Program 03 / Expert reasoning
Make the reasoning inspectable.
Explore context-dependent tasks where each conclusion must follow the definitions and evidence supplied in the brief.
01 / The task
Start with a concrete assignment.
Apply a technical note's local definitions to a new problem, showing the intermediate steps needed to check the conclusion.
Input materials
A technical passage, its notation and definitions, boundary conditions, a question, and a worked reference. Mark any conventions that differ from the familiar form of the problem.
02 / The workflow
Carry the task through.
- 01
Locate the relevant definitions and identify the object, regime, units, and assumptions required by the question.
- 02
Derive intermediate quantities using those conventions, preserving signs, normalization factors, and conditions at each transformation.
- 03
Assemble the conclusion and check it against the passage, including limiting cases where the brief supports them.
03 / The deliverables
Work you can inspect.
- 01Context and prompt
- 02Worked reference
- 03Step-level rubric
- 04Error annotations
04 / The evaluation
Make the criteria explicit.
Separate answer correctness from definition tracking, evidence use, and the first unsupported step.
- The solution uses the supplied definitions consistently, even when standard conventions differ.
- Intermediate claims identify their supporting equations or passages and remain dimensionally consistent.
- Review identifies the earliest unsupported step and distinguishes it from errors that follow.
Delivery boundary
The task measures reasoning within the supplied context. A correct response does not validate the underlying theory or establish performance across an entire scientific field.