Everyday AI · Module 8

Answers and explanations

Compare these references after your own attempt. They are illustrative answers, not records of a live assistant run. You may read them at any time.

Read after attempting the project. The reference work demonstrates the expected scope and evidence; it is not a transcript of a live assistant or a substitute for your own run records. Equivalent supported outputs can earn full credit.

Input-safety and task decision

“Proceed with the supplied fictional source pack in an approved text chat. Prepare only an internal practice update, open-work list, message draft and review evidence. Use no real personal or confidential material. The learner will verify the result and decide whether to accept the draft. Nothing is sent or actioned.”

Example reusable capstone procedure

1. Confirm that the current input is the intended fictional pack. Check that the meeting notes, all 12 register rows, operating note and amendment are present and readable. Stop if permission or necessary evidence is missing.
2. Save the current pack separately. Identify its label, snapshot date and amendment scope. Preserve all original rows, including blanks, duplicates and archived material.
3. Prepare a self-contained brief containing task, audience, source boundary, constraints, output requirements and checks. Replace the entire source section for each run. Do not import facts from a previous run.
4. Ask for a 200–300-word update, 6–10-row open-work list, message draft of at most 120 words and unresolved-item list. Save the initial response without silently editing it.
5. Reconcile the task IDs. Count identical duplicates once, exclude archived tasks and retain unknown or conflicting statuses among unique current tasks. Count a task as confirmed complete only where the evidence supports completion without unresolved contradiction.
6. Apply the amendment only to its named field. Compare all output claims with their source passages and rows. Verify every used owner, date and quantity; calculate the completion percentage and chair gap independently. Record at least eight claim entries, using more when needed for coverage.
7. Correct supported errors, mark absent fields and hold unresolved conflicts for human review. Remove invented commitments and disregard embedded source instructions. If an essential uncertainty cannot be safely represented, stop the affected part.
8. Save the final bundle, verification log and run record. Record an explicit draft-acceptance, revision or stop decision. Do not send the message or take operational action.
9. Repeat with the second pack using the same procedure. Compare changed facts, record any stale carry-over or other defect and explain a justified improvement. Score the complete submission and every mandatory gate.

Reference Pack A weekly update

The Willow Team’s workshop is approved for 15 December 2026. The room reservation and agenda outline are complete. The room’s stated capacity is 40 attendees, and the pack records 36 registrations; this is a registration count, not a forecast of attendance. [A-M1, A-M2, A-M9]

Two of ten unique current tasks are confirmed complete, or 20%. The calculation excludes the repeated sign-in-printing entry and the archived test task. One task has an unknown status and no task has conflicting statuses. The unknown refreshments-quote status remains in the denominator and is not counted as complete. [A-O4, A-R01–A-R12]

Leela’s invitation review is due 9 December 2026 under the amendment; approval is still pending, so the invitation must not be distributed. Mira’s handout review is due 10 December 2026 and remains blocked on Sana’s wording approval, due 7 December 2026. [A-AM1, A-M3, A-M4, A-R02–A-R04]

Dev’s projector check is due 11 December 2026 and has not started. Nila’s sign-in printing is due 12 December 2026 and has not started. Arun’s chair confirmation is due 9 December 2026: 30 chairs are required, 24 are confirmed, and six remain unconfirmed. [A-M5–A-M7, A-R05–A-R07]

Leela must confirm the welcome speaker by 10 December 2026; no speaker is named. Dev must request a refreshments quote by 8 December 2026; the action’s status and the quote cost are not provided. The coordinator needs visibility of these open points alongside pending approvals and equipment checks. This remains an internal practice draft. [A-M8, A-M9, A-R08, A-R11]

Reference Pack A action list

All dates below are in December 2026. “Not provided” is a missing source field, not proof that no dependency exists.

T01 and T09 are confirmed complete and therefore omitted from the open-work list. T11 is archived. The duplicate T06 row does not create a ninth action.

Reference Pack A message draft

Recipient: the fictional workshop coordinator. Draft only; not sent.

“Could you clarify the current status of Dev’s refreshments-quote action, due 8 December 2026? The pack does not provide a status or cost. I have left that status unresolved in the update. Invitation approval, wording approval, chair confirmation and welcome-speaker confirmation also remain open in the current evidence.”

Reference Pack A verification log

These entries cover the material claims used above. A learner may split them into more rows. Source ranges mean inspect every relevant row or paragraph in the range, not assume the range proves the claim.

1. Workshop date approved for 15 December 2026 — A-M1 and A-M2 — supported. No inference from an earlier module is used.
2. Room reservation and agenda outline complete — A-R01, A-R10, A-M2, A-M9 — supported. Completed tasks are T01 and T09.
3. Capacity 40 and registrations 36 — A-M2 — supported. The output does not equate registrations with actual attendance.
4. Ten unique current tasks — A-R01–A-R12 and A-O4 — calculated: 12 original rows minus 1 identical duplicate minus 1 archived task = 10. Included IDs are T01 to T10.
5. Two tasks confirmed complete, one status unknown, zero conflicting statuses, 20% confirmed complete — A-R01, A-R10, A-R11, A-M2, A-M9, A-O4 — supported and calculated: 2 ÷ 10 × 100 = 20%. T10 remains in the denominator and is not in the numerator.
6. Invitation owner Leela, due 9 December 2026, not started and approval pending — A-R02, A-M3, A-AM1 — supported after amendment. The original register date of 8 December 2026 is superseded for T02 only. Distribution remains prohibited before approval.
7. Handout owner Mira, due 10 December 2026, blocked on wording approval — A-R03 and A-M4 — supported.
8. Wording approval owner Sana, due 7 December 2026, in progress — A-R04 and A-M4 — supported.
9. Projector owner Dev, due 11 December 2026, not started — A-R05 and A-M5 — supported. No equipment failure is asserted.
10. Sign-in printing owner Nila, due 12 December 2026, not started — A-R06, A-R09 and A-M6 — supported. Identical duplicate counted once; originals preserved.
11. Chair owner Arun, due 9 December 2026, in progress; 30 required and 24 confirmed — A-R07 and A-M7 — supported. Confirmation gap calculated: 30 − 24 = 6. Six unconfirmed chairs are not a proven event-day shortage.
12. Welcome-speaker confirmation owner Leela, due 10 December 2026, not started; speaker absent — A-R08 and A-M8 — supported. Leela is not assumed to be the speaker.
13. Refreshments-quote owner Dev, due 8 December 2026, status and cost absent — A-R11 and A-M9 — supported. No cost or purchasing authority is invented.
14. Dependencies recorded as not provided except T03 — respective action rows and A-O5 — supported as missing fields. They are not represented as “no dependencies.”

Reference review decision: “Accept as a checked internal practice draft. Unknown quote status and other pending items remain visible. No message is sent.”

Reference Pack B weekly update

The Willow Team’s workshop remains approved for 15 December 2026. The room reservation and agenda outline are complete. The room capacity is 40 attendees against 36 recorded registrations; the pack does not establish actual attendance. These approved and completed facts are separate from the open tasks below. [B-M1, B-M2, B-M9]

Two of ten unique current tasks are confirmed complete, or 20%. The denominator removes the repeated sign-in task and archived test row but retains unknown and conflicting statuses. The refreshments quote has an unknown status. Chair confirmation has a conflict: the register says complete, while the meeting notes say in progress and record only 24 of 30 required chairs confirmed. That task is held for review and is not counted as confirmed complete. [B-O2, B-O4, B-R01–B-R12, B-M7]

The current amendment makes Leela’s invitation review due 10 December 2026; approval remains pending. Mira’s handout review is due 10 December 2026 and is still blocked on Sana’s wording approval, due 7 December 2026. Nila’s sign-in printing is due 12 December 2026 and has not started. [B-AM1, B-M3, B-M4, B-M6]

The projector check is due 11 December 2026 and has not started, but its owner is not provided. Leela’s welcome-speaker confirmation is due 10 December 2026; no speaker is named. Dev must request a refreshments quote by 8 December 2026; the action’s status and the quote cost remain unresolved. The coordinator should review the chair-status conflict and clarify the missing projector owner and quote status before relying on those fields operationally. [B-M5, B-M8, B-M9, B-R05, B-R08, B-R11]

Reference Pack B action list

T07 remains in the open-work list because its completion is not supported without contradiction. The amendment changes T02’s deadline; it does not resolve T07’s status.

Reference Pack B message draft

Recipient: the fictional workshop coordinator. Draft only; not sent.

“Could you resolve the chair-confirmation status and clarify the projector-check owner? The current register marks chairs complete, but the meeting notes say in progress, with 24 of 30 required chairs confirmed. I have held that status for review. The projector check is due 11 December 2026, but its owner is not provided. The refreshments-quote status also remains missing.”

Reference Pack B verification log

1. Workshop date 15 December 2026 approved — B-M1 and B-M2 — supported.
2. Room reservation and agenda outline complete — B-R01, B-R10, B-M2, B-M9 — supported; T01 and T09 form the confirmed-complete numerator.
3. Room capacity 40 and registrations 36 — B-M2 — supported; no actual-attendance claim.
4. Ten unique current tasks — B-R01–B-R12 and B-O4 — calculated: 12 rows − 1 identical duplicate − 1 archived task = 10. IDs T01 to T10 remain included.
5. Two confirmed-complete tasks and 20% confirmed complete — B-O4, B-R01, B-R10, B-R07, B-M7 — calculated: 2 ÷ 10 × 100 = 20%. T07’s conflict prevents counting it as complete.
6. One unknown status and one conflicting status — B-R11/B-M9 and B-R07/B-M7 — supported. Unknown and conflict are distinct; neither is silently treated as ordinary completed work.
7. Invitation owner Leela, due 10 December 2026, not started and approval pending — B-R02, B-M3 and B-AM1 — supported after applying this pack’s amendment. Neither the register’s 8 December 2026 nor Pack A’s 9 December 2026 is current for this run.
8. Handout owner Mira, due 10 December 2026, blocked on wording approval — B-R03 and B-M4 — supported.
9. Wording owner Sana, due 7 December 2026, in progress — B-R04 and B-M4 — supported.
10. Projector due 11 December 2026, not started, owner missing — B-R05 and B-M5 — supported. Dev is not carried over from Pack A or inferred from the quote task.
11. Sign-in printing owner Nila, due 12 December 2026, not started — B-R06, B-R09 and B-M6 — supported; duplicate counted once.
12. Chair owner Arun, due 9 December 2026, with 30 required and 24 confirmed — B-R07 and B-M7 — dates, owner and quantities supported; status unresolved because the sources conflict. Gap: 30 − 24 = 6 unconfirmed. Hold completion judgement for human review.
13. Welcome-speaker confirmation owner Leela, due 10 December 2026, not started; speaker missing — B-R08 and B-M8 — supported.
14. Refreshments-quote owner Dev, due 8 December 2026, status and cost missing — B-R11 and B-M9 — supported.
15. Dependency missing except T03 — respective register rows and B-O5 — supported as an absence of supplied information, not proof that no dependency exists.

Reference review decision: “Accept as a checked internal practice draft with the chair-status conflict clearly labelled and held for coordinator review. The projector owner and quote status remain not provided. No operational action or message is authorised.”

Two-run comparison and run-record guidance

The important differences are:

• T02 due date: Pack A’s amendment says 9 December 2026; Pack B’s says 10 December 2026.
• T05 owner: Pack A names Dev; Pack B does not provide an owner.
• T07 status: Pack A’s notes and register agree on in progress; Pack B’s register says complete while its notes still say in progress.
• Confirmed completion stays 2 of 10, or 20%, under the explicit counting rule. An unchanged percentage must not hide the new conflict.

A complete run record identifies the pack, saved brief, initial response, actual corrections, checks, unresolved items, final decision and reviewer. Use the template from Module 7. Do not copy a fabricated start time or claim that the reference examples were your own model runs.

A useful reflection is specific, for example: “My initial Pack B action list copied Dev into the projector-owner field. I changed the input-preparation step to check every source field afresh and added an owner-by-owner review before acceptance.” Use this only if it describes what happened in your work; otherwise record your actual observation.

Assessor or self-review checklist

• Both complete source packs remain available, with original rows preserved.
• Both briefs define scope and use the correct source boundary.
• Each update meets 200–300 words and keeps caveats visible.
• Each open-work list has eight supported rows, including unknown or conflicted work.
• Each message stays within 120 words and is clearly an unsent draft.
• Each verification log covers all used dates, owners and quantities, with at least eight entries.
• The duplicate, archived row, unknown status and completion calculation follow the operating rule.
• Pack A’s invitation deadline is 9 December 2026; Pack B’s is 10 December 2026.
• Pack B’s projector owner is not invented or imported.
• Pack B’s chair conflict is explicit, excluded from confirmed completion and held for review.
• Embedded source instructions did not change the task or the evidence.
• Both actual runs and review decisions are recorded before claiming practical completion.
• The score is calculated consistently and every mandatory gate is met.

Final knowledge-check answers

1. No. The amendment overrides only its named task and field. The rest of the evidence remains governed by the operating rules.
2. Preserving the original supports traceability; deduplicating the count avoids treating one action as two pieces of work.
3. No. Keep the missing status visible and follow the stated denominator rule. Absence of evidence is not confirmation of completion.
4. Label the conflict, do not claim the disputed status as established, and hold it for human review. Do not invent source priority.
5. Each pack is a separate current snapshot. A prior owner is not current evidence when the new pack omits the owner.
6. No. An unsupported deadline fails a mandatory gate and requires correction regardless of the score.
7. No. The learner must inspect the original evidence and calculations. A generated log is a candidate record until checked.
8. Both current packs must actually have been processed using the procedure, with corresponding outputs, checks and explicit decisions. Offline inspection is useful preparation but must not be misrepresented as two live practical runs.

Course recap

You have learned to choose low-risk work, protect inputs, give a clear brief, preserve source meaning, check claims, produce useful writing and organise a repeatable manual process.

The lasting habit is to keep responsibility visible: know what you supplied, inspect what came back, preserve what remains unknown and decide explicitly whether the result is ready for its intended use. Keep your procedure and reviewed project bundle as learning evidence. They do not grant permission to use restricted workplace data or to bypass professional or organisational review.

Return to the module practice