LAB01 — Chapter 1 practical exercise

Read the chapter and complete its worked example first. Use a fresh copy of the named resource/checkpoint so the starting state is recoverable.

Start a new section in evidence-annotation.md. Consider this original scenario: a reporting routine receives {valid: false, temperature_c: 31.0} from a synthetic fixture. A proposed explanation says, “The room is hot, the alarm must turn on, and the sensor cable is disconnected.” Your independent task is to classify those three claims and propose a better response. You may ask an assistant to help, but write your own final judgment.

First identify which part of the input is an observation and what produced it. The fixture is authored software data, not a room measurement. Second decide whether the invalid flag should affect the interpretation of the temperature. You have not yet been given a complete fault policy, so record that requirement as missing. Third ask whether this tuple can uniquely establish cable disconnection. It cannot distinguish that physical explanation from a failed conversion, a deliberate test input, or another source of invalid data.

The expected observation is a worksheet that preserves the invalid flag, labels the input synthetic, and declines to treat a numeric field as a trustworthy reading merely because it is present. A strong revised response says: “This fixture represents an invalid sample. Consult the fault requirement before selecting a state. It does not establish room temperature or a physical cause.” Save that response and the next check you would perform.

Submission check

Submit the named artifact with actual/synthetic/illustrative evidence labels. Include a starting state, action, result, and remaining limitation. Compare with the separately distributed instructor key after your own attempt. The chapter's completion checklist and transfer task remain part of the learning activity.