リトリーバル・ガントレット設計:封印タスク棚卸と補助条件の申告
Agent支援エンジニアリングチェック
前提条件
第85〜87日のキャップストーン統合と、完了済みの学習プロジェクト系列(autograd・事前学習・実LoRA・評価可能エージェント・CIデリバリ)。
学習目標
5領域にわたる無支援リトリーバル用の固定・封印タスク棚卸を作成し、試行前に補助条件を申告することで、独立した証跡が支援成果から推定されないようにする。
手順
1. この日が存在する理由を理解する:検索練習(テスト効果)は再読よりも長期記憶を強化します。今日はカリキュラム全体を固定の無支援チェックに変換します。
2. 封印ガントレットは正確に5領域をカバーし、各領域は実際の証跡日に紐付きます:
- PY領域(コアPython):値、制御フロー、関数、コンテナ、例外、ファイル(第4〜12日)。
- GIT領域(Gitとデバッグ):ブランチ、差分判読、障害診断、使い捨てリポジトリでの安全復旧(第13〜15日、79〜81日)。
- MATH領域(数学):微分、連鎖律、確率、交差エントロピー解釈(第16〜30日)。
- GRAD領域(勾配とAutograd):計算グラフ、共有ノード累積、有限差分検証(第31〜33日とprojects/autograd)。
- MODEL領域(モデル推論):トークン化、因果マスク、パラメータ台帳、損失・パープレキシティ判読、LoRA計数、エージェントループ挙動(第34〜87日)。
3. 各領域で3つの固定タスクIDを今決定します。チェック中の即興変更は禁止です。全タスクを未達時の回復日にマッピングします。
4. 補助条件を書面で申告します:独立習得確認 — AI不使用、ノート不使用、ブラウザ不使用、120分ブロック中105分以内、開始時刻を記録。申告条件は誠実な自己報告であり、監視の主張ではありません。
5. エージェントはこの棚卸の整理*のみ*を支援できます。封印タスクの作成・解答・採点は禁止です。
演習と予測記録
5領域各3件の固定task_id(計15件)を列挙した sealed_inventory.json を作成し、各行が {domain, task_id, recovery_day, declared_condition: 'independent'} を持つこと。行数15・task_id重複なしをassertせよ。
タスクごとに1行。例:{"domain":"GIT","task_id":"GIT-1","recovery_day":"day-14","declared_condition":"independent"}。
{
"declared_condition": "independent",
"time_cap_minutes": 105,
"tasks": [
{"domain":"PY","task_id":"PY-1","recovery_day":"day-09","declared_condition":"independent"},
{"domain":"PY","task_id":"PY-2","recovery_day":"day-11","declared_condition":"independent"},
{"domain":"PY","task_id":"PY-3","recovery_day":"day-12","declared_condition":"independent"},
{"domain":"GIT","task_id":"GIT-1","recovery_day":"day-14","declared_condition":"independent"},
{"domain":"GIT","task_id":"GIT-2","recovery_day":"day-80","declared_condition":"independent"},
{"domain":"GIT","task_id":"GIT-3","recovery_day":"day-81","declared_condition":"independent"},
{"domain":"MATH","task_id":"M-1","recovery_day":"day-19","declared_condition":"independent"},
{"domain":"MATH","task_id":"M-2","recovery_day":"day-25","declared_condition":"independent"},
{"domain":"MATH","task_id":"M-3","recovery_day":"day-27","declared_condition":"independent"},
{"domain":"GRAD","task_id":"G-1","recovery_day":"day-31","declared_condition":"independent"},
{"domain":"GRAD","task_id":"G-2","recovery_day":"day-32","declared_condition":"independent"},
{"domain":"GRAD","task_id":"G-3","recovery_day":"day-33","declared_condition":"independent"},
{"domain":"MODEL","task_id":"MR-1","recovery_day":"day-50","declared_condition":"independent"},
{"domain":"MODEL","task_id":"MR-2","recovery_day":"day-65","declared_condition":"independent"},
{"domain":"MODEL","task_id":"MR-3","recovery_day":"day-83","declared_condition":"independent"}
]
}
assert len(tasks) == 15 # 実際は15行すべて列挙すること
全タスクを明名の回復経路にマッピングした完全な封印棚卸を、試行開始前の補助条件申告とともに作成できる。
公式ソースリソースと権利証跡
Test-Enhanced Learning: Taking Memory Tests Improves Long-Term Retention
該当セクション・タイムスタンプ: Psychological Science 17(3): 249-255, Experiments 1-2
検証バージョンと日付: Psychological Science, 2006 (Verified: 2026-10-30)
Foundational experimental evidence that retrieval practice (testing) outperforms repeated study for long-term retention; grounds the Day 88 AI-free retrieval checks in peer-reviewed learning science rather than folk advice.
Basic understanding of study sessions, retention intervals, and experimental design vocabulary.
The curriculum restates the experimental design and effect sizes in original prose; every sealed task runs without the paper.
比較対象候補リソースと選定評価 (2)
Strong meta-analytic coverage of spacing effects but addresses scheduling rather than the retrieval effect itself; retained as support for the Day 90 spaced-review schedule.
Equally foundational follow-up demonstrating repeated retrieval vs repeated study; the 2006 paper is cited as the standard first controlled demonstration.
Improving Students' Learning With Effective Learning Techniques: Promising Directions From Cognitive and Educational Psychology
該当セクション・タイムスタンプ: Psychological Science in the Public Interest 14(1): 4-58; practice testing and distributed practice sections
検証バージョンと日付: Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 2013 (Verified: 2026-10-30)
Detailed comparative review rating practice testing and distributed practice as high-utility techniques while rating highlighting and rereading low-utility; anchors the retrieval, correction, and spaced-review design of Days 88-90.
None beyond general academic reading.
Curriculum restates the utility ratings and application conditions in original prose; every task remains runnable offline.
比較対象候補リソースと選定評価 (2)
Important negative result on learning-styles matching but narrower scope; Dunlosky et al. rates a broader set of techniques directly usable for this curriculum.
Strong trade-book synthesis of the same evidence base; the peer-reviewed review is preferred for citation precision and technique-by-technique utility ratings.