At the start of a cross-subject（语境补充词）/cross-subject/ challenge, Noah's team received a real case rather than a textbook（教科书）/'tekstbuk/ exercise. The opening evidence connected castle（城堡、象棋中的车）/'kæsl. 'kɑ:sl/, cattle（牛、家畜）/kætl/, cave（洞、穴）/keiv/, cease（停止）/si:s/, celebrity（名声、名人）/si'lebrti/, cell（细胞；小房间）/sɛl/, chain（链、枷锁）/tʃein/, chairwoman（女主席、女议长）/'tʃєәwumәn/, champion（冠军、拥护者）/'tʃæmpiәn/, chaos（大混乱、混沌）/'keiɒs/, chapter（章节）/ˈʧæptər/, character（人物；角色）/ˈkærəktə/, characteristic（特性、特征）/.kærәktә'ristik/, and chat（闲谈）/tʃæt/. The links looked unusual, but each detail came from a witness, label, form, or measurement（尺寸、度量）/'meʒәdmәnt/ in the case file. The team has already reviewed the complete plan.

A second folder added cheat（作弊；欺骗）/ʧit/, cheek（颊、厚颜）/tʃi:k/, cheese（奶酪）/tʃiːz/, chef（厨师）/ʃef/, chemical（化学药品）/'kemikl/, chemist（化学家、药剂师）/'kemist/, chest（胸部）/tʃest/, chew（咀嚼、咀嚼物）/tʃu:/, chief（主要的、首位的）/tʃi:f/, china（中国）/ˈtʃaɪnə/, choke（窒息、噎）/tʃәuk/, chorus（合唱队、齐声）/'kɒ:rәs/, church（教堂）/ʧərʧ/, and cigarette（香烟、纸烟）/.sigә'ret/. Some entries described people and places; others recorded objects, actions, or changing conditions. The students sorted each clue（线索、暗示）/klu:/ by time and source instead of forcing an early answer. The final choice was explained to everyone at the meeting.

The hardest set included circuit（电路、环(行)道）/'sә:kit/, circumstance（情况；条件）/ˈsərkəmˌstæns/, circus（马戏团、马戏）/'sә:kәs/, clap（鼓掌）/klæp/, classic（古典作品、杰作）/'klæsik/, clay（泥土、肉体）/klei/, click（咔哒声、啪嗒声）/klik/, clone（克隆；复制）/kloʊn/, cloth（布）/klɒ:θ. klɒθ/, clue, collapse（崩溃、倒塌）/kә'læps/, collar（衣领、颈圈）/'kɒlә/, column（专栏、圆柱）/'kɒlәm/, and combine（(企业的)联合、联合收割机）/kәm'bain/. Noah checked spelling and context while a partner marked facts that could be tested. Mina, who led（lead的过去式和过去分词）/led/ the discussion（讨论）/dɪˈskʌʃn/, asked for clear evidence. Then the supervisor（管理者、监督者）/.sju:pә'vaizә/ said, “Do not hide an awkward clue merely because it weakens（削弱、减弱）/'wi:kәn/ your first idea.”

The last working board brought together comedy（喜剧、有趣的事情）/'kɒmidi/, comic（滑稽的、有趣的）/'kɒmik/, commit（委托(托付)、犯罪）/kә'mit/, communist（共产主义者、共产党员）/'kɒmjunist/, comparison（比较、对照）/kәm'pærisn/, composition（作文；构成）/ˌkɑmpəˈzɪʃən/, comprehension（理解、包含）/.kɒmpri'henʃәn/, comprise（包含、构成）/kәm'praiz/, concentrate（浓缩、精选）/'kɒnsәntreit/, concern（担忧；涉及）/kənˈsərn/, concrete（凝结物、混凝土）/'kɒnkri:t/, conduct（开展；实施）/ˈkɑndəkt/, confucianism（儒家思想）/kənfˈjuʃəˌnɪzəm/, and confucius（孔子）/kənfˈjuʃəs/. The group compared the four boards, removed repeated claims, and wrote（写下）/roʊt/ a short reason beside every decision（决定）/dɪˈsɪʒn/. If the first method fails, we can try another one. That rule helped them correct two mistakes without blaming a teammate（队友）/'ti:mmeit/.

They would carry out（开展；执行）/ˈkɛri aʊt/ a careful review before they could draw a conclusion（得出结论）/drɔ ə kənˈkluʒən/. The answer must be based on（以……为依据）/bi beɪst ɔn/ evidence. Everyone would have access to（有机会使用；可获取）/hæv ˈækˌsɛs tɪ/ the same file, focus on（集中于）/ˈfoʊkɪs ɔn/ the task, and refer to（查阅；提到）/rɪˈfər tɪ/ original notes. In contrast（相比之下）/ɪn ˈkɑntræst/, guesses would be rejected; in addition（此外）/ɪn əˈdɪʃən/, every change needed a reason. The completed record told（告诉）/toʊld/ a clearer story than the first draft. It did not pretend that every clue was equally important; it showed how disciplined reading, calm cooperation（合作、协力）/kәu.ɒpә'reiʃәn/, and a checkable（语境补充词）/checkable/ decision could turn a crowded case into useful（有用的）/ˈjuːsfəl/ action.