What this category's data looks like
The materials for this category mainly fall into three types: safety inspection checklists, hazard rectification ledgers, and emergency incident reports. Safety inspection checklists are checked item by item on a weekly or monthly basis by the teacher on duty and the safety officer, and contain inspection items, locations, dates, and signatures; hazard rectification ledgers register hazard names, quantities, discovery dates, rectification deadlines, responsible persons, and re-inspection receipts one by one; emergency incident reports record incident names, number of people involved, occurrence dates, reporters, and receiving signatures. The three types of materials corroborate one another in inspection and reporting: the checklist provides discovery records, the ledger provides the rectification loop closure, and the report provides incident characterization and receipts. When the materials enter reranking and hybrid retrieval, each participates as a candidate source in recall; the checklist corresponds to inspection item fields, the ledger corresponds to hazard entries and rectification status, and the report corresponds to incident entries and acknowledgment information. The update cadence is daily filing, weekly and monthly aggregation, and immediate supplementary entry for incidents, and field definitions must be checked against the current version of this institution.
Configuration and implementation checks
This step is executed by the reranking model in the retrieval service, which outputs the sorted candidates and rerank scores. The basis entries that can be traced back to the original text are then completed by citation trimming and answer generation. Hybrid retrieval runs both the vector and full-text paths simultaneously and merges the results; after merging, the scope is large and similarity filtering cannot be applied directly, so the reranking model is usually then used to sort and filter by rerank score.
| Object | Check | Verification action |
|---|---|---|
| Safety inspection checklist | Inspection items, locations, dates, and signatures are complete and are the current version of this institution | Check whether the inspection items in the checklist match the hazard names in the ledger, whether dates and signatures can be traced back to the original text, and whether candidates come from both paths at the same time |
| Hazard rectification ledger | Hazard names, quantities, discovery dates, rectification deadlines, and re-inspection receipts can be matched to the original text | Compare whether the same record's name, quantity, and date in the ledger and the report are consistent, confirm that when versions are not synchronized the current version prevails, and record the number of candidate entries and scores |
| Emergency incident report | Incident name, number of people involved, occurrence date, reporter, and receiving signature can be traced back | Check the cross fields between the report and the checklist and ledger, inspect cases of missing signatures or receipts, and adjust limit and searchMode to observe candidate sources |
| Reranking and hybrid retrieval | Both the vector and full-text paths are enabled, and the reranking model is bound and used for sorting and filtering | Check the switches for both paths in the search parameters, compare the ordering and scores before and after reranking, and confirm that usingReRank and similarity filtering take effect |
Three common errors
- Symptom: the same hazard has mismatched names, quantities, and dates in the checklist and the ledger. Cause: the filing definitions in the two places are not unified, and entry was not backfilled according to the current version.
- Symptom: the ledger has been updated but the report still references the old version, and the versions are not synchronized. Cause: the materials have different update cadences, and incident supplementary entry did not write back to the related entries.
- Symptom: rectification records lack a re-inspection signature or receipt and cannot be closed out. Cause: the re-inspection step left no trace, and blank signature fields were not backfilled.
How to verify the setup
Acceptance for this feature: compare the order and rerank scores of the top three entries before and after enabling reranking, confirm changes in the number of candidate entries and scores, and check the status of similarity, limit, searchMode, and usingReRank in the search parameters.
Business test: ask a basis question that spans materials, see whether the answer gives traceable sources, and check that the number of citations equals the array length; the tokens of the citation text are recorded separately and are not compared for equality with the number of array entries.
- Check the names, quantities, dates, and signatures of the safety inspection checklist, hazard rectification ledger, and emergency incident report one by one, mark inconsistent items, and trace them back to the original text.
- Compare the ordering and scores before and after reranking, record the number of candidate entries and scores, and confirm the switches for both hybrid retrieval paths and the binding status of the reranking model.