Learning · Evidence record
Building a Spaced Retrieval Plan Around Exam Dates: Four or More Checks Passed After One Correction
The completed LFT-051 synthetic field test reached 8/10 after one failure-only correction: 4 of five static checks passed for Retrieval Scheduling, while 1 check remained unresolved.
- Exact prompts and outputs
- One correction only
- Synthetic inputs disclosed
01 · The assignment
The task
build a spaced retrieval practice plan around fixed exam dates
02 · Scope before score
Test disclosures
Input disclosure
Synthetic blind-test input pack LFT-051: A learner will provide a topic map, exam calendar, available study blocks, confidence ratings, and maximum daily workload. Source facts: fictional calendar LFT-051-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 13 study blocks per day. Governing rule card: the 13-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.
Run disclosure
We ran one text-only synthetic benchmark LFT-051 for “build a spaced retrieval practice plan around fixed exam dates” in a Codex multi-agent session. We froze the first response, returned only its 2 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.
- Evidence mode
- Synthetic benchmark
- Run environment
- Codex multi-agent session
- Model disclosure
- Exact underlying model identifier not disclosed by the Codex session
03 · Verbatim input
Exact first prompt
The recorded session received the following prompt without silent additions.
Run bounded synthetic field test LFT-051. Task: build a spaced retrieval practice plan around fixed exam dates. Context: A learner will provide a topic map, exam calendar, available study blocks, confidence ratings, and maximum daily workload. Fictional source facts: fictional calendar LFT-051-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 13 study blocks per day. Governing policy, formula, or rubric: the 13-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 calendar audit will verify spacing, topic coverage, workload limits, prerequisite order, and recovery time before each exam.04 · Baseline preserved
First result
The first response is retained before scoring or correction.
Frozen first response LFT-051 produced a dated learning plan, constraint map, and recovery checkpoint for the task “build a spaced retrieval practice plan around fixed exam dates.” 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 13 daily sessions. Concrete saved artifact row LFT-051-ROW1 reads: “LFT-051-C1 | move M2 to day 3, keep P1 before P3, protect the day-9 review, and leave one recovery block open rather than exceeding 13 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 Retrieval Scheduling learner adaptation [LFT-051], Retrieval Scheduling evidence traceability [LFT-051], and Retrieval Scheduling safety and access [LFT-051]. The audit found concrete failures: for Retrieval Scheduling objective fit [LFT-051], the saved draft did not connect LFT-051-M4 to the full boundary of “build a spaced retrieval practice plan around fixed exam dates”; for Retrieval Scheduling content accuracy [LFT-051], the saved draft left the 13-block daily ceiling and both fixed exam dates without an explicit verification row. Those were evidence defects in the saved response, not inferred real-world failures, and they became the complete boundary of the single correction pass.Initial score: 6/10
05 · One pass only
Exact correction prompt
Only this single correction was allowed; there was no second repair pass.
Correct only these detected LFT-051 first-draft failures, using no new input or goal: 1) Retrieval Scheduling objective fit [LFT-051] — the draft did not connect LFT-051-M4 to the full boundary of “build a spaced retrieval practice plan around fixed exam dates”; 2) Retrieval Scheduling content accuracy [LFT-051] — the draft left the 13-block daily ceiling and both fixed exam dates without an explicit verification row.06 · Corrected output
Corrected final result
Corrected response LFT-051 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 13 daily sessions. Concrete corrected artifact row LFT-051-ROW1 reads: “LFT-051-C1 | move M2 to day 3, keep P1 before P3, protect the day-9 review, and leave one recovery block open rather than exceeding 13 daily sessions | evidence locator: LFT-051-C1 | static status: 8/10 after one correction.” It changed only the detected failure areas, adding inspectable rows for Retrieval Scheduling objective fit [LFT-051]. The frozen final text passed Retrieval Scheduling objective fit [LFT-051], Retrieval Scheduling learner adaptation [LFT-051], Retrieval Scheduling evidence traceability [LFT-051], and Retrieval Scheduling safety and access [LFT-051] and still failed Retrieval Scheduling content accuracy [LFT-051]. The final dated learning plan, constraint map, and recovery checkpoint therefore earned 8/10 from 4 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.Final score: 8/10
07 · Five checks, two points each
Five-check record
The first and final statuses are textual as well as color coded. Each final pass is worth two points; the displayed verdict is tied to the final total.
| Check | First | Final | Evidence |
|---|---|---|---|
| Retrieval Scheduling objective fit [LFT-051] | Fail | Pass | LFT-051 static check 1 inspected the saved wording for “Retrieval Scheduling objective fit [LFT-051].” The first transcript did not contain enough support; the corrected transcript contained enough support. The comparison used only fictional fixture LFT-051-M4, the declared Retrieval Scheduling rules, and the record’s frozen text; no live outcome or external action counted as evidence. |
| Retrieval Scheduling content accuracy [LFT-051] | Fail | Fail | LFT-051 static check 2 inspected the saved wording for “Retrieval Scheduling content accuracy [LFT-051].” The first transcript did not contain enough support; the corrected transcript did not contain enough support. The comparison used only fictional fixture LFT-051-M4, the declared Retrieval Scheduling rules, and the record’s frozen text; no live outcome or external action counted as evidence. |
| Retrieval Scheduling learner adaptation [LFT-051] | Pass | Pass | LFT-051 static check 3 inspected the saved wording for “Retrieval Scheduling learner adaptation [LFT-051].” The first transcript contained enough support; the corrected transcript contained enough support. The comparison used only fictional fixture LFT-051-M4, the declared Retrieval Scheduling rules, and the record’s frozen text; no live outcome or external action counted as evidence. |
| Retrieval Scheduling evidence traceability [LFT-051] | Pass | Pass | LFT-051 static check 4 inspected the saved wording for “Retrieval Scheduling evidence traceability [LFT-051].” The first transcript contained enough support; the corrected transcript contained enough support. The comparison used only fictional fixture LFT-051-M4, the declared Retrieval Scheduling rules, and the record’s frozen text; no live outcome or external action counted as evidence. |
| Retrieval Scheduling safety and access [LFT-051] | Pass | Pass | LFT-051 static check 5 inspected the saved wording for “Retrieval Scheduling safety and access [LFT-051].” The first transcript contained enough support; the corrected transcript contained enough support. The comparison used only fictional fixture LFT-051-M4, the declared Retrieval Scheduling rules, and the record’s frozen text; no live outcome or external action counted as evidence. |
08 · No cleanup by omission
What worked—and what failed
What worked
- LFT-051 kept “build a spaced retrieval practice plan around fixed exam dates” bounded to disclosed fictional inputs and preserved an auditable first-response snapshot.
- LFT-051 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 13 daily sessions—inspectable rather than implying unseen work.
- LFT-051 earned final passes for Retrieval Scheduling objective fit [LFT-051] and Retrieval Scheduling learner adaptation [LFT-051] under the same frozen scoring rules.
What failed or remained weak
- LFT-051 still lacked enough saved-text evidence for Retrieval Scheduling content accuracy [LFT-051]; the record leaves that final failure visible.
09 · Inspectable record
Evidence notes
A calendar audit will verify spacing, topic coverage, workload limits, prerequisite order, and recovery time before each exam.
- LFT-051 preserves the exact synthetic prompt, frozen first-response account, failure-only correction, corrected-response account, and five boolean decisions together.
- LFT-051 scores are arithmetic: 3 first-pass checks × 2 = 6/10; 4 final-pass checks × 2 = 8/10.
- LFT-051 evaluated only the text/static portion of the declared evidence plan—A calendar audit will verify spacing, topic coverage, workload limits, prerequisite order, and recovery time before each exam.—and did not fabricate a live artifact, external validator, or observed outcome.
10 · Boundary of the claim
Limitations
- LFT-051 is a synthetic benchmark, so its worked verdict measures fit to the disclosed fictional Retrieval Scheduling fixtures rather than effectiveness in a real workplace or learning setting.
- LFT-051 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.