In the MM-04 workflow case, similar-looking model activity has different evidential validity: GPT-5.5 closes the evidence-to-action loop while GLM-5.1 leaves the assigned deck unchanged and Gemini-3.1-Pro misses required numeric or visual evidence¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · design r? · q1
Currency · newest study 2026 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q1 i? Three representative trajectories fail at different links of one teaching contract: GPT-5.5 closes the loop, GLM-5.1 produces plausible material without changing the assigned deck, and Gemini-3.1-Pro reaches the designated artifact but misses required evidence. → Zixin Chen 2026

Evidence¶

Zixin Chen 2026¶

Zixin Chen, Peng Liu, Rui Sheng, Haobo Li, Jianhong Tu, Xiaodong Deng, Kashun Shum, Dayiheng Liu, Huamin Qu. (2026). Are Agents Ready to Teach? A Multi-Stage Benchmark for Real-World Teaching Workflows. Preprint. https://arxiv.org/abs/2605.14322 doi:10.48550/arxiv.2605.14322

q1 · i? · design · r?

Case-study audit of the Stage 3 workflow MM-04, in which an ECON101 instructor requests supply–demand remediation from the Fall 2023 midterm and the existing Week 5 deck; four weak KCs must be recovered from 120 historical attempts. The article shows verifier-level checkpoints localize distinct breaks in the evidence–decision–action chain.

"GPT-5.5 closes the loop: diagnosed weaknesses become visual slide remediation, the quiz targets the same concepts, and the messages refer to that completed intervention. GLM-5.1 crosses the content boundary but not the object-identity boundary: it produces plausible microeconomics material while leaving the assigned deck unchanged"

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Markov transition analysis shows the three clusters differ in workflow dynamics: iterative optimization loops, rapid prototyping flows, and browsing-anchored exploration — related
• Code-augmented interaction redistributes failures into protocol, execution, and mathematical layers, with Gemini 2.5 Pro failing mostly through protocol violations — related
• The author reports that prompt phrasing and the specific foundational model had secondary impact on final material quality compared with the structure of the workflow itself. — related