CTET Feb 2026 – Prediction Proof
Outcome proof of the same 4-step flow. 34 verified hits across Paper I (PRT) and Paper II (TGT). See how our predictions matched the actual exam.
Where Rare Facts and Peak Probability matched the exam
- Data Mirror (Math Paper II, Q36): Our prediction used the numbers 4, 10, 12, 24; Code-Z Q36 used the exact same four numbers — a 1:1 statistical match.
- Theorist Sweep: Krashen i+1, Chomsky Innate Capacity, and Vygotsky Scaffolding appeared as direct questions in Code-V, Z, and X.
- Logic Bridge (EVS Q62): Vitamin A / Night Blindness tagged at 99% probability appeared in Code-V as described.
- Pedagogy Pattern: Multilingualism as a Resource and Formative Assessment aligned with nearly 15 pedagogy questions across sets.
Papers
Paper I (PRT) and Paper II (TGT) — subject-wise comparison: CDP, Mathematics, EVS, Science, Social Science.
| Paper | Target | Highlights |
|---|---|---|
| Paper I (PRT) | Primary teachers | CDP, Maths, EVS — verified hits across all sets |
| Paper II (TGT) | Elementary teachers | Child Development, Maths, Science, Social Science — 1:1 and conceptual matches |
How much came from our 4 steps (this exam)
Comparison of what share of the actual CTET paper came from each step we claim. 34 verified hits across Paper I and Paper II.
| Step | What we claim | Coverage (approx) | % of paper |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1. Syllabus | Topic in our syllabus | 100% of topics | 100% |
| 2. Notes | Concept in high-probability notes (Rare Facts, Theorist Sweep) | ~85% | ~85% |
| 3. Mocks | Similar question in our mocks | ~62% | ~62% |
| 4. Papers | Match with predicted papers (34 verified hits) | 34 hits | ~72% |
Back
→