What this category's data looks like
This page addresses business basis queries in the investigation and handling of academic misconduct reports, involving three types of materials: report materials, investigation reports, and expert appraisal opinions. Report materials are usually submitted by the reporter and include the reported person's information, factual description, evidence list, and submission date; investigation reports are issued by the investigation team and record the investigation process, established facts, handling recommendations, and signatures; expert appraisal opinions are provided by appraisal experts and include appraisal matters, analysis opinions, conclusions, and expert signatures. The materials enter the parsing and chunking function in document form, each playing the role of source proof, procedural record, and professional judgment. The update rhythm advances with the investigation stages, and receipts, revised versions, or additional appraisals may be supplemented. Field characteristics center on names, quantities, dates, and signatures, and it is necessary to check whether the same record is consistent across different materials.
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.
| Object | Check | Verification action |
|---|---|---|
| Report materials | Check the reported person's name, evidence quantity, submission date, and receipt signature; compare item by item with the corresponding records in the investigation report to confirm that the name, quantity, and date match the original text | Open the data row to check the status; separately check the file record and the data row identifier; check whether chunkSize and chunkSplitter affect entry boundaries |
| Investigation report | Check the dates and signatures of the investigation process, established facts, and handling recommendations; compare with the appraisal matters and conclusion dates in the expert appraisal opinions to confirm that the version is current and no signatures are missing | Open the data row to check the status; view the data rows covered by the rebuild task; confirm that trainingType is consistent with the index status transition |
| Expert appraisal opinions | Check the appraisal matters, analysis opinions, conclusions, and expert signatures; compare with the evidence names and quantities in the report materials to confirm that the same record is consistent across different materials | Open the data row to check the status; separately check the file record and the data row; check whether chunkSize causes entries to be misaligned across materials |
| Data row | Is in one of the three states parsed, indexing, or indexed and is consistent with the interface display; data pending indexing does not participate in recall, and changing the model only rebuilds data that has completed indexing | Open the data row to check the status; view the data rows covered by the rebuild task; confirm that trainingType corresponds to the index status |
Three common errors
- Symptom: The name, quantity, and date of the same record do not match between the report materials and the investigation report. Cause: The material versions were not synchronized, or the original text was not traced back for verification during entry.
- Symptom: The expert appraisal opinions lack the expert signature or receipt, and the investigation report lacks the investigation team's signature. Cause: The material circulation step did not collect everything, or the scanned copy omitted the signature page.
- Symptom: Newly uploaded materials cannot be found, and failed training leaves empty data rows. Cause: The data row is in parsed or indexing, indexing has not been completed, and the retrieval layer does not recall it.
How to verify the setup
This function's acceptance: upload one material, observe the data row status transition and the coverage scope of the rebuild task; confirm that the status transitions among parsed, indexing, and indexed, and that rebuild only covers data that has completed indexing; check the impact of chunkSize, chunkSplitter, and trainingType on chunking and training.
Business test: ask a cross-material basis question and see whether the answer provides a traceable source.
- Open the data row to check the status, confirm it is consistent with the interface display, and separately check the file record and the data row identifier.
- View the data rows covered by the rebuild task, confirm that it targets only data that has completed indexing, and that data pending indexing does not participate in rebuild.