design learner adaptation [LFT-023], the saved draft did not resolve or clearly preserve the unsupported LFT-023-W03 conclusion and stylistic variation in W04; for Research design evidence traceability [LFT-023], the saved draft gave the central LFT-023-W03 decision no source-to-output locator; for Research design safety and access [LFT-023], the saved draft left the criterion-level feedback table, evidence citations, and next-step prompt 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-023 first-draft failures, using no new input or goal: 1) Research design objective fit [LFT-023] — the draft did not connect LFT-023-W03 to the full boundary of “narrow an overbroad research question for a student”; 2) Research design learner adaptation [LFT-023] — the draft did not resolve or clearly preserve the unsupported LFT-023-W03 conclusion and stylistic variation in W04; 3) Research design evidence traceability [LFT-023] — the draft gave the central LFT-023-W03 decision no source-to-output locator; 4) Research design safety and access [LFT-023] — the draft left the criterion-level feedback table, evidence citations, and next-step prompt without a complete reviewer handoff and acceptance marker.",
  "finalResult": "Corrected response LFT-023 retained the original fictional inputs, task boundary, and central decision: cite P2/P7 for LFT-023-W01, diagnose the unsupported W03 conclusion, score W04 by the same R1–R5 criteria, and preserve the no-rewrite boundary. Concrete corrected artifact row LFT-023-ROW1 reads: “LFT-023-W01 | cite P2/P7 for LFT-023-W01, diagnose the unsupported W03 conclusion, score W04 by the same R1–R5 criteria, and preserve the no-rewrite boundary | evidence locator: LFT-023-W01 | static status: 4/10 after one correction.” It changed only the detected failure areas, adding inspectable rows for Research design learner adaptation [LFT-023]. The frozen final text passed Research design content accuracy [LFT-023] and Research design learner adaptation [LFT-023] and still failed Research design objective fit [LFT-023], Research design evidence traceability [LFT-023], and Research design safety and access [LFT-023]. The final criterion-level feedback table, evidence citations, and next-step prompt 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": "Research design objective fit [LFT-023]",
      "firstPass": false,
      "finalPass": false,
      "evidence": "LFT-023 static check 1 inspected the saved wording for “Research design objective fit [LFT-023].” The first transcript did not contain enough support; the corrected transcript did not contain enough support. The comparison used only fictional fixture LFT-023-W03, the declared Research design rules, and the record’s frozen text; no live outcome or external action counted as evidence."
    },
    {
      "name": "Research design content accuracy [LFT-023]",
      "firstPass": true,
      "finalPass": true,
      "evidence": "LFT-023 static check 2 inspected the saved wording for “Research design content accuracy [LFT-023].” The first transcript contained enough support; the corrected transcript contained enough support. The comparison used only fictional fixture LFT-023-W03, the declared Research design rules, and the record’s frozen text; no live outcome or external action counted as evidence."
    },
    {
      "name": "Research design learner adaptation [LFT-023]",
      "firstPass": false,
      "finalPass": true,
      "evidence": "LFT-023 static check 3 inspected the saved wording for “Research design learner adaptation [LFT-023].” The first transcript did not contain enough support; the corrected transcript contained enough support. The comparison used only fictional fixture LFT-023-W03, the declared Research design rules, and the record’s frozen text; no live outcome or external action counted as evidence."
    },
    {
      "name": "Research design evidence traceability [LFT-023]",
      "firstPass": false,
      "finalPass": false,
      "evidence": "LFT-023 static check 4 inspected the saved wording for “Research design evidence traceability [LFT-023].” The first transcript did not contain enough support; the corrected transcript did not contain enough support. The comparison used only fictional fixture LFT-023-W03, the declared Research design rules, and the record’s frozen text; no live outcome or external action counted as evidence."
    },
    {
      "name": "Research design safety and access [LFT-023]",
      "firstPass": false,
      "finalPass": false,
      "evidence": "LFT-023 static check 5 inspected the saved wording for “Research design safety and access [LFT-023].” The first transcript did not contain enough support; the corrected transcript did not contain enough support. The comparison used only fictional fixture LFT-023-W03, the declared Research design 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-023 kept “narrow an overbroad research question for a student” bounded to disclosed fictional inputs and preserved an auditable first-response snapshot.",
    "LFT-023 made the central handling—cite P2/P7 for LFT-023-W01, diagnose the unsupported W03 conclusion, score W04 by the same R1–R5 criteria, and preserve the no-rewrite boundary—inspectable rather than implying unseen work."
  ],
  "whatFailed": [
    "LFT-023 still lacked enough saved-text evidence for Research design objective fit [LFT-023]; the record leaves that final failure visible.",
    "LFT-023 still lacked enough saved-text evidence for Research design evidence traceability [LFT-023]; the record leaves that final failure visible.",
    "LFT-023 still lacked enough saved-text evidence for Research design safety and access [LFT-023]; the record leaves that final failure visible."
  ],
  "evidencePlan": "Version history will be evaluated against predefined criteria for scope, clarity, feasibility, and openness.",
  "evidenceNotes": [
    "LFT-023 preserves the exact synthetic prompt, frozen first-response account, failure-only correction, corrected-response account, and five boolean decisions together.",
    "LFT-023 scores are arithmetic: 1 first-pass checks × 2 = 2/10; 2 final-pass checks × 2 = 4/10.",
    "LFT-023 evaluated only the text/static portion of the declared evidence plan—Version history will be evaluated against predefined criteria for scope, clarity, feasibility, and openness.—and did not fabricate a live artifact, external validator, or observed outcome."
  ],
  "limitations": [
    "LFT-023 is a synthetic benchmark, so its failed verdict measures fit to the disclosed fictional Research design fixtures rather than effectiveness in a real workplace or learning setting.",
    "LFT-023 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."
  ]
}