What this category's data looks like
This page focuses on the grade entry and credit recognition scenario; materials come from three categories: transcripts, deferred examination applications, and make-up examination arrangements. A transcript records the course name, grade, credits, and the course instructor's signature; a deferred examination application states the student, course, reason for deferral, approval date, and seal; a make-up examination arrangement lists the make-up course, time, location, and invigilator's signature. The three material categories are updated along with academic affairs milestones: transcripts are generated after entry, deferred examination applications are archived after approval, and make-up examination arrangements are published before the exam. When entering the material verification and discrepancy localization function, the transcript serves as the baseline ledger, while deferred examination applications and make-up examination arrangements serve as materials to be verified, each taking on the role of comparison source. Field characteristics center on names, quantities, dates, signatures, and receipts, which need to be aligned item by item.
Configuration and implementation checks
This step is carried out by application settings (response limit, etc.), which output the length of a single answer and the range of context that can be accommodated. The "discrepancy list" is then completed by the model. The response limit is controlled by a slider for the length of a single answer; if set too low, the answer will be truncated, and if set too high, consumption will increase.
| Object | Check | Verification action |
|---|---|---|
| Transcript | Course name, credit count, grade entry date, and course instructor's signature are complete | Verify fields and signatures one by one, and record items inconsistent with the ledger |
| Deferred examination application | Student name, course name, deferral date, approval signature, and receipt are consistent | Compare the application with the transcript, and flag mismatches in name or date |
| Make-up examination arrangement | Make-up course, time, location, invigilator's signature, and receipt are in sync | Verify the arrangement against the deferred examination application, and locate fields whose versions are not synchronized |
| Response limit | Matches the answer length required by the page | Check the toggle and slider position in application settings, and confirm the maxResponse value |
Three common errors
- Symptom: the course name or credit count of the same record does not match between the transcript and the deferred examination application. Cause: a unified field mapping was not used during entry, resulting in deviations in names, quantities, and dates.
- Symptom: the make-up examination arrangement and the deferred examination application are not synchronized in version, and the time or location is still an old value. Cause: re-verification was not triggered after the material was updated, and the old version continued to be referenced.
- Symptom: the transcript lacks the course instructor's signature or the deferred examination application lacks the approval receipt. Cause: the signature and receipt steps were not closed-loop, and the material lacked verifiable credentials when it entered verification.
How to verify the setup
Function acceptance: ask a question that requires a long answer, and see whether the ending is complete; at the same time, check whether maxResponse and maxContext match, and confirm that the answer was not truncated.
Business test: use a real record to find a field inconsistent with the ledger, record the discrepancy list, and hand it to the reviewer to confirm write-back.
- Check the response limit toggle and slider position in application settings, and confirm the
maxResponseandmaxContextvalues - Ask a question that requires a long answer, check whether the answer ending is complete, and compare the usage changes between two runs