Does PDF to Quiz show whether a learner is improving?
PDF to Quiz showed improvement from 53% to 85% while continuing to flag circuit measurement as needing work. Across 2 attempts of 47 questions, it counted 94 answers and reported mean and median scores of 69%, without claiming complete mastery.
1 of 1 test case passed
Every test case in this scenario has a result.
The test case
Each test case is judged on its own: Pass, Fail, Not gradable, or Untested. The scenario result above is based on this test case.
Progress agrees with the attempts behind itPassEvidence
Mastery score MASTERY SCORE 74% Proficient - 6 points to reach Expert Later attempt score 85% Great work! A few more passes and you'll nail it. AI Quiz Feedback You've made a solid start, and an 85% shows you already understand much of the material. The main area to improve is circuit measurement rules: remember that an ammeter goes in series because it must measure the same current flowing through the lamp, while a voltmeter goes in parallel because it measures the potential difference across a component without significantly changing the circuit. Latest Results: 85% attempt 85 | 47 | 40 | 7 | Multiple Choice | 10/11/2026 Latest Results: 53% attempt 53 | 47 | 25 | 22 | Multiple Choice | 10/11/2026
Transcribed from Proof 1 · Screenshot
Transcribed from Proof 4 · Screenshot
Transcribed from Proof 2 · Screenshot
| ✓ | Expected: Progress must agree with the attempts, reflect the improved topic more positively, flag the continuing weakness, and avoid claiming complete mastery.Found: Correct answers rose from 25 to 40 out of 47; parallel-circuit questions ranked among top correct answers, meter errors persisted, and mastery read 74% Proficient. |
The later attempt was completed and submitted, so the progress view reflects actual quiz activity. Topic improvement appears indirectly in question lists and rising scores, without a per-topic view, while continuing meter errors remain highlighted without a complete-mastery claim.
Missing voltage digits. For two identical lamps in series on a 3.0 V battery, the review shows 5 V as correct and 0 V as chosen; the explanation gives 1.5 V each. Leading digits are missing.
Same-day attempt order. Latest Results dates both attempts 10/11/2026 without clock times. Their order within that day is supplied by the Results Graph.
Configuration and setup
How this tool was set up for the run and what the test needed in place. Each row is a fact from the run's records; a fact the records do not hold is left out, not guessed.
How this scenario is graded
How we decide Pass, Fail and Not gradable. The same rules apply to every tool tested on this scenario.
Each test case gets one result per tool: Pass, Fail or Not gradable. A test case we haven't run yet shows Untested. There are no partial results.
- Pass: the tool did everything the test expected, and nothing it said contradicts the correct answer.
- Fail: at least one expected behaviour clearly didn't happen; the test case's result says which one and quotes the tool.
- Not gradable: our evidence couldn't settle the outcome (for example a record we needed is missing). It is never counted as a fail, and the test case's result says what's missing.
Where this sits in the benchmark
This page is one cell of a larger study: one tool, one scenario. Only this benchmark's frame appears here.
| Level | Name | Scope |
|---|---|---|
| Benchmark | Quiz Generation → | 15 scenarios · 10 tools |
| Capability | Learner Progress → | |
| Scenario | The learner checks whether they are improving → | |
| Tool | PDF to Quiz → |
Global scenario definition → · Global capability definition → · PDF to Quiz product page →
History of this result
What has happened to this result since it was first published. Runs and grades are never overwritten: a retest or a re-grade publishes a new result and keeps the earlier one readable.
Act on this result
Nothing filed here edits the run or the grade. A challenge opens a review, and a review can produce a new run or a re-grade — which becomes the current result and leaves this one in the history.
You run the same kind of test against your own setup and get the same behaviour.
Agree →Yours behaves differently. Tell us what you got, with a screenshot if you have one.
Disagree →Something here is wrong — a reference value, a transcription, a grade.
Report an issue →Tell us what changed and we schedule a rerun of the failing test case. The old result stays as history.
Vendor notice →The same record is available as structured data through the AI Demos MCP server, with the counts, the coverage and every per-test-case reason carried as fields.
Verify the proof files
These files support this result. Open a file to inspect the original evidence.
File fingerprints (SHA-256)
A fingerprint identifies the exact file used for this result.