grading · human decisions

reviews and appeals

Submission review resolves solver work that automated grading cannot safely finalize. A grade appeal asks a reviewer to reconsider a finalized result. Question review is a separate publication workflow.

when a submission is flagged

A solution may be flagged because the problem requires manual grading, the AI grader reported low confidence or ambiguity, the work was unreadable, or the response needs judgment that automation should not make. While you wait, submission history shows under review, the provisional marks and feedback, and no Elo change.

An authorized reviewer sees the problem’s private marking material and your submitted work. When the reviewer finalizes the grade, submission history shows the final marks, breakdown, feedback, Elo effect, and a user-visible audit entry.

submission review lifecycle

flagged or manual grading
  → reviewer checks the full marking scheme and solver work
  → final human grade and feedback
  → Elo and solved status applied exactly once

appealing a finalized grade

Open profile → submissions, choose a finalized submission, and use appeal this grade. A submission still waiting for its initial review cannot be appealed, and only the submission owner can file the appeal. There is no filing deadline in the current policy.

Explain the specific mark, rubric item, calculation, or feedback you believe should be reconsidered. “I disagree” is not enough context; point to the mathematical work and the decision you want the reviewer to inspect. Submission history shows appeal pending until a reviewer decides.

decision	what it means	rating effect
`upheld`	The original final grade remains in force.	No additional Elo or solved-count change.
`revised`	A reviewer replaces the final grade, breakdown, and feedback.	Only the difference from the previously applied result is reconciled.

how delayed decisions affect Elo

A flagged submission starts with zero applied rating effect. Its submission-time user rating, problem rating, re-attempt status, maximum marks, and formula version are stored. When the human grade becomes final, Mathleagues calculates the target effect from that original context and applies it to the current ratings as a delayed adjustment.

If an appeal revises a result, the application does not replay the full Elo change. It applies:

revised appeal adjustment

adjustment
  = revised target delta
  - previously applied target delta

Current rating bounds still apply, so the audit history records both the target difference and the effective adjustment after clamping. See the Elo system for the underlying formula.

private review material

Solvers see the decision, user-visible explanation, grades, and rating summary. Internal reviewer notes, correct-answer guidance, private marking criteria, other users’ work, and raw AI provider data remain private.

question review is different

Question review publishes contributed problem drafts; it does not grade solver submissions. A contributor creates a draft, submits it for publication review, receives requested changes when needed, edits and resubmits, and sees the question’s publication status. Reviewers use thequestion reviews queue for that workflow and the submission reviews queue for solver work and appeals.

where to go

Solvers manage grades from profile → submissions. Contributors manage drafts from my questions. Reviewer access is assigned through the trusted staff workflow.