analysis is a real tab
Adaptive selection knew what you were weak at and nothing about what the
exam is made of, so being weak at something worth 5% of the paper ranked
the same as being weak at something worth 1%. Every score is now
multiplied by the weight the board publishes for that topic's domain —
the same `exam_blueprints.weight` behind the Relevance column.
A topic the blueprint does not cover takes the median published weight. A
zero would make unmapped material unreachable and the highest would make
it the priority; neither is a claim the blueprint supports. With no study
objective the multiplier is absent and selection is about weakness alone,
exactly as before.
Weight scales weakness, it does not replace it: a topic you are certain of
does not surface because it is worth 5% of the paper, because (1 −
accuracy) is near zero and no multiplier rescues that. docs/adaptive-
sessions.md says all of this, including what is still open.
Session analysis is the third tab rather than a link out of the page —
two of the three used to change what you were reading and the third took
you somewhere else. The tab bar is one component both routes wear,
AnalysisSessionPage's body is a component the tab renders in place, and
the tab lives in the address so a link opens where it says.
Two things that were wrong turned up in that work: a session nobody had
sat showed 0% in the figures and "0% correct" in the donut — two separate
statements of a score on a session that had none — and the old third tab
disappeared entirely for anyone with no attempts, so the strip silently
changed shape.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01TqXevQJhxFrM7jJg82cgZN
Four gaps, one change.
Articles could not belong to an exam at all — an article reached one only
by inference through its category, which cannot say that the same article
belongs to a basic-science step and a clinical one showing different
views in each. article_exam_links says whether it is in the group;
Exam.article_views already decided what is shown once you are there.
POST /exams/ wrote name, slug, sort order and active, and silently
dropped family, description and article views, so a new objective landed
in "Other" showing everything whatever was asked for. It writes what it
is given now, and PATCH can change it afterwards.
Membership was one link row at a time, which nobody would do for three
thousand questions. POST /exams/{id}/assign takes whole topics with
everything beneath them — questions and articles both — and is
idempotent, so widening a selection and running it again adds only what
is new.
And the point of all of it: a real paper is not a uniform draw. The ABP
publishes that 12% of a general paediatrics exam is preventive care and
2% is rheumatology; forty questions drawn evenly is forty coin flips.
exam_blueprints holds a board's published outline — its own numbering,
its headings, its weights — and blueprint_category_links maps it onto
our taxonomy rather than bending the tree to fit, because their outline
is arranged for examining and ours for studying.
The sampler uses largest-remainder, so twenty-four percentages still come
to forty questions, and a domain that cannot supply its share gives the
shortfall back to be spread over those that can — the paper keeps its
length and loses only accuracy, and the working is returned so the
shortfall is visible rather than silent.
Seeded from the ABP General Pediatrics Content Outline (Oct 2024):
structure and published weights only, no exam material. 120 lines, 22 of
24 domains mapped; Psychosocial Issues and Child Abuse and Neglect have
no category of ours and are reported rather than hidden.
Creating an objective is now an administrator's rather than a
moderator's: it appears in everyone's picker and scopes the whole bank,
which is site configuration, and it sits with the other site switches a
moderator cannot reach.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01TqXevQJhxFrM7jJg82cgZN
