{
  "schema": "wmfm-developer-scoring-export",
  "schemaVersion": "1.1.0",
  "createdAt": "2026-05-10 11:23:26.147082",
  "purpose": "developer scoring and grading diagnostics",
  "method": "deterministic",
  "appState": {
    "modelClass": "lm",
    "modelType": "lm",
    "hasFactorPredictors": true,
    "hasInteractionTerms": false,
    "formula": "Exam ~ Gender",
    "exampleName": "test-SG-3",
    "package": null,
    "researchQuestion": "Do average final exam marks differ by gender in this course example?"
  },
  "current": {
    "explanation": "Do average final exam marks differ by gender in this course example? The model compares average final exam marks (out of 100) for female and male students. The expected mark for female students is 55 (95% confidence interval 50 to 59), while for male students it is 51 (95% confidence interval 46 to 55). The fitted values differ by about 4 marks, but the model provides weak evidence for a clear difference-the data are consistent with a range from a small advantage for male students to a moderate advantage for female students. The model explains very little of the variation in exam marks (about 1%), so other factors not included here are more important for understanding why students receive different marks. Overall, the model does not show a clear difference in average exam marks by gender. The estimated difference is modest, and the uncertainty around this comparison means we cannot rule out patterns ranging from nearly equal marks to female students scoring moderately higher on average.",
    "grade": {
      "class": ["wmfmGrade", "list"],
      "scoreScale": 10,
      "scored": true,
      "method": "deterministic",
      "summary": [
        {
          "method": "deterministic",
          "overallScore": 100,
          "mark": 10,
          "scoreScale": 10,
          "scored": true
        }
      ],
      "metrics": [
        {
          "label": "Overall score",
          "studentValue": 100,
          "maxValue": 100,
          "marksLost": 0,
          "status": "scored",
          "confidence": "high",
          "evidenceStrength": 1,
          "reason": "The explanation met all applicable deterministic rubric criteria."
        },
        {
          "label": "Factual score",
          "studentValue": 2,
          "maxValue": 2,
          "marksLost": 0,
          "status": "scored",
          "confidence": "high",
          "evidenceStrength": 1,
          "reason": "The explanation stayed close to the fitted model facts."
        },
        {
          "label": "Inference score",
          "studentValue": 2,
          "maxValue": 2,
          "marksLost": 0,
          "status": "scored",
          "confidence": "high",
          "evidenceStrength": 1,
          "reason": "The explanation used an appropriate inferential tone."
        },
        {
          "label": "Completeness score",
          "studentValue": 2,
          "maxValue": 2,
          "marksLost": 0,
          "status": "scored",
          "confidence": "high",
          "evidenceStrength": 1,
          "reason": "The explanation covered the main parts of the model story."
        },
        {
          "label": "Clarity score",
          "studentValue": 2,
          "maxValue": 2,
          "marksLost": 0,
          "status": "scored",
          "confidence": "high",
          "evidenceStrength": 1,
          "reason": "The explanation was generally clear and readable."
        },
        {
          "label": "Calibration score",
          "studentValue": 2,
          "maxValue": 2,
          "marksLost": 0,
          "status": "scored",
          "confidence": "high",
          "evidenceStrength": 1,
          "reason": "The explanation kept its claims reasonably well calibrated."
        },
        {
          "label": "Effect direction correct",
          "studentValue": 2,
          "maxValue": 2,
          "marksLost": 0,
          "status": "scored",
          "confidence": "high",
          "evidenceStrength": 1,
          "reason": "The direction of the fitted effect was described correctly."
        },
        {
          "label": "Effect scale appropriate",
          "studentValue": 2,
          "maxValue": 2,
          "marksLost": 0,
          "status": "scored",
          "confidence": "high",
          "evidenceStrength": 1,
          "reason": "The effect was described on an appropriate scale."
        },
        {
          "label": "Reference group handled correctly",
          "studentValue": 2,
          "maxValue": 2,
          "marksLost": 0,
          "status": "scored",
          "confidence": "high",
          "evidenceStrength": 1,
          "reason": "Baseline or reference-group information was handled appropriately."
        },
        {
          "label": "Interaction coverage adequate",
          "studentValue": null,
          "maxValue": 0,
          "marksLost": 0,
          "status": "not_applicable",
          "confidence": "not_applicable",
          "evidenceStrength": null,
          "reason": "Interaction coverage adequate was not applicable to this model."
        },
        {
          "label": "Interaction substance correct",
          "studentValue": null,
          "maxValue": 0,
          "marksLost": 0,
          "status": "not_applicable",
          "confidence": "not_applicable",
          "evidenceStrength": null,
          "reason": "Interaction substance correct was not applicable to this model."
        },
        {
          "label": "Uncertainty handling appropriate",
          "studentValue": 2,
          "maxValue": 2,
          "marksLost": 0,
          "status": "scored",
          "confidence": "high",
          "evidenceStrength": 1,
          "reason": "Uncertainty was handled appropriately for this model."
        },
        {
          "label": "Inferential register appropriate",
          "studentValue": 2,
          "maxValue": 2,
          "marksLost": 0,
          "status": "scored",
          "confidence": "high",
          "evidenceStrength": 1,
          "reason": "The wording matched the evidence level well."
        },
        {
          "label": "Main-effect coverage adequate",
          "studentValue": 2,
          "maxValue": 2,
          "marksLost": 0,
          "status": "scored",
          "confidence": "high",
          "evidenceStrength": 1,
          "reason": "The main effect was described adequately."
        },
        {
          "label": "Reference-group coverage adequate",
          "studentValue": 2,
          "maxValue": 2,
          "marksLost": 0,
          "status": "scored",
          "confidence": "high",
          "evidenceStrength": 1,
          "reason": "Reference-group context was included where needed."
        },
        {
          "label": "Clarity adequate",
          "studentValue": 2,
          "maxValue": 2,
          "marksLost": 0,
          "status": "scored",
          "confidence": "high",
          "evidenceStrength": 1,
          "reason": "The explanation wording was acceptably clear."
        },
        {
          "label": "Numeric expression adequate",
          "studentValue": 2,
          "maxValue": 2,
          "marksLost": 0,
          "status": "scored",
          "confidence": "high",
          "evidenceStrength": 1,
          "reason": "The explanation handled numeric information adequately."
        },
        {
          "label": "Comparison structure clear",
          "studentValue": 2,
          "maxValue": 2,
          "marksLost": 0,
          "status": "scored",
          "confidence": "high",
          "evidenceStrength": 1,
          "reason": "Comparisons were structured clearly."
        }
      ],
      "whereMarksLost": [],
      "strengths": [
        {
          "metric": "calibrationScore",
          "label": "Calibration score",
          "studentValue": 2,
          "maxValue": 2,
          "comment": "The explanation kept its claims reasonably well calibrated."
        },
        {
          "metric": "clarityAdequate",
          "label": "Clarity adequate",
          "studentValue": 2,
          "maxValue": 2,
          "comment": "The explanation wording was acceptably clear."
        },
        {
          "metric": "clarityScore",
          "label": "Clarity score",
          "studentValue": 2,
          "maxValue": 2,
          "comment": "The explanation was generally clear and readable."
        },
        {
          "metric": "comparisonStructureClear",
          "label": "Comparison structure clear",
          "studentValue": 2,
          "maxValue": 2,
          "comment": "Comparisons were structured clearly."
        },
        {
          "metric": "completenessScore",
          "label": "Completeness score",
          "studentValue": 2,
          "maxValue": 2,
          "comment": "The explanation covered the main parts of the model story."
        },
        {
          "metric": "effectDirectionCorrect",
          "label": "Effect direction correct",
          "studentValue": 2,
          "maxValue": 2,
          "comment": "The direction of the fitted effect was described correctly."
        },
        {
          "metric": "effectScaleAppropriate",
          "label": "Effect scale appropriate",
          "studentValue": 2,
          "maxValue": 2,
          "comment": "The effect was described on an appropriate scale."
        },
        {
          "metric": "factualScore",
          "label": "Factual score",
          "studentValue": 2,
          "maxValue": 2,
          "comment": "The explanation stayed close to the fitted model facts."
        },
        {
          "metric": "inferenceScore",
          "label": "Inference score",
          "studentValue": 2,
          "maxValue": 2,
          "comment": "The explanation used an appropriate inferential tone."
        },
        {
          "metric": "inferentialRegisterAppropriate",
          "label": "Inferential register appropriate",
          "studentValue": 2,
          "maxValue": 2,
          "comment": "The wording matched the evidence level well."
        },
        {
          "metric": "mainEffectCoverageAdequate",
          "label": "Main-effect coverage adequate",
          "studentValue": 2,
          "maxValue": 2,
          "comment": "The main effect was described adequately."
        },
        {
          "metric": "numericExpressionAdequate",
          "label": "Numeric expression adequate",
          "studentValue": 2,
          "maxValue": 2,
          "comment": "The explanation handled numeric information adequately."
        },
        {
          "metric": "referenceGroupCoverageAdequate",
          "label": "Reference-group coverage adequate",
          "studentValue": 2,
          "maxValue": 2,
          "comment": "Reference-group context was included where needed."
        },
        {
          "metric": "referenceGroupHandledCorrectly",
          "label": "Reference group handled correctly",
          "studentValue": 2,
          "maxValue": 2,
          "comment": "Baseline or reference-group information was handled appropriately."
        },
        {
          "metric": "uncertaintyHandlingAppropriate",
          "label": "Uncertainty handling appropriate",
          "studentValue": 2,
          "maxValue": 2,
          "comment": "Uncertainty was handled appropriately for this model."
        }
      ],
      "semanticEvidence": [
        {
          "field": "effectDirection",
          "label": "Effect direction",
          "value": "positive",
          "evidencePresent": true,
          "detail": "Direction inferred from directional wording or group estimates."
        },
        {
          "field": "effectMagnitude",
          "label": "Effect magnitude",
          "value": "not stated",
          "evidencePresent": false,
          "detail": "First clearly stated fitted magnitude found near effect wording."
        },
        {
          "field": "effectScale",
          "label": "Effect scale",
          "value": "additive",
          "evidencePresent": true,
          "detail": "Scale inferred from additive or multiplicative model language."
        },
        {
          "field": "uncertaintyMentioned",
          "label": "Uncertainty mentioned",
          "value": "present",
          "evidencePresent": true,
          "detail": "Uncertainty language such as confidence intervals, overlap, or weak evidence."
        },
        {
          "field": "interactionAcknowledged",
          "label": "Interaction acknowledged",
          "value": "present",
          "evidencePresent": true,
          "detail": "Interaction or slope-difference structure mentioned."
        },
        {
          "field": "comparisonMentioned",
          "label": "Comparison mentioned",
          "value": "present",
          "evidencePresent": true,
          "detail": "Group comparison or contrast language mentioned."
        },
        {
          "field": "noClearDifferenceMentioned",
          "label": "No-clear-difference language",
          "value": "present",
          "evidencePresent": true,
          "detail": "Language indicating no clear or well-supported difference."
        },
        {
          "field": "modelCannotAnswerQuestion",
          "label": "Model cannot answer question",
          "value": "present",
          "evidencePresent": true,
          "detail": "Explanation says the fitted model cannot directly answer the research question."
        },
        {
          "field": "researchQuestionAnsweredDirectly",
          "label": "Research question answered directly",
          "value": "present",
          "evidencePresent": true,
          "detail": "Whether the fitted model is treated as directly answering the research question."
        },
        {
          "field": "alternativeModelInterpretationProvided",
          "label": "Alternative model interpretation provided",
          "value": "absent",
          "evidencePresent": false,
          "detail": "Explanation gives the fitted predictor interpretation when the research question predictor is absent."
        }
      ],
      "objectSummaryText": "WMFM grade summary\n------------------\nMethod: deterministic \nRuns: 1 \nMark mean:10.00[10.00, 10.00]\nOverall score mean:100.00[100.00, 100.00]\n\nElapsed time: 0s \nMean time per run: 0s "
    }
  },
  "repeated": {
    "totalRuns": 3,
    "elapsedSeconds": 15.9637,
    "createdAt": "2026-05-10 11:23:26.136908",
    "summary": [
      {
        "requestedRuns": 3,
        "completedRuns": 3,
        "scoredRuns": 3,
        "meanMark": 10,
        "minMark": 10,
        "maxMark": 10,
        "elapsed": "16.0 seconds"
      }
    ],
    "runTable": [
      {
        "run": 1,
        "scored": true,
        "overallScore": 100,
        "mark": 10,
        "elapsedSeconds": 5.5,
        "status": "scored"
      },
      {
        "run": 2,
        "scored": true,
        "overallScore": 100,
        "mark": 10,
        "elapsedSeconds": 5.2,
        "status": "scored"
      },
      {
        "run": 3,
        "scored": true,
        "overallScore": 100,
        "mark": 10,
        "elapsedSeconds": 5.3,
        "status": "scored"
      }
    ],
    "runs": [
      {
        "run": 1,
        "status": "scored",
        "elapsedSeconds": 5.5,
        "explanation": "Do average final exam marks differ by gender in this course example? The analysis compares average final exam marks (out of 100) for female and male students. The expected mark for female students is 55 (95% confidence interval 50 to 59), while for male students it is 51 (95% confidence interval 46 to 55). Although the estimated marks differ by about 4 marks, the model does not show a clear difference-values consistent with these data range from male students scoring slightly higher to female students scoring moderately higher. The model explains very little of the variation in exam marks (about 1%), indicating that other factors not included here play a much larger role in determining individual marks. Overall, there is no clear evidence of a difference in average exam marks by gender based on these data.",
        "grade": {
          "class": ["wmfmGrade", "list"],
          "scoreScale": 10,
          "scored": true,
          "method": "deterministic",
          "summary": [
            {
              "method": "deterministic",
              "overallScore": 100,
              "mark": 10,
              "scoreScale": 10,
              "scored": true
            }
          ],
          "metrics": [
            {
              "label": "Overall score",
              "studentValue": 100,
              "maxValue": 100,
              "marksLost": 0,
              "status": "scored",
              "confidence": "high",
              "evidenceStrength": 1,
              "reason": "The explanation met all applicable deterministic rubric criteria."
            },
            {
              "label": "Factual score",
              "studentValue": 2,
              "maxValue": 2,
              "marksLost": 0,
              "status": "scored",
              "confidence": "high",
              "evidenceStrength": 1,
              "reason": "The explanation stayed close to the fitted model facts."
            },
            {
              "label": "Inference score",
              "studentValue": 2,
              "maxValue": 2,
              "marksLost": 0,
              "status": "scored",
              "confidence": "high",
              "evidenceStrength": 1,
              "reason": "The explanation used an appropriate inferential tone."
            },
            {
              "label": "Completeness score",
              "studentValue": 2,
              "maxValue": 2,
              "marksLost": 0,
              "status": "scored",
              "confidence": "high",
              "evidenceStrength": 1,
              "reason": "The explanation covered the main parts of the model story."
            },
            {
              "label": "Clarity score",
              "studentValue": 2,
              "maxValue": 2,
              "marksLost": 0,
              "status": "scored",
              "confidence": "high",
              "evidenceStrength": 1,
              "reason": "The explanation was generally clear and readable."
            },
            {
              "label": "Calibration score",
              "studentValue": 2,
              "maxValue": 2,
              "marksLost": 0,
              "status": "scored",
              "confidence": "high",
              "evidenceStrength": 1,
              "reason": "The explanation kept its claims reasonably well calibrated."
            },
            {
              "label": "Effect direction correct",
              "studentValue": 2,
              "maxValue": 2,
              "marksLost": 0,
              "status": "scored",
              "confidence": "high",
              "evidenceStrength": 1,
              "reason": "The direction of the fitted effect was described correctly."
            },
            {
              "label": "Effect scale appropriate",
              "studentValue": 2,
              "maxValue": 2,
              "marksLost": 0,
              "status": "scored",
              "confidence": "high",
              "evidenceStrength": 1,
              "reason": "The effect was described on an appropriate scale."
            },
            {
              "label": "Reference group handled correctly",
              "studentValue": 2,
              "maxValue": 2,
              "marksLost": 0,
              "status": "scored",
              "confidence": "high",
              "evidenceStrength": 1,
              "reason": "Baseline or reference-group information was handled appropriately."
            },
            {
              "label": "Interaction coverage adequate",
              "studentValue": null,
              "maxValue": 0,
              "marksLost": 0,
              "status": "not_applicable",
              "confidence": "not_applicable",
              "evidenceStrength": null,
              "reason": "Interaction coverage adequate was not applicable to this model."
            },
            {
              "label": "Interaction substance correct",
              "studentValue": null,
              "maxValue": 0,
              "marksLost": 0,
              "status": "not_applicable",
              "confidence": "not_applicable",
              "evidenceStrength": null,
              "reason": "Interaction substance correct was not applicable to this model."
            },
            {
              "label": "Uncertainty handling appropriate",
              "studentValue": 2,
              "maxValue": 2,
              "marksLost": 0,
              "status": "scored",
              "confidence": "high",
              "evidenceStrength": 1,
              "reason": "Uncertainty was handled appropriately for this model."
            },
            {
              "label": "Inferential register appropriate",
              "studentValue": 2,
              "maxValue": 2,
              "marksLost": 0,
              "status": "scored",
              "confidence": "high",
              "evidenceStrength": 1,
              "reason": "The wording matched the evidence level well."
            },
            {
              "label": "Main-effect coverage adequate",
              "studentValue": 2,
              "maxValue": 2,
              "marksLost": 0,
              "status": "scored",
              "confidence": "high",
              "evidenceStrength": 1,
              "reason": "The main effect was described adequately."
            },
            {
              "label": "Reference-group coverage adequate",
              "studentValue": 2,
              "maxValue": 2,
              "marksLost": 0,
              "status": "scored",
              "confidence": "high",
              "evidenceStrength": 1,
              "reason": "Reference-group context was included where needed."
            },
            {
              "label": "Clarity adequate",
              "studentValue": 2,
              "maxValue": 2,
              "marksLost": 0,
              "status": "scored",
              "confidence": "high",
              "evidenceStrength": 1,
              "reason": "The explanation wording was acceptably clear."
            },
            {
              "label": "Numeric expression adequate",
              "studentValue": 2,
              "maxValue": 2,
              "marksLost": 0,
              "status": "scored",
              "confidence": "high",
              "evidenceStrength": 1,
              "reason": "The explanation handled numeric information adequately."
            },
            {
              "label": "Comparison structure clear",
              "studentValue": 2,
              "maxValue": 2,
              "marksLost": 0,
              "status": "scored",
              "confidence": "high",
              "evidenceStrength": 1,
              "reason": "Comparisons were structured clearly."
            }
          ],
          "whereMarksLost": [],
          "strengths": [
            {
              "metric": "calibrationScore",
              "label": "Calibration score",
              "studentValue": 2,
              "maxValue": 2,
              "comment": "The explanation kept its claims reasonably well calibrated."
            },
            {
              "metric": "clarityAdequate",
              "label": "Clarity adequate",
              "studentValue": 2,
              "maxValue": 2,
              "comment": "The explanation wording was acceptably clear."
            },
            {
              "metric": "clarityScore",
              "label": "Clarity score",
              "studentValue": 2,
              "maxValue": 2,
              "comment": "The explanation was generally clear and readable."
            },
            {
              "metric": "comparisonStructureClear",
              "label": "Comparison structure clear",
              "studentValue": 2,
              "maxValue": 2,
              "comment": "Comparisons were structured clearly."
            },
            {
              "metric": "completenessScore",
              "label": "Completeness score",
              "studentValue": 2,
              "maxValue": 2,
              "comment": "The explanation covered the main parts of the model story."
            },
            {
              "metric": "effectDirectionCorrect",
              "label": "Effect direction correct",
              "studentValue": 2,
              "maxValue": 2,
              "comment": "The direction of the fitted effect was described correctly."
            },
            {
              "metric": "effectScaleAppropriate",
              "label": "Effect scale appropriate",
              "studentValue": 2,
              "maxValue": 2,
              "comment": "The effect was described on an appropriate scale."
            },
            {
              "metric": "factualScore",
              "label": "Factual score",
              "studentValue": 2,
              "maxValue": 2,
              "comment": "The explanation stayed close to the fitted model facts."
            },
            {
              "metric": "inferenceScore",
              "label": "Inference score",
              "studentValue": 2,
              "maxValue": 2,
              "comment": "The explanation used an appropriate inferential tone."
            },
            {
              "metric": "inferentialRegisterAppropriate",
              "label": "Inferential register appropriate",
              "studentValue": 2,
              "maxValue": 2,
              "comment": "The wording matched the evidence level well."
            },
            {
              "metric": "mainEffectCoverageAdequate",
              "label": "Main-effect coverage adequate",
              "studentValue": 2,
              "maxValue": 2,
              "comment": "The main effect was described adequately."
            },
            {
              "metric": "numericExpressionAdequate",
              "label": "Numeric expression adequate",
              "studentValue": 2,
              "maxValue": 2,
              "comment": "The explanation handled numeric information adequately."
            },
            {
              "metric": "referenceGroupCoverageAdequate",
              "label": "Reference-group coverage adequate",
              "studentValue": 2,
              "maxValue": 2,
              "comment": "Reference-group context was included where needed."
            },
            {
              "metric": "referenceGroupHandledCorrectly",
              "label": "Reference group handled correctly",
              "studentValue": 2,
              "maxValue": 2,
              "comment": "Baseline or reference-group information was handled appropriately."
            },
            {
              "metric": "uncertaintyHandlingAppropriate",
              "label": "Uncertainty handling appropriate",
              "studentValue": 2,
              "maxValue": 2,
              "comment": "Uncertainty was handled appropriately for this model."
            }
          ],
          "semanticEvidence": [
            {
              "field": "effectDirection",
              "label": "Effect direction",
              "value": "positive",
              "evidencePresent": true,
              "detail": "Direction inferred from directional wording or group estimates."
            },
            {
              "field": "effectMagnitude",
              "label": "Effect magnitude",
              "value": "not stated",
              "evidencePresent": false,
              "detail": "First clearly stated fitted magnitude found near effect wording."
            },
            {
              "field": "effectScale",
              "label": "Effect scale",
              "value": "additive",
              "evidencePresent": true,
              "detail": "Scale inferred from additive or multiplicative model language."
            },
            {
              "field": "uncertaintyMentioned",
              "label": "Uncertainty mentioned",
              "value": "present",
              "evidencePresent": true,
              "detail": "Uncertainty language such as confidence intervals, overlap, or weak evidence."
            },
            {
              "field": "interactionAcknowledged",
              "label": "Interaction acknowledged",
              "value": "present",
              "evidencePresent": true,
              "detail": "Interaction or slope-difference structure mentioned."
            },
            {
              "field": "comparisonMentioned",
              "label": "Comparison mentioned",
              "value": "present",
              "evidencePresent": true,
              "detail": "Group comparison or contrast language mentioned."
            },
            {
              "field": "noClearDifferenceMentioned",
              "label": "No-clear-difference language",
              "value": "present",
              "evidencePresent": true,
              "detail": "Language indicating no clear or well-supported difference."
            },
            {
              "field": "modelCannotAnswerQuestion",
              "label": "Model cannot answer question",
              "value": "present",
              "evidencePresent": true,
              "detail": "Explanation says the fitted model cannot directly answer the research question."
            },
            {
              "field": "researchQuestionAnsweredDirectly",
              "label": "Research question answered directly",
              "value": "present",
              "evidencePresent": true,
              "detail": "Whether the fitted model is treated as directly answering the research question."
            },
            {
              "field": "alternativeModelInterpretationProvided",
              "label": "Alternative model interpretation provided",
              "value": "absent",
              "evidencePresent": false,
              "detail": "Explanation gives the fitted predictor interpretation when the research question predictor is absent."
            }
          ],
          "objectSummaryText": "WMFM grade summary\n------------------\nMethod: deterministic \nRuns: 1 \nMark mean:10.00[10.00, 10.00]\nOverall score mean:100.00[100.00, 100.00]\n\nElapsed time: 0s \nMean time per run: 0s "
        }
      },
      {
        "run": 2,
        "status": "scored",
        "elapsedSeconds": 5.2,
        "explanation": "Do average final exam marks differ by gender in this course example? The analysis compares average final exam marks (out of 100) for female and male students. The expected mark for female students is 55 (95% confidence interval 50 to 59), while for male students it is 51 (95% confidence interval 46 to 55). Although the point estimates differ by about 4 marks, the model does not show a clear difference-the data are consistent with patterns ranging from male students scoring slightly higher to female students scoring moderately higher. The model explains very little of the variation in exam marks (about 1%), indicating that gender accounts for only a small part of the differences in individual performance. Overall, there is no clear evidence of a difference in average exam marks by gender based on these data.",
        "grade": {
          "class": ["wmfmGrade", "list"],
          "scoreScale": 10,
          "scored": true,
          "method": "deterministic",
          "summary": [
            {
              "method": "deterministic",
              "overallScore": 100,
              "mark": 10,
              "scoreScale": 10,
              "scored": true
            }
          ],
          "metrics": [
            {
              "label": "Overall score",
              "studentValue": 100,
              "maxValue": 100,
              "marksLost": 0,
              "status": "scored",
              "confidence": "high",
              "evidenceStrength": 1,
              "reason": "The explanation met all applicable deterministic rubric criteria."
            },
            {
              "label": "Factual score",
              "studentValue": 2,
              "maxValue": 2,
              "marksLost": 0,
              "status": "scored",
              "confidence": "high",
              "evidenceStrength": 1,
              "reason": "The explanation stayed close to the fitted model facts."
            },
            {
              "label": "Inference score",
              "studentValue": 2,
              "maxValue": 2,
              "marksLost": 0,
              "status": "scored",
              "confidence": "high",
              "evidenceStrength": 1,
              "reason": "The explanation used an appropriate inferential tone."
            },
            {
              "label": "Completeness score",
              "studentValue": 2,
              "maxValue": 2,
              "marksLost": 0,
              "status": "scored",
              "confidence": "high",
              "evidenceStrength": 1,
              "reason": "The explanation covered the main parts of the model story."
            },
            {
              "label": "Clarity score",
              "studentValue": 2,
              "maxValue": 2,
              "marksLost": 0,
              "status": "scored",
              "confidence": "high",
              "evidenceStrength": 1,
              "reason": "The explanation was generally clear and readable."
            },
            {
              "label": "Calibration score",
              "studentValue": 2,
              "maxValue": 2,
              "marksLost": 0,
              "status": "scored",
              "confidence": "high",
              "evidenceStrength": 1,
              "reason": "The explanation kept its claims reasonably well calibrated."
            },
            {
              "label": "Effect direction correct",
              "studentValue": 2,
              "maxValue": 2,
              "marksLost": 0,
              "status": "scored",
              "confidence": "high",
              "evidenceStrength": 1,
              "reason": "The direction of the fitted effect was described correctly."
            },
            {
              "label": "Effect scale appropriate",
              "studentValue": 2,
              "maxValue": 2,
              "marksLost": 0,
              "status": "scored",
              "confidence": "high",
              "evidenceStrength": 1,
              "reason": "The effect was described on an appropriate scale."
            },
            {
              "label": "Reference group handled correctly",
              "studentValue": 2,
              "maxValue": 2,
              "marksLost": 0,
              "status": "scored",
              "confidence": "high",
              "evidenceStrength": 1,
              "reason": "Baseline or reference-group information was handled appropriately."
            },
            {
              "label": "Interaction coverage adequate",
              "studentValue": null,
              "maxValue": 0,
              "marksLost": 0,
              "status": "not_applicable",
              "confidence": "not_applicable",
              "evidenceStrength": null,
              "reason": "Interaction coverage adequate was not applicable to this model."
            },
            {
              "label": "Interaction substance correct",
              "studentValue": null,
              "maxValue": 0,
              "marksLost": 0,
              "status": "not_applicable",
              "confidence": "not_applicable",
              "evidenceStrength": null,
              "reason": "Interaction substance correct was not applicable to this model."
            },
            {
              "label": "Uncertainty handling appropriate",
              "studentValue": 2,
              "maxValue": 2,
              "marksLost": 0,
              "status": "scored",
              "confidence": "high",
              "evidenceStrength": 1,
              "reason": "Uncertainty was handled appropriately for this model."
            },
            {
              "label": "Inferential register appropriate",
              "studentValue": 2,
              "maxValue": 2,
              "marksLost": 0,
              "status": "scored",
              "confidence": "high",
              "evidenceStrength": 1,
              "reason": "The wording matched the evidence level well."
            },
            {
              "label": "Main-effect coverage adequate",
              "studentValue": 2,
              "maxValue": 2,
              "marksLost": 0,
              "status": "scored",
              "confidence": "high",
              "evidenceStrength": 1,
              "reason": "The main effect was described adequately."
            },
            {
              "label": "Reference-group coverage adequate",
              "studentValue": 2,
              "maxValue": 2,
              "marksLost": 0,
              "status": "scored",
              "confidence": "high",
              "evidenceStrength": 1,
              "reason": "Reference-group context was included where needed."
            },
            {
              "label": "Clarity adequate",
              "studentValue": 2,
              "maxValue": 2,
              "marksLost": 0,
              "status": "scored",
              "confidence": "high",
              "evidenceStrength": 1,
              "reason": "The explanation wording was acceptably clear."
            },
            {
              "label": "Numeric expression adequate",
              "studentValue": 2,
              "maxValue": 2,
              "marksLost": 0,
              "status": "scored",
              "confidence": "high",
              "evidenceStrength": 1,
              "reason": "The explanation handled numeric information adequately."
            },
            {
              "label": "Comparison structure clear",
              "studentValue": 2,
              "maxValue": 2,
              "marksLost": 0,
              "status": "scored",
              "confidence": "high",
              "evidenceStrength": 1,
              "reason": "Comparisons were structured clearly."
            }
          ],
          "whereMarksLost": [],
          "strengths": [
            {
              "metric": "calibrationScore",
              "label": "Calibration score",
              "studentValue": 2,
              "maxValue": 2,
              "comment": "The explanation kept its claims reasonably well calibrated."
            },
            {
              "metric": "clarityAdequate",
              "label": "Clarity adequate",
              "studentValue": 2,
              "maxValue": 2,
              "comment": "The explanation wording was acceptably clear."
            },
            {
              "metric": "clarityScore",
              "label": "Clarity score",
              "studentValue": 2,
              "maxValue": 2,
              "comment": "The explanation was generally clear and readable."
            },
            {
              "metric": "comparisonStructureClear",
              "label": "Comparison structure clear",
              "studentValue": 2,
              "maxValue": 2,
              "comment": "Comparisons were structured clearly."
            },
            {
              "metric": "completenessScore",
              "label": "Completeness score",
              "studentValue": 2,
              "maxValue": 2,
              "comment": "The explanation covered the main parts of the model story."
            },
            {
              "metric": "effectDirectionCorrect",
              "label": "Effect direction correct",
              "studentValue": 2,
              "maxValue": 2,
              "comment": "The direction of the fitted effect was described correctly."
            },
            {
              "metric": "effectScaleAppropriate",
              "label": "Effect scale appropriate",
              "studentValue": 2,
              "maxValue": 2,
              "comment": "The effect was described on an appropriate scale."
            },
            {
              "metric": "factualScore",
              "label": "Factual score",
              "studentValue": 2,
              "maxValue": 2,
              "comment": "The explanation stayed close to the fitted model facts."
            },
            {
              "metric": "inferenceScore",
              "label": "Inference score",
              "studentValue": 2,
              "maxValue": 2,
              "comment": "The explanation used an appropriate inferential tone."
            },
            {
              "metric": "inferentialRegisterAppropriate",
              "label": "Inferential register appropriate",
              "studentValue": 2,
              "maxValue": 2,
              "comment": "The wording matched the evidence level well."
            },
            {
              "metric": "mainEffectCoverageAdequate",
              "label": "Main-effect coverage adequate",
              "studentValue": 2,
              "maxValue": 2,
              "comment": "The main effect was described adequately."
            },
            {
              "metric": "numericExpressionAdequate",
              "label": "Numeric expression adequate",
              "studentValue": 2,
              "maxValue": 2,
              "comment": "The explanation handled numeric information adequately."
            },
            {
              "metric": "referenceGroupCoverageAdequate",
              "label": "Reference-group coverage adequate",
              "studentValue": 2,
              "maxValue": 2,
              "comment": "Reference-group context was included where needed."
            },
            {
              "metric": "referenceGroupHandledCorrectly",
              "label": "Reference group handled correctly",
              "studentValue": 2,
              "maxValue": 2,
              "comment": "Baseline or reference-group information was handled appropriately."
            },
            {
              "metric": "uncertaintyHandlingAppropriate",
              "label": "Uncertainty handling appropriate",
              "studentValue": 2,
              "maxValue": 2,
              "comment": "Uncertainty was handled appropriately for this model."
            }
          ],
          "semanticEvidence": [
            {
              "field": "effectDirection",
              "label": "Effect direction",
              "value": "positive",
              "evidencePresent": true,
              "detail": "Direction inferred from directional wording or group estimates."
            },
            {
              "field": "effectMagnitude",
              "label": "Effect magnitude",
              "value": "not stated",
              "evidencePresent": false,
              "detail": "First clearly stated fitted magnitude found near effect wording."
            },
            {
              "field": "effectScale",
              "label": "Effect scale",
              "value": "additive",
              "evidencePresent": true,
              "detail": "Scale inferred from additive or multiplicative model language."
            },
            {
              "field": "uncertaintyMentioned",
              "label": "Uncertainty mentioned",
              "value": "present",
              "evidencePresent": true,
              "detail": "Uncertainty language such as confidence intervals, overlap, or weak evidence."
            },
            {
              "field": "interactionAcknowledged",
              "label": "Interaction acknowledged",
              "value": "present",
              "evidencePresent": true,
              "detail": "Interaction or slope-difference structure mentioned."
            },
            {
              "field": "comparisonMentioned",
              "label": "Comparison mentioned",
              "value": "present",
              "evidencePresent": true,
              "detail": "Group comparison or contrast language mentioned."
            },
            {
              "field": "noClearDifferenceMentioned",
              "label": "No-clear-difference language",
              "value": "present",
              "evidencePresent": true,
              "detail": "Language indicating no clear or well-supported difference."
            },
            {
              "field": "modelCannotAnswerQuestion",
              "label": "Model cannot answer question",
              "value": "absent",
              "evidencePresent": false,
              "detail": "Explanation says the fitted model cannot directly answer the research question."
            },
            {
              "field": "researchQuestionAnsweredDirectly",
              "label": "Research question answered directly",
              "value": "present",
              "evidencePresent": true,
              "detail": "Whether the fitted model is treated as directly answering the research question."
            },
            {
              "field": "alternativeModelInterpretationProvided",
              "label": "Alternative model interpretation provided",
              "value": "absent",
              "evidencePresent": false,
              "detail": "Explanation gives the fitted predictor interpretation when the research question predictor is absent."
            }
          ],
          "objectSummaryText": "WMFM grade summary\n------------------\nMethod: deterministic \nRuns: 1 \nMark mean:10.00[10.00, 10.00]\nOverall score mean:100.00[100.00, 100.00]\n\nElapsed time: 0s \nMean time per run: 0s "
        }
      },
      {
        "run": 3,
        "status": "scored",
        "elapsedSeconds": 5.3,
        "explanation": "Do average final exam marks differ by gender in this course example? The analysis compares average final exam marks (out of 100) for female and male students. The expected mark for female students is 55 (95% confidence interval 50 to 59), while for male students it is 51 (95% confidence interval 46 to 55). Although the point estimates differ by about 4 marks, the model does not show a clear difference-the data are consistent with patterns ranging from male students scoring slightly higher to female students scoring moderately higher. The model explains very little of the variation in exam marks (about 1%), indicating that gender accounts for only a small part of the differences observed in individual performance. There is no clear evidence of a difference in average exam marks by gender based on these data.",
        "grade": {
          "class": ["wmfmGrade", "list"],
          "scoreScale": 10,
          "scored": true,
          "method": "deterministic",
          "summary": [
            {
              "method": "deterministic",
              "overallScore": 100,
              "mark": 10,
              "scoreScale": 10,
              "scored": true
            }
          ],
          "metrics": [
            {
              "label": "Overall score",
              "studentValue": 100,
              "maxValue": 100,
              "marksLost": 0,
              "status": "scored",
              "confidence": "high",
              "evidenceStrength": 1,
              "reason": "The explanation met all applicable deterministic rubric criteria."
            },
            {
              "label": "Factual score",
              "studentValue": 2,
              "maxValue": 2,
              "marksLost": 0,
              "status": "scored",
              "confidence": "high",
              "evidenceStrength": 1,
              "reason": "The explanation stayed close to the fitted model facts."
            },
            {
              "label": "Inference score",
              "studentValue": 2,
              "maxValue": 2,
              "marksLost": 0,
              "status": "scored",
              "confidence": "high",
              "evidenceStrength": 1,
              "reason": "The explanation used an appropriate inferential tone."
            },
            {
              "label": "Completeness score",
              "studentValue": 2,
              "maxValue": 2,
              "marksLost": 0,
              "status": "scored",
              "confidence": "high",
              "evidenceStrength": 1,
              "reason": "The explanation covered the main parts of the model story."
            },
            {
              "label": "Clarity score",
              "studentValue": 2,
              "maxValue": 2,
              "marksLost": 0,
              "status": "scored",
              "confidence": "high",
              "evidenceStrength": 1,
              "reason": "The explanation was generally clear and readable."
            },
            {
              "label": "Calibration score",
              "studentValue": 2,
              "maxValue": 2,
              "marksLost": 0,
              "status": "scored",
              "confidence": "high",
              "evidenceStrength": 1,
              "reason": "The explanation kept its claims reasonably well calibrated."
            },
            {
              "label": "Effect direction correct",
              "studentValue": 2,
              "maxValue": 2,
              "marksLost": 0,
              "status": "scored",
              "confidence": "high",
              "evidenceStrength": 1,
              "reason": "The direction of the fitted effect was described correctly."
            },
            {
              "label": "Effect scale appropriate",
              "studentValue": 2,
              "maxValue": 2,
              "marksLost": 0,
              "status": "scored",
              "confidence": "high",
              "evidenceStrength": 1,
              "reason": "The effect was described on an appropriate scale."
            },
            {
              "label": "Reference group handled correctly",
              "studentValue": 2,
              "maxValue": 2,
              "marksLost": 0,
              "status": "scored",
              "confidence": "high",
              "evidenceStrength": 1,
              "reason": "Baseline or reference-group information was handled appropriately."
            },
            {
              "label": "Interaction coverage adequate",
              "studentValue": null,
              "maxValue": 0,
              "marksLost": 0,
              "status": "not_applicable",
              "confidence": "not_applicable",
              "evidenceStrength": null,
              "reason": "Interaction coverage adequate was not applicable to this model."
            },
            {
              "label": "Interaction substance correct",
              "studentValue": null,
              "maxValue": 0,
              "marksLost": 0,
              "status": "not_applicable",
              "confidence": "not_applicable",
              "evidenceStrength": null,
              "reason": "Interaction substance correct was not applicable to this model."
            },
            {
              "label": "Uncertainty handling appropriate",
              "studentValue": 2,
              "maxValue": 2,
              "marksLost": 0,
              "status": "scored",
              "confidence": "high",
              "evidenceStrength": 1,
              "reason": "Uncertainty was handled appropriately for this model."
            },
            {
              "label": "Inferential register appropriate",
              "studentValue": 2,
              "maxValue": 2,
              "marksLost": 0,
              "status": "scored",
              "confidence": "high",
              "evidenceStrength": 1,
              "reason": "The wording matched the evidence level well."
            },
            {
              "label": "Main-effect coverage adequate",
              "studentValue": 2,
              "maxValue": 2,
              "marksLost": 0,
              "status": "scored",
              "confidence": "high",
              "evidenceStrength": 1,
              "reason": "The main effect was described adequately."
            },
            {
              "label": "Reference-group coverage adequate",
              "studentValue": 2,
              "maxValue": 2,
              "marksLost": 0,
              "status": "scored",
              "confidence": "high",
              "evidenceStrength": 1,
              "reason": "Reference-group context was included where needed."
            },
            {
              "label": "Clarity adequate",
              "studentValue": 2,
              "maxValue": 2,
              "marksLost": 0,
              "status": "scored",
              "confidence": "high",
              "evidenceStrength": 1,
              "reason": "The explanation wording was acceptably clear."
            },
            {
              "label": "Numeric expression adequate",
              "studentValue": 2,
              "maxValue": 2,
              "marksLost": 0,
              "status": "scored",
              "confidence": "high",
              "evidenceStrength": 1,
              "reason": "The explanation handled numeric information adequately."
            },
            {
              "label": "Comparison structure clear",
              "studentValue": 2,
              "maxValue": 2,
              "marksLost": 0,
              "status": "scored",
              "confidence": "high",
              "evidenceStrength": 1,
              "reason": "Comparisons were structured clearly."
            }
          ],
          "whereMarksLost": [],
          "strengths": [
            {
              "metric": "calibrationScore",
              "label": "Calibration score",
              "studentValue": 2,
              "maxValue": 2,
              "comment": "The explanation kept its claims reasonably well calibrated."
            },
            {
              "metric": "clarityAdequate",
              "label": "Clarity adequate",
              "studentValue": 2,
              "maxValue": 2,
              "comment": "The explanation wording was acceptably clear."
            },
            {
              "metric": "clarityScore",
              "label": "Clarity score",
              "studentValue": 2,
              "maxValue": 2,
              "comment": "The explanation was generally clear and readable."
            },
            {
              "metric": "comparisonStructureClear",
              "label": "Comparison structure clear",
              "studentValue": 2,
              "maxValue": 2,
              "comment": "Comparisons were structured clearly."
            },
            {
              "metric": "completenessScore",
              "label": "Completeness score",
              "studentValue": 2,
              "maxValue": 2,
              "comment": "The explanation covered the main parts of the model story."
            },
            {
              "metric": "effectDirectionCorrect",
              "label": "Effect direction correct",
              "studentValue": 2,
              "maxValue": 2,
              "comment": "The direction of the fitted effect was described correctly."
            },
            {
              "metric": "effectScaleAppropriate",
              "label": "Effect scale appropriate",
              "studentValue": 2,
              "maxValue": 2,
              "comment": "The effect was described on an appropriate scale."
            },
            {
              "metric": "factualScore",
              "label": "Factual score",
              "studentValue": 2,
              "maxValue": 2,
              "comment": "The explanation stayed close to the fitted model facts."
            },
            {
              "metric": "inferenceScore",
              "label": "Inference score",
              "studentValue": 2,
              "maxValue": 2,
              "comment": "The explanation used an appropriate inferential tone."
            },
            {
              "metric": "inferentialRegisterAppropriate",
              "label": "Inferential register appropriate",
              "studentValue": 2,
              "maxValue": 2,
              "comment": "The wording matched the evidence level well."
            },
            {
              "metric": "mainEffectCoverageAdequate",
              "label": "Main-effect coverage adequate",
              "studentValue": 2,
              "maxValue": 2,
              "comment": "The main effect was described adequately."
            },
            {
              "metric": "numericExpressionAdequate",
              "label": "Numeric expression adequate",
              "studentValue": 2,
              "maxValue": 2,
              "comment": "The explanation handled numeric information adequately."
            },
            {
              "metric": "referenceGroupCoverageAdequate",
              "label": "Reference-group coverage adequate",
              "studentValue": 2,
              "maxValue": 2,
              "comment": "Reference-group context was included where needed."
            },
            {
              "metric": "referenceGroupHandledCorrectly",
              "label": "Reference group handled correctly",
              "studentValue": 2,
              "maxValue": 2,
              "comment": "Baseline or reference-group information was handled appropriately."
            },
            {
              "metric": "uncertaintyHandlingAppropriate",
              "label": "Uncertainty handling appropriate",
              "studentValue": 2,
              "maxValue": 2,
              "comment": "Uncertainty was handled appropriately for this model."
            }
          ],
          "semanticEvidence": [
            {
              "field": "effectDirection",
              "label": "Effect direction",
              "value": "positive",
              "evidencePresent": true,
              "detail": "Direction inferred from directional wording or group estimates."
            },
            {
              "field": "effectMagnitude",
              "label": "Effect magnitude",
              "value": "not stated",
              "evidencePresent": false,
              "detail": "First clearly stated fitted magnitude found near effect wording."
            },
            {
              "field": "effectScale",
              "label": "Effect scale",
              "value": "additive",
              "evidencePresent": true,
              "detail": "Scale inferred from additive or multiplicative model language."
            },
            {
              "field": "uncertaintyMentioned",
              "label": "Uncertainty mentioned",
              "value": "present",
              "evidencePresent": true,
              "detail": "Uncertainty language such as confidence intervals, overlap, or weak evidence."
            },
            {
              "field": "interactionAcknowledged",
              "label": "Interaction acknowledged",
              "value": "present",
              "evidencePresent": true,
              "detail": "Interaction or slope-difference structure mentioned."
            },
            {
              "field": "comparisonMentioned",
              "label": "Comparison mentioned",
              "value": "present",
              "evidencePresent": true,
              "detail": "Group comparison or contrast language mentioned."
            },
            {
              "field": "noClearDifferenceMentioned",
              "label": "No-clear-difference language",
              "value": "present",
              "evidencePresent": true,
              "detail": "Language indicating no clear or well-supported difference."
            },
            {
              "field": "modelCannotAnswerQuestion",
              "label": "Model cannot answer question",
              "value": "absent",
              "evidencePresent": false,
              "detail": "Explanation says the fitted model cannot directly answer the research question."
            },
            {
              "field": "researchQuestionAnsweredDirectly",
              "label": "Research question answered directly",
              "value": "present",
              "evidencePresent": true,
              "detail": "Whether the fitted model is treated as directly answering the research question."
            },
            {
              "field": "alternativeModelInterpretationProvided",
              "label": "Alternative model interpretation provided",
              "value": "absent",
              "evidencePresent": false,
              "detail": "Explanation gives the fitted predictor interpretation when the research question predictor is absent."
            }
          ],
          "objectSummaryText": "WMFM grade summary\n------------------\nMethod: deterministic \nRuns: 1 \nMark mean:10.00[10.00, 10.00]\nOverall score mean:100.00[100.00, 100.00]\n\nElapsed time: 0s \nMean time per run: 0s "
        }
      }
    ]
  }
}