What this category's data looks like
What this category's data looks like
The daily materials for social evaluation of vocational skill level certification mainly come from three types: evaluation implementation plans, candidate registration forms, and assessor dispatch forms. The evaluation implementation plan gives the certification occupation, level, assessment method, and time arrangement; the candidate registration form carries the candidate's identity, application conditions, and contact information; the assessor dispatch form records assessor qualifications, dispatch sessions, and signed receipts. The three types of materials are updated on a rolling basis by batch, and there may be multiple revisions within the same batch. Field characteristics are concentrated in names, quantities, dates, and signature fields: candidate name, ID number, application level, assessor name, dispatch date, receipt signature. When materials enter this feature, the evaluation implementation plan is parsed and chunked as the primary basis, while the candidate registration form and assessor dispatch form are stored separately as supporting materials, each bound to a unique data identifier for subsequent retrieval and reference back to the original text.
Configuration and implementation checks
Configuration and implementation checks
This step is executed by the parsing and training task (server-side task), outputting data rows and index status (parsed, indexing, indexed). The basis entries that can be traced back to the original text are then completed by retrieval and subsequent processing. After parsing is completed, parsed chunks are immediately stored as visible data rows and bound to a unique data identifier; the index transitions through the three states parsed, indexing, and indexed; data pending indexing does not participate in recall; changing the model only rebuilds data that has completed indexing.
| Object | Check | Verification action |
|---|---|---|
| Evaluation implementation plan | The certification occupation, level, assessment method, and time arrangement can be traced back to the original text item by item, and match the names, quantities, and dates in the candidate registration form and assessor dispatch form | Open the data row to check whether the status is parsed, indexing, or indexed, and separately verify the identity of the file record and the data row; check whether the chunk boundaries of chunkSize and chunkSplitter are cut at clauses |
| Candidate registration form | The candidate name, ID number, and application level are consistent with the batch records in the evaluation implementation plan, and the signature field and receipt are complete | Verify the respective identities of the file record and the data row, and confirm that the registration form fields match the implementation plan fields; check whether the processing mode corresponding to trainingType covers this material |
| Assessor dispatch form | The assessor name, qualifications, and dispatch date are consistent with the assessment arrangements in the implementation plan, and no signature or receipt is missing | Open the data row to check the status, and confirm that the dates and quantities in the dispatch form match those in the implementation plan; check whether the data rows covered by the rebuild task contain only data that has completed indexing |
| Data row | It is in one of the three states parsed, indexing, or indexed and is consistent with the interface display; the rebuild scope covers only data that has completed indexing | Open the data row to check the status, and confirm that data pending indexing does not participate in recall; look at the data rows covered by the rebuild task, and verify that the initial training covers data pending indexing and data being indexed |
Three common errors
- # Three common errors
- Symptom: The same candidate name is written differently in the registration form and the implementation plan, and the quantities or dates do not match. Cause: The versions of the two materials were not synchronized, and cross-material field comparison was not performed after parsing and chunking.
- Symptom: The assessor dispatch form lacks a signature or receipt, but retrieval can still hit that entry. Cause: Successful parsing does not equal a retrieval hit; index status and signature completeness were not verified separately.
- Symptom: Newly uploaded materials cannot be found. Cause: The data row is in parsed or indexing status, and data pending indexing is naturally isolated at the retrieval layer and is not recalled.
How to verify the setup
How to verify the setup
Acceptance for this feature: upload an evaluation implementation plan, see whether the data row status transitions through parsed, indexing, and indexed, and see whether the data rows covered by the rebuild task contain only data that has completed indexing; verify the values of chunkSize, chunkSplitter, and trainingType.
Business test: ask a cross-material basis question, for example whether a certain candidate's application level is consistent between the registration form and the implementation plan, and see whether the answer gives a traceable source.
- Open the data row to check the status, confirm that it is in one of parsed, indexing, or indexed and is consistent with the interface display, and separately verify the identity of the file record and the data row.
- View the data rows covered by the rebuild task, confirm that it covers only data that has completed indexing, and that the initial training covers data pending indexing and data being indexed; verify the values of
chunkSize,chunkSplitter, andtrainingType.