A.1.2: Case Study #2: Mechanics & Application

The Revealing Mechanism

Note 1: This outline provides guidance specific to Case Study #2, complementing the general case study rubric [link].
Note 2: See [link] for some illustrative examples of mechanisms.

The Brief

Understand the high-level algorithmic structure of an AI-powered method, function, or system.

Investigate how it operates and analyse how its design shapes behaviour.

You are not analysing surface outputs.
You are analysing the underlying process.

Your analysis should address the following questions.

1. What problem or function is the system designed to address?

• Problem / Function

    – What is the main objective of the task?
    – Why is this problem important?
    – Why does this mechanism exist within the system?

2. What is the mechanism?

• Mechanism Explanation

    – Describe clearly how it operates.
    – Explain how the overall task breaks down into algorithmic steps or modules.

• Your explanation should show

    – The overall workflow of the system
    – The specific mechanism you are analysing
    – Inputs → transformations → outputs

Avoid unnecessary jargon.
Focus on structural clarity.

3. What does this mechanism enable — and what does it limit?

• Capabilities

    – What strengths or behaviours does the mechanism enable?

• Limitations

    – What trade-offs, distortions, or failure patterns arise from its design?

4. If the mechanism changed, what would change?

• Causal reasoning

    – Explain how structural design choices create the system’s strengths, limits, and failure patterns.

• Comparison

    – Where helpful, compare your mechanism to an alternative design or configuration.

Your analysis should reveal one key insight about how the mechanism shapes system behaviour.

What a Strong Submission Demonstrates

A strong submission will:

Your writing should demonstrate algorithmic thinking and structural clarity.

Choosing Your Mechanism

Your mechanism should be:

Do not choose something broad like “AI” or “machine learning.”
Focus on one clearly defined mechanism within a system.

Explain the mechanism conceptually.
You may reference specific techniques where necessary to clarify how it works.

Do not turn this into a technical manual.

Clarity over breadth.
Mechanism over surface.

See [link] for some illustrative examples of mechanisms.

Deliverables

Your submission must include four parts.

i. Annotation (≈500 words)

Provide a short written annotation accompanying your case study.

• Title
    – A clear title identifying the system or mechanism studied.

• Caption / Description
    – A brief written explanation summarising the focus of your case study.

ii. The Artefact

Your artefact consists of two components:

• Supporting Explanation — contextual material that frames the system and the mechanism you analyse
• Mechanism Representation — the core explanation showing how the mechanism operates

Think of this as telling the story of the system first, then revealing how the mechanism works.

Explanation Layer (Supporting Context)

This section provides the context needed to understand the mechanism under study.
It is essentially the story or narrative that frames your mechanism.

It may include slides, visual examples, short demonstrations, or other explanatory material.

Your explanation layer should generally follow the sequence below.

• Problem
    – Illustrate the real-world task or use case the system is designed to address.

• System Context
    – Provide brief background on the system or application being studied.

• Mechanism (Overview)
    – Identify the mechanism you will analyse.
    – The detailed explanation follows in the next section.

• Assessment
    – Provide preliminary observations about what the system does well and where it struggles.

• Comparison (if relevant)
    – Introduce any alternative approaches or configurations that may be referenced later.

The goal of this section is to frame the system and prepare the reader for the detailed mechanism explanation.

This corresponds to the contextual slides or images that accompany your core artefact in the online gallery documentation.

Mechanism (Core Artefact)

This section is the central focus of the artefact.

Explain how the mechanism operates using clear diagrammatic representations.

Your explanation should make visible:

• The overall workflow of the system
• The specific module or mechanism you are analysing
• Inputs → transformations → outputs
• How information changes across the pipeline

Where relevant, present multiple levels of abstraction:

• System-level overview — the overall pipeline
• Module-level breakdown — the mechanism you selected
• Internal functional logic — how the mechanism operates

If the system is complex, focus on the overall structure plus one clearly analysed sub-mechanism.

The goal is to make the hidden architecture legible.

This is not a demo of outputs and not an exercise in aesthetic polish.

Your priority is clarity of algorithmic structure and explaining how system behaviour emerges from design choices.

iii. Vignette

The vignette is a short-form video presentation summarising your case study.

• Duration: approximately 90 seconds

Your video should clearly communicate:

• The system or application studied
• The mechanism you investigated
• Your key insight about how the mechanism shapes behaviour

iv. Evidences (Optional)

You may include supplementary materials in an appendix, such as:

• Code snippets
• Parameter sweeps
• Prompt comparisons
• Additional diagrams or tables
• Experimental results

Grading Criteria

In a nutshell

We are not grading:

We are grading:

Criterion What It Means
Understanding Do you correctly explain how the mechanism works?
Causal Reasoning / Comparison Do you link structural design choices to observable system behaviour, including how behaviour might change under alternative designs?
Limitations Do you identify meaningful trade-offs, constraints, or failure modes introduced by the mechanism?
Clarity Can you explain complex ideas in a precise and accessible way?
Visual Explanation Do your diagrams or visual representations clearly communicate the mechanism and information flow?

Rubric

Criterion Excellent Adequate Insufficient
Mechanism Accuracy Structurally correct and clearly articulated explanation of how the mechanism operates Mostly correct explanation with minor gaps or simplifications Superficial, vague, or incorrect description of the mechanism
Causal Analysis Clear linkage between structural design and system behaviour, with thoughtful comparison or reasoning Some connection between structure and behaviour, but underdeveloped Describes outputs or observations without structural reasoning
Failure Awareness Identifies meaningful trade-offs, limitations, or structural constraints Mentions limitations but without depth or explanation No meaningful discussion of limitations
Clarity of Communication Complex mechanism explained clearly and accessibly to non-specialists Explanation understandable but dense or uneven Obscure, overly technical, or difficult to follow
Visual Explanation Diagrams clearly reveal the system workflow, mechanism, and information flow Visuals present but only partially clarify the mechanism Visuals absent, confusing, or decorative rather than explanatory

Submission Deadline

Original: 📅2026.04.01 ⏰00:00
Extended: 📅2026.04.08 ⏰00:00

The Standard

The goal is not to describe AI.
The goal is to understand how it works.

Do not remain at the surface of outputs.
Demonstrate that you can think in mechanisms, modules, and pipelines.

Don’t just use AI.
Explain it.