What this category's data looks like
This page addresses business basis queries in degree conferral and certificate information reporting. Materials include degree application forms, thesis review forms, defense resolutions, and certificate information reporting drafts. The degree application form carries the applicant's identity, discipline, and date fields; the thesis review form carries review conclusions, reviewers, and signatures; the defense resolution carries the defense date, voting results, and signatures; the reporting draft carries the certificate number and reporting receipt. Materials enter parsing and training tasks by batch. After parsing and chunking are completed, they are immediately persisted as visible data rows and bound to a unique data identifier, then flow through the three index states. Field characteristics center on names, degree types, dates, quantities, and signature fields. The same record must maintain consistent names, quantities, and dates across multiple materials, and the version is based on the current reporting batch.
Configuration and implementation checks
This step is executed by parsing and training tasks (server-side tasks), outputting data rows and index states (parsed, indexing, indexed). Basis entries that can be traced back to the original text are then completed by retrieval and subsequent processing.
| Object | Check | Verification action |
|---|---|---|
| Degree application form | Identity, discipline, and date fields and signature fields must be consistent with the current reporting batch | Check that the data row status is parsed, indexing, or indexed, and trace back to the signature and date positions in the original text |
| Thesis review form | Review conclusions, reviewers, and signatures must match the corresponding records in the defense resolution | Check the identifiers of the file records and data rows separately, and confirm that names, quantities, and dates are consistent |
| Defense resolution | Defense date, voting results, and signatures must be cross-consistent with the application form and review form | Inspect the data rows covered by the rebuild task, and confirm that only data with completed indexing is covered |
| Certificate information reporting draft | Certificate number, reporting receipt, and signature must be consistent with the resolution and application form | Check the chunking and training modes corresponding to chunkSize, chunkSplitter, and trainingType |
Three common errors
- Symptom: A newly uploaded degree application form cannot be found. Cause: The data row is in a pending-index state, and the retrieval layer naturally isolates it so it is not recalled; you must wait for the index state to change to completed.
- Symptom: Empty data rows remain after training fails. Cause: Parsing and chunking have already been persisted as visible data rows, but the index was not written back when training did not complete; you must directly edit or delete that data row.
- Symptom: The name, quantity, and date of the same record do not match between the thesis review form and the defense resolution. Cause: The versions are not synchronized or signatures and receipts are missing, and the two materials are not aligned to the current batch.
How to verify the setup
This feature acceptance: Upload one material, observe the data row status transitions and the coverage scope of the rebuild task, confirm that the status transitions among parsed, indexing, and indexed, and that rebuild covers only data with completed indexing.
Business test: Ask a cross-material basis question, see whether the answer provides traceable sources, and check that the tokens of the cited text and the number of array entries are recorded separately.
- Open the data row to check the status, confirm it is consistent with the interface display, and check the identifiers of the file records and data rows separately.
- Inspect the data rows covered by the rebuild task, and confirm that it targets only data with completed indexing; pending-index data does not participate in rebuild.