Answer all eight questions, then check the score. Open only the explanations needed for remediation.
1. Solve the worked-case variant: Replace the first target coordinate in [1,0] with 1.2 while keeping readout [0.6,0.2]. Recompute correction error.
Show answer
B. Target-minus-read error moves from [0.4,−0.2] to [0.6,−0.2]. The first correction rises by 50% while the second is unchanged; the rule corrects observed error rather than rewriting all memory indiscriminately. The correct answer executes the requested change and gives a checkable result; the other texts do not close this calculation or trace.
2. Which causal order correctly connects the first three stages of “DeltaNet: correcting memory”?
Show answer
D. Limit of addition → Read before writing → Local error The chain follows the taught progression; reversing stages consumes a representation or state before it is produced.
3. If “Local error” is removed, which diagnostic method is defensible?
Show answer
A. Keep the same input, predict the first output that depends on “Local error,” then compare the before/after trace. One intervention and a prior prediction make the delta attributable to the removed mechanism.
4. Which verdict respects this session’s validity boundary?
Show answer
C. The delta rule reduces some interference; it does not create unlimited capacity, and stability depends on keys, gates, and normalization. The correct answer bounds the conclusion; the others turn a local relation into a global guarantee.
5. Which evidence best matches the stated status of “DeltaNet: correcting memory”?
Show answer
B. Established mechanisms; numerical simplifications are pedagogical. Product or mechanism evidence must remain attributed and measured; availability and completion do not prove value.
6. When should a simpler baseline be preferred to “Fast weights”?
Show answer
D. When a controlled test shows equivalent quality with lower memory, latency, or complexity. The choice depends on a measured trade-off on the real workload, not novelty or one isolated metric.
7. A learner gets the right result but cannot explain “Read before writing.” Which remediation is most useful?
Show answer
A. Rebuild the first missing transformation, label its inputs and outputs, then test a neighboring case. The remediation targets the first causal break and then requires transfer instead of rewarding a guessed result.
8. Which submission actually demonstrates the outcome “Separate fast weights and trained parameters.”?
Show answer
C. A trace with starting data, transformations, observed result, boundary, and next experiment. The correct submission makes the reasoning reproducible and the verdict revisable by future measurement.