What this category's data looks like
This page addresses the business of safety grading and classification of university laboratories. The materials include three types: laboratory grading and classification tables, hazard source lists, and safety responsibility statements. The grading and classification table registers the grade, hazard source category, and determination notes by room or laboratory unit; the hazard source list records names, quantities, storage locations, and control measures by entry; the safety responsibility statement is retained by responsible person, date, and signed receipt. The three types of materials are updated on different rhythms: the grading and classification table is updated with laboratory renovations or grade adjustments, the hazard source list is updated with changes in reagents and equipment, and responsibility statements are re-signed by academic year or personnel change. When materials enter knowledge base retrieval, the grading and classification table provides the basis for grade determination, the hazard source list provides factual entries on hazard sources, and the responsibility statement provides clues on responsibility and signature status. The three have different roles. During retrieval, candidate fragments are recalled separately by field and date, and then the original text is checked by subsequent nodes or manually.
Configuration and implementation checks
This step is executed by the knowledge base retrieval service (retrieval node and search test), outputting candidate fragments and similarity scores (after mode, merge, rerank, filter, and upper-limit trimming). The basis entries that can be traced back to the original text are then completed by subsequent nodes or manually.
| Object | Check | Verification action |
|---|---|---|
| Laboratory grading and classification table | Fields must include laboratory name, grade, hazard source category, determination notes, and effective date; the name, quantity, and date of the same record in the two materials must be consistent | In the search test, use searchMode to switch among semantic, full-text, and hybrid modes, compare whether candidate fragments hit the grade and date fields, and check the similarity score |
| Hazard source list | Fields must include hazard source name, quantity, storage location, control measures, and update date; the version must be current and consistent with the references in the grading and classification table | Test once each with synonymous questions to see whether candidates contain both the list entry and the classification table reference; compare the order of the first few items before and after enabling rerank, and record the usingReRank switch state |
| Safety responsibility statement | Fields must include responsible person, scope of responsibility, signature, and receipt date; entries missing signature or receipt must be traceable back to the original text location | Search by responsible person name and academic year, and check whether candidate fragments carry the signature and receipt fields; if the source does not match, first check hits and associations, and do not attribute it to upper-limit trimming of references |
| Knowledge base retrieval service | The output is candidate fragments and similarity scores, after mode, merge, rerank, filter, and upper-limit trimming; it is not a statistical table, business document, or authorization result | Record the number of candidates and scores, and record the array count separately; when the reference upper limit is involved, check the tokens of the reference text, and do not equate the number of entries with the budget |
Three common errors
- Phenomenon: the name, quantity, or date of the same laboratory in the grading and classification table and the hazard source list do not match. Cause: the two materials are updated separately, without field-level comparison and association checking.
- Phenomenon: the retrieved version of the responsibility statement is inconsistent with the current academic year. Cause: the old version was not archived or marked invalid, the version was not synchronized, and the candidate still ranks high by similarity.
- Phenomenon: a responsibility statement entry is missing a signature or receipt, but the answer still gives a basis. Cause: the material itself has incomplete fields, and retrieval only returns candidate fragments without validating the signature and receipt fields.
How to verify the setup
Acceptance of this feature: test once each with synonymously rewritten questions, compare candidate fragments and similarity scores, then toggle rerank to see the order of the first few items, and record the searchMode and usingReRank states.
Business test: ask a cross-material basis question and see whether the answer gives a traceable source.
- In the knowledge base search test, retrieve the same question using semantic, full-text, and hybrid modes respectively, record the number of candidates and scores, and check whether candidates contain both semantic and full-text results.
- Trace each returned reference back to the original text one by one, and check the fields, dates, and signatures of the grading and classification table, hazard source list, and safety responsibility statement; when the reference upper limit is involved, check the tokens of the reference text, and record the array count separately.