What this category's data looks like
In the graduate admissions re-examination and admission scenario, materials include the re-examination plan, candidate score sheets, and adjustment lists. The re-examination plan provides admission rules, time nodes, and signature fields; the candidate score sheets record preliminary examination scores, re-examination scores, and rankings; the adjustment lists mark adjustment sources and confirmation status. When the three types of materials enter the workflow, their roles differ: the re-examination plan serves as the basis source, while the score sheets and adjustment lists serve as comparison objects. Materials are updated by admissions year, and versions are based on the release date and signed receipt. Field characteristics: name, quantity, date, signature field, receipt status. Common inconsistencies are concentrated in the same record's name, quantity, and date not matching across two materials, versions not being synchronized, and missing signatures or receipts.
Configuration and implementation checks
This step is executed by workflow nodes (user selection and branches), outputting branch directions and interaction status records. Basis items that can be traced back to the original text are continued by subsequent nodes according to the branches.
| Object | Check | Verification action |
|---|---|---|
| Re-examination plan | The basis comes from the materials in this park and the version is current, and the items can be matched to the original text; check the name, date, and signature field | Check the options and branch connections one by one in the node, confirm that the plan version corresponds to the current year, and use nodeId to locate the node |
| Candidate score sheet | The name, quantity, and date of the same record in the score sheet and adjustment list are consistent; check the fields and signed receipt | Trigger a user selection, view the node status in the run record, and use variables to check whether the selection result variable is passed to subsequent nodes |
| Adjustment list | The list version is synchronized with the re-examination plan, and items missing signatures or receipts are marked separately; check the quantity and date | Reference the selection result variable in a subsequent node and run a trial once to confirm that adjustment list items can be traced back to the original source |
Three common errors
- Phenomenon: The same candidate's name, quantity, or date does not match across two materials. Cause: The materials are maintained independently, and field-level comparison and signed receipt verification are not performed.
- Phenomenon: The versions of the re-examination plan and adjustment list are not synchronized. Cause: The update rhythms differ, the old version is still referenced in the process, and version marking is lacking.
- Phenomenon: After selecting an option, the default branch is still followed. Cause: The options and branch connections were not checked item by item, and after the interaction is completed the process stops or the same session repeatedly enters the interaction.
How to verify the setup
Acceptance of this function: run trials for each option one by one, check the branch direction and interaction status in the run record, confirm that options and branches correspond one to one, and use nodeId and variables to check node status and selection result variables.
Business test: ask a cross-material basis question, see whether the answer gives a traceable source, and check whether the name, quantity, date, and signed receipt are consistent.
- Check the options and branch connections one by one in the node, confirm that each option corresponds to one branch, and avoid following the default branch after selecting an option.
- Trigger a user selection, view the node status and selection result variable in the run record, and confirm that the process continues after the interaction is completed.