A useful success criterion is observable. “More trust” gives a reviewer little to test. For Harbour, an observable result is that connected participants reach the same effective allocation for C7, while the competing request is recorded as unsuccessful under the case rules.
Keep performance and correctness separate. A quick response that gives North and South different accepted allocations has failed the central task.
A slow response may preserve the rule but fail an operating deadline. We will examine both later.
For now, set the minimum correctness condition and a boundary on what the exercise proves. This is a paper rehearsal, so its outcome demonstrates your reasoning. It does not measure a network or predict production speed.
Check the decision
A rehearsal returns North at one desk and South at another in one second. Both desks mark their own answer accepted.
Assess the result against the single-allocation condition. Record your response in worksheet section problem.
Model response and reasoning
The rehearsal fails because two contradictory accepted allocations remain, despite the fast replies.
Speed cannot compensate for violating the shared-record condition. First resolve what acceptance means across the desks.
Check: StateThe current recorded condition after effective changes.
Example: C7 is allocated North. the contradiction and avoid a performance-only verdict.
You have defined the single-allocation outcome for C7. Next, apply the validity rules in order to see how that outcome is produced.
Source
Blockchain Technology Overview. The exercise inputs and model choices are fictional teaching examples.