The final distinction is a human one.
Connecting a technical judgment to the person responsible for its use.
An assessment artifact can satisfy a formal condition and still require contextual judgment before it becomes useful in teaching. The decision to use it belongs to a setting, a purpose, and a person responsible for that use.
Automated examination and expert review address different parts of this responsibility. The former can support consistency of inspection; the latter connects the artifact to the intended instructional context. Neither function is fully described by a generic label of “quality.”
For IVY TEST, the public question is what a judgment is warranted to mean. Internal representations, generation procedures, and acceptance policies are not specified here. The perspectives above describe evaluation problems and research considerations, not a claim that each discussed formalism is deployed.
This perspective describes a research problem and its interpretive commitments. It is not a claim of calibrated difficulty, demonstrated learning gains, or deployment of each formalism discussed.