What this category's data looks like
This page focuses on the scenarios of primary and secondary school timetables and after-school service scheduling. Material sources include the school master timetable, teacher assignment table, after-school service project table, and accompanying signed receipts. The update cadence is usually triggered at the beginning of the semester, at month-end, or by temporary adjustments. The three types of materials play different roles when entering the parsing and chunking function: the master timetable provides the class and time-slot baseline, the teacher assignment table carries the personnel-to-subject correspondence, and the after-school service project table records project names, participant counts, and dates. Field characteristics center on course names, teacher names, class numbers, week numbers, period numbers, project counts, start and end dates, and signature status. Material formats are mostly tables or scanned documents. After parsing, the original row order and header semantics must be preserved to facilitate subsequent retrieval and discrepancy localization.
Configuration and implementation checks
This step is executed by the parsing and training task (server-side task), which outputs data rows and index status (parsed, indexing, indexed). The "discrepancy list" is then completed by retrieval and subsequent processing. After parsing is complete, parsed chunks are immediately persisted as visible data rows and bound to a unique data identifier. The index transitions through three states, and data pending indexing does not participate in recall.
| Object | Check | Verification action |
|---|---|---|
| Master timetable | Check whether the class, course name, period, and date are consistent with the teacher assignment table | Open the data row verification status and confirm it is in one of parsed / indexing / indexed; check whether chunkSize and chunkSplitter split by table row |
| Teacher assignment table | Check whether teacher names, subjects, classes, and signed receipts are complete | Verify the file record and the data row separately, confirm the processing mode corresponding to trainingType; compare the name and quantity of the same record in the two materials |
| After-school service project table | Check project names, participant counts, start and end dates, and receipt signatures | View the data rows covered by the rebuild task; only data with completed indexing is covered; record the referenced text tokens, and record the array length separately |
| Discrepancy list (final output) | Generated by retrieval and subsequent processing, listing fields with inconsistent names, quantities, or dates | Use one real record to find fields inconsistent with the ledger, hand them to the reviewer for confirmation, and write them back |
Three common errors
- Symptom: the name or period of the same course does not match between the master timetable and the teacher assignment table. Cause: the two material versions were not synchronized, and cross-material field alignment was not performed after parsing and chunking.
- Symptom: the after-school service project count or start and end dates are inconsistent with the ledger. Cause: the project table was not re-parsed after updating, and old data rows still in completed indexing status were recalled.
- Symptom: missing signatures or receipts prevent the discrepancy list from closing the loop. Cause: scanned materials have missing pages, and the missing signature field was not marked when parsing and persisting, so the reviewer cannot confirm.
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 the transition from parsed to indexing to indexed, and that rebuild only covers data with completed indexing.
Business test: use one real record to find fields inconsistent with the ledger, record name, quantity, and date discrepancies, and hand them to the reviewer for confirmation and write-back.
- Verify the file record and the data row separately, confirm that the identifiers of the file and the data row are distinguishable, and that the status is consistent with the interface display.
- Check the data rows covered by the rebuild task, confirm that only data with completed indexing is covered, and that data pending indexing does not participate in the rebuild chain.