A role-separated worksheet portability contract

Research-attempt provenance

Definitions and mathematical statement

Shared notation.

Standard number systems are $\mathbb N,\mathbb Z,\mathbb Q,\mathbb R,\mathbb C$. Specialized notation and index ranges follow the cited source and the definitions below.

A reusable worksheet source contains instructional content intended for reuse. A delivered copy is a particular presentation or distribution of that content. A learner attempt contains an individual's responses; an evaluation attaches judgments or scores to those responses. These entities may have different ownership, access, and persistence requirements.

Record scope and qualifications.

The catalogue title is retained as metadata. Named certificates, contracts, bounds or frameworks in that title are not asserted as results of the original source extract. The registry marks this content-model question as reconstructed. No authoritative schema, identity model, or data-retention requirement is given.

Catalogue screening limitation: PreTeXt software design, documentation, or publication feature request; no mathematical problem is specified by the supplied passage.

The source snapshot labels this record partially solved; this is catalogue metadata rather than independent verification of a mathematical result or the current completion of a project. The source text below is rendered literally where necessary; damaged formulas and composite extracts are not silently repaired into a new mathematical claim. The supplied catalogue marks this formulation as an unverified reconstruction; missing assumptions are not certified by the source link.

Statement recorded in the supplied source.

therefore treated as a content-model problem: which information belongs to a reusable worksheet source, and which belongs to a delivered copy, learner attempt, or evaluation? [S2]

Source status.

The supplied catalogue labels this source record partially solved; that metadata was checked against the supplied snapshot on 2026-10-11. The label is preserved for provenance and is not an independent verification of present open status or mathematical correctness.

Short English statement

Distinguish reusable worksheet content from delivered copies, learner attempts, and evaluations.

Sources

• S1 Ulam AI and the UnsolvedMath Contributors, UnsolvedMath: A Curated Collection of Open Mathematics Problems, record 20002154 (AIM-INFRASTRUCTURE-0054). Catalogue curation and metadata: CC BY 4.0. The source extract is retained; definitions, English summaries and qualifications are editorial additions. https://huggingface.co/datasets/ulamai/UnsolvedMath.
• S2 AIM Workshop Problem Lists, source linked by catalogue record AIM-INFRASTRUCTURE-0054. https://github.com/PreTeXtBook/community/wiki/Moderated-Problem-Session.

Preparation and review.

The original source and UnsolvedMath contributors retain attribution for the source extract. Codex (GPT-6; exact serving revision not exposed) assisted with definitions, English summaries, scope notes and formatting. No new human mathematical authorship or independently verified solution is asserted. Permanent source ID 20002154 and code AIM-INFRASTRUCTURE-0054 checked against the complete supplied registry and current repository. Distinct upstream records, including repeated questions and broad or damaged extracts, are retained for complete coverage of the source CS category. A repeated record is not a new independent conjecture. Complete mathematical-equivalence and current-literature review has not been performed. Preparation and final review follow contribution prompts C and D, with source gaps disclosed. Structural and rendering checks do not establish a new theorem or open status.

Literature and context check

The community-session source was consulted directly. Its entry is a feature or design request, without a complete formal specification. The catalogue title is editorial and is not evidence of an existing theorem. The following finite model is an auxiliary investigation; no PreTeXt implementation or project completion is asserted.

Research attempt: Versioned attempts and a grading join that changes the result

Consider two worksheet revisions with the same local exercise identifier $q$. Revision $v_1$ asks for $1+1$ and accepts response 2; revision $v_2$ asks for $1+2$ and accepts response 3. A learner response record storing only $(q,2)$ cannot determine the correct grade: it is correct for the first revision and incorrect for the second. Joining that record to whichever reusable source is currently latest can retroactively change the grade without any change to the learner's response.

In a finite relational model, separate immutable source revisions, delivery instances, learner attempts, and evaluations. An attempt contains a delivery identifier; each delivery points to exactly one source revision; an evaluation points to exactly one attempt and one scoring-rule revision. If every such pointer has a unique target, following the pointer chain determines a unique source and scoring rule for an evaluation. This follows by composition of functions: a unique next target at each of the finitely many stages gives exactly one complete chain. A missing pointer instead gives an explicit unresolved association, not a valid grade.

These roles also prevent a mistaken reuse operation. Copying reusable source should not automatically copy an old learner's name and response into a new learner's attempt. In the model, source is a projection that omits attempt fields, so changing any learner response leaves that projection unchanged. Conversely a projection that includes a learner name fails this independence test immediately when two attempts of the same source have different learners. This proves a simple noninterference property of the selected data separation; it is not a privacy certification for real storage or publication.

Verification and adversarial audit

The argument is an exact analysis of the stated finite model. Its counterexample was checked by direct substitution; no PreTeXt build, browser test, or user study was run. The model's assumptions are explicit and are not asserted to describe every real document.

Audit corrections.

The reconstructed source text is treated as a content-model prompt. Revision identity is included in the grading example, and abstract separation is not asserted to secure an actual publication system.

External computation.

None; symbolic arguments and boundary checks only.

Scope and remaining gaps

The calculation identifies a concrete failed route or a restricted correctness property. Actual schema integration, transformations, usability, and compatibility with the full original feature request remain unimplemented and unverified. Thus the original agenda remains unresolved, with no claimed mathematical novelty.

Integration review.

Codex (GPT-6; exact serving revision not exposed) reviewed the written arguments and expanded layout and source-reference wrappers. Repository metadata and the production web renderer were checked using Python 3.13 and JavaScript with MathJax 3.2.2. This model-assisted review is not independent human proof verification; no PDF compilation or formal proof checking is asserted.

Completion Estimate

COMPLETION: 0% The calculations below the preserved source statement investigate a concrete route, but establish no substantiated new progress toward the entire original target. Known special cases and failed sufficient conditions are not credited as a solution.

References

The original source references and catalogue attribution are preserved in the Sources section above. The following URLs were actually consulted for this attempt; retention of an additional original reference does not claim fresh consultation of it.

• https://github.com/PreTeXtBook/community/wiki/Moderated-Problem-Session (consulted 2026-10-11).

Model and contributor disclosure

OpenAI gpt-6-astra, requested reasoning configuration ultra, generated this research attempt on 2026-10-11. The exact serving revision is not exposed. Codex GPT-6 performed orchestration, repository-format review, and a model-assisted mathematical audit of the written arguments; its exact serving revision is also not exposed. The mathematical route, boundary checks and final adversarial self-audit followed contribution prompts A then B in docs/contribution_prompts.md, after reading CONTRIBUTING.md. Python 3.14.2 assembled the standalone documents; any mathematical computation is specified in Verification. No theorem prover was used. No human mathematical authorship, substantial human proof correction, or independent human proof checking is asserted. Model-assisted review, source retrieval, and structural checks do not establish correctness or novelty. Full private reasoning transcripts are unavailable as reproducibility artifacts; the complete arguments, inputs and outcomes actually used are stated here or in the companion batch audit.

Final status

Unresolved as a new research contribution. This is a concrete route investigation, not a claim of new complete resolution or a current-status certification. A known answer reproduced for context does not become a new contribution. The catalogue's source-status label is preserved; this attempt status does not assert that a source-labelled solved question is open.