Semester 2 Portfolio Artifact
Preserve a tested algorithm library plus the integrated release rehearsal planner. The library records module breadth; the planner shows how contracts, algorithms, versions and evidence fit together. A reviewer should reproduce the main claims without a live walkthrough. Public publication is optional.
Review packet
- A concise README: problem, constraints, supported input/version semantics, environment, run/check commands and known limits.
- An evidence map from all five module gates and S1–S6 to source, proofs, assessment/recheck records and reproducible verification.
- A small fixture with readiness certificate and optimal schedule witness; generated tiny-instance and history checks with bounded oracle costs.
- A resource memo covering table magnitude, snapshots, output and admission limits; one fair comparison with workload, repetitions and honest interpretation.
- A decision note explaining a rejected alternative, declared assistance and a repaired real failure if one occurred. Do not fabricate a debugging story.
- A short Semester 3 handoff identifying interfaces and the next change that would challenge their assumptions.
Keep evidence categories clear
| Material | Role | Sharing |
|---|---|---|
| Implementation, CLI, original design/proof notes | Portfolio candidate | Share if desired after setup and claims are checked |
| Raw exam attempts, scores, reviewer feedback and remediation | Checkpoint evidence | Keep private by default; do not imply self-review was independent review |
| Fixture, generators, model checks and measured summary | Reproducibility evidence | Share bounded runnable versions; avoid unsupported universal claims |
| Personal reflection and assistance log | Learning/progression evidence | Retain an honest record; publish only what you choose |
Correctness, competency and inspection determine completion under the rubric. Presentation polish cannot compensate for missing invariants, and a private repository is acceptable when the reviewer can inspect it.