E.10.LRN:11 - SoTA Echoing
| Source line | Adopted distinction | Limit retained here |
|---|---|---|
| OECD, Teaching Compass, 2025 | Keep teaching agency and practice distinct from student competency development. | The framework does not define FPF kinds or prove capability from teaching occurrence. |
| ISO/IEC 22989:2022 terminology as reused by ISO/IEC TS 42119-2:2025 | Treat ML as computational optimization of model parameters and keep the resulting model and testing distinct. | Source-local terminology does not settle human learning, deployment capability, or generalization evidence. |
| Goodfellow et al., Generative Adversarial Nets, 2014 | Separate minimax training Work, trained models, and generated samples. | Historical anchor; it does not establish every current GAN evaluation or deployment claim. |
| de Boer et al., Guiding Curiosity, 2026 | Preserve the current empirical contrast between performance-based and information-based uses of “learning progress.” | Shared source wording does not make capability change and information gain the same FPF result. |
| Tajwar et al., Training a Generally Curious Agent, 2025 | Keep trained information-gathering capability, interaction data, environment feedback, and transfer conditions explicit. | One agent-training line does not supply a universal curiosity or learning objective. |
| Papert and Harel, Situating Constructionism, 1991, and Kafai et al., Designing Constructionist Futures, 2020 | Treat public/shareable construction as a Method and evidence-design commitment, not a synonym for incremental constructivism. | Artifact existence does not prove authorship, capability, transfer, or retention. |
| Segovia-Martin et al., cultural-evolution review, 2024 | Keep copying and reconstructive transmission alternatives and the unit-of-transmission question open. | A pattern can be one named cultural variant without becoming a universal meme or knowledge atom. |
Recheck a source line only when a newer edition changes a distinction used by this Solution or when contrary evidence shows that the current branch boundary changes a practitioner action. Recency alone does not merge branches.