What this category's data looks like
This page addresses business basis queries in the graduate admissions re-examination and admission scenario. The materials include three types: the re-examination plan, the candidate score sheet, and the transfer list. The re-examination plan specifies the process, weights, and time nodes; the candidate score sheet carries the preliminary and re-examination scores and rankings; the transfer list records transfer preferences, proposed admissions, and substitute order. The three types of materials play different roles when entering this feature: the re-examination plan is retrieved as the rule basis, while the candidate score sheet and the transfer list are retrieved and compared as the factual basis. Materials are updated by admissions year, and fields include candidate number, name, major, date, signature or receipt. The same record may fail to match in name, quantity, or date across two materials, and versions may be out of sync or signatures or receipts may be missing, causing basis entries to be unable to point back to the original text.
Configuration and implementation checks
This step is executed by the server-side model channel configuration, which outputs the model binding relationships and channel responses. Basis entries that can point back to the original text are completed subsequently by AI nodes, code nodes, or manual work. Configuring the model does not equal configuring business data permissions.
| Object | Check | Verification action |
|---|---|---|
| Re-examination plan | The version must be current, dates and signatures or receipts must be complete, and entries must match the original text | Check the plan version number and release date, inspect signatures or receipts, and confirm that the retrieved paragraphs can point back to the original text |
| Candidate score sheet | Candidate number, name, major, scores, and rankings must be consistent with the transfer list, and dates must match | Compare names, quantities, and dates in the two materials one by one, record inconsistencies, and point back to the original text locations |
| Transfer list | Proposed admissions and substitute order must be consistent with the re-examination plan rules; missing signatures or receipts are deemed not effective | Check the list order against the plan clauses, inspect signatures or receipts, and confirm that cited entries can point back to the original text |
| Model type and channel | Corresponds to the step to be used, and the channel and key are consistent with the integrated service | Check the type label in the model configuration, compare it with the model name returned by the channel, and adjust maxContext, maxTokens, and quoteMaxToken to observe the response |
Three common errors
- Symptom: the same candidate's name or score fails to match across two materials. Cause: alignment was not performed by candidate number during data entry, and name and quantity fields are maintained separately.
- Symptom: a retrieved re-examination plan clause is already expired. Cause: versions are out of sync, and old-version materials remain in the knowledge base without being replaced.
- Symptom: a transfer list missing signatures or receipts is still cited. Cause: the effective status was not validated when the material was ingested, and basis entries cannot point back to the original text.
How to verify the setup
Feature acceptance: run one conversation and one retrieval, check the model identifier in the response, confirm that the language model and the index model are bound to their corresponding steps respectively, and check that toolChoice behavior meets expectations.
Business test: ask a cross-material basis question, see whether the answer provides traceable sources, and record the number of cited entries and the quoteMaxToken budget separately, without performing an equality comparison.
- In the model configuration, check the model type labels and the model names returned by the channel, and confirm that language, index, rerank, speech synthesis, and speech recognition are each bound to their corresponding steps.
- Check the version, date, and signature or receipt of the re-examination plan, candidate score sheet, and transfer list one by one, record differences in name, quantity, and date for the same record across two materials, and point back to the original text.