What this category's data looks like
This page addresses the scenario of formulating talent cultivation programs in vocational colleges. The materials include three types: talent cultivation programs, course standards, and job competency analysis tables. Talent cultivation programs are released as complete sets by major and grade, with fields including major name, cultivation objectives, course setup, class hours and credits, signatures, and dates; course standards are archived by course code, with fields including course name, objectives, content, assessment methods, version number, and signature; job competency analysis tables are compiled by job cluster, with fields including job name, competency items, corresponding courses, survey date, and receipt. When the three types of materials enter hybrid retrieval, each plays a different role: talent cultivation programs provide the top-level basis, course standards provide course-level support, and job competency analysis tables provide job-side evidence. In terms of update cadence, programs are revised according to the major adjustment cycle, course standards are updated on a rolling basis with course reform, and job competency analysis tables are supplemented according to the survey cycle. In terms of field characteristics, the course name, class hour quantity, and date of the same record may be inconsistent between the program and the course standard; version desynchronization or missing signatures may also occur. During retrieval, it must be possible to trace back to the original text and verify the current version.
Configuration and implementation checks
This step is executed by the reranking model in the retrieval service, which outputs the sorted candidates and reranking scores. "Basis items that can be traced back to the original text" are then completed by citation trimming and answer generation. Hybrid retrieval simultaneously runs the vector and full-text paths and merges the results. After merging, the scope is large and similarity filtering cannot be applied directly; usually the reranking model is then used to sort and filter by reranking score.
| Object | Check | Verification action |
|---|---|---|
| Hybrid retrieval | Both the vector and full-text paths are enabled; the switch status of both paths must be checked in the search parameters | Check the switches for both paths in the search parameters, confirm the values of searchMode and usingReRank, and record the number of candidates and the scores |
| Talent cultivation program | The major name, course setup, class hours and credits, signatures, and dates must match those in the course standards and job competency analysis tables | Compare item by item the course names, quantities, and dates of the same record in the program and the course standards, check whether signatures and receipts are complete, and verify the filtering results of similarity and limit |
| Course standard | The course name, objectives, assessment methods, version number, and signature must be the current version and consistent with the program | Check the version number and date, confirm consistency with the course entries in the talent cultivation program, check whether signatures are missing, and record the number of candidates and the scores |
| Job competency analysis table | The job name, competency items, corresponding courses, survey date, and receipt must match those in the program and course standards | Compare the correspondence between job competency items and course standards, check the survey date and receipt, and confirm that the names and quantities of the same record are consistent in the two materials |
Three common errors
- Phenomenon: The name, class hour quantity, and date of the same course do not match between the talent cultivation program and the course standard. Cause: The two materials are maintained separately, versions are not synchronized, and unified verification is lacking.
- Phenomenon: The course standard version is not synchronized, and the old version is still hit by retrieval. Cause: The version number and date fields are not updated with revisions, and retrieval does not filter by the current version.
- Phenomenon: The job competency analysis table lacks signatures or receipts, and basis items cannot be traced back to the original text. Cause: Survey records are archived incompletely, and signature and receipt fields are missing.
How to verify the setup
This feature's acceptance: compare the order and scores of the top three items before and after enabling reranking, check whether the number of candidates and the scores change with reranking, and confirm that usingReRank takes effect.
Business test: ask a cross-material basis question, see whether the answer provides traceable sources, and check whether the sources come from this institution's materials, whether the version is current, and whether the items match the original text.
- Check the switches for both paths and
searchModeandusingReRankin the search parameters, record the number of candidates and the scores, and compare the order of the top three items before and after reranking. - Compare item by item the names, quantities, dates, signatures, and receipts in the talent cultivation programs, course standards, and job competency analysis tables, confirm that the versions are current, and retain the items that can be traced back to the original text.