Theory
State professional terminology, lineage, and model-limit questions. Stage intent: verification.
For teachers
Prepare a mission
Everything you need to run the lesson: the prompts for this academic depth, the diagnostic answer key, the misconceptions to watch for, and the truth boundary to hold.
Choose the mission and depth
Write the rule before you need it.
When a fault happens, nobody on the ground can react in time. Whatever the spacecraft does next was decided months earlier, by whoever wrote its rules. Your team will read a mission that went wrong and write the rule that should have been there.
Pilot lesson
What to say at University
These prompts come from the academic layer, so they change with the depth you selected.
Prediction
Predict where the model is expected to be useful and where it is not.
Running the Twin
Inspect allowed lineage/hash channels only if the profile discloses them. Runtime remains the frozen Twin; this plan does not execute physics.
Checkpoint
Separate simulated, derived, reference, and (if ever present) measured evidence.
Analysis
Design, integrate, verify, and validate within frozen Core V1 limits. Evidence intent: policy/state artifact + scenario tests + safety/verification rationale.
Engineering decision
Produce a V&V-style conclusion that does not claim flight qualification.
Limitation
Name at least one frozen-model limitation that this experiment cannot answer.
Provenance
Keep simulated, simulated_sensor, estimator_state, derived, reference, and measured distinct. Never label simulated as measured.
Diagnostic answer key
Why can a spacecraft not simply wait for instructions when a fault happens?
- ✓ It may be out of contact, and the fault will not wait
- · It can always reach the ground instantly
- · Faults never happen quickly
Timing
One session. Adjust freely — the sequence matters more than the clock.
| When | Stage | What you are doing |
|---|---|---|
| 0–10 min | Mission brief and outcomes | Set the mission question and the success criterion. |
| 10–20 | Diagnostic | Surface prior ideas. No score — this is for you, not them. |
| 20–35 | Visual theory | Work the concept visual. Ask for the idea in their own words. |
| 35–45 | Prediction | Every learner commits in writing before any run. |
| 45–60 | Twin investigation | Baseline first, then the candidate case. |
| 60–70 | Evidence and decision | Compare, choose, and state one limitation. |
| 70–80 | Assessment and result | Formative only. Collect the written reasoning. |
| Home | Home mission | Software-only extension. No hardware, no account. |
Facilitation and the truth boundary
While they work
- Insist on condition and action. Intentions are the most common wrong answer and the most important one to correct.
- Ask what each proposed rule costs. A rule with no cost is usually not a rule.
- This is the fault-recovery scenario, not the eclipse one used by the diagnosis mission.
Is the rule expressed as a testable condition and a concrete action, with its cost acknowledged?
Hold this line
- These mission readings are produced by a model. No real fault occurred.
- A rule that works here has not been shown to be safe on real hardware.
- This lesson is not an operational assurance result.
Home mission
Home mission: the rule you already follow
Write down one rule you follow without thinking, as a condition and an action - for example, if the battery reaches ten per cent, stop watching video. Then write what it costs you, because every safety rule costs something.
Tell us what did not work
Ten questions, answered locally. Nothing is submitted or tracked — you download the file and send it if you want to.
Informal educator feedback
This local-first form contains the ten approved pilot-review questions. It does not submit, track, or store data remotely. Optional name/contact should be handled outside this form only if a reviewer volunteers it.