What this category's data looks like
In the degree conferral and certificate information reporting scenario, materials mainly consist of three types of documents: degree application forms, thesis review forms, and defense resolutions. The sources are submissions by each training unit in batches, and the update cadence is synchronized with the degree conferral batches. Field characteristics center on name, student ID, major, date, signature, and receipt. The degree application form carries personal and course information, the thesis review form carries review comments and scores, and the defense resolution carries the defense conclusion and committee signatures. When these three types of materials enter the material verification and discrepancy localization function, each serves as an independent comparison source, and the model compares them field by field within the given context scope, locating whether the name, quantity, and date of the same object are consistent across the two materials, and outputs a discrepancy list. When material versions are not synchronized or receipts are missing, the discrepancy list must annotate the source file and field location for the reviewer to confirm and write back.
Configuration and implementation checks
This part is executed by application settings (response limit, etc.), which output the length of a single answer and the context range it can accommodate. 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; maxResponse and maxContext correspond to answer length and context range respectively, quoteMaxToken is the budget for quoted content, and the number of quotes is recorded separately by array length and is not compared for equality with the budget.
| Object | Check | Verification action |
|---|---|---|
| Degree application form | Whether the name, quantity, date, and signature are consistent with the ledger | Compare name, student ID, major, and date field by field, check the signature column and receipt, and record the location of discrepant fields |
| Thesis review form | Whether the review comment date and reviewer signature are complete | Check the review date, review conclusion, and signature, verify whether signatures or receipts are missing, and annotate version discrepancies |
| Defense resolution | Whether the defense conclusion date and committee signatures are consistent with the application form | Compare the defense date, resolution conclusion, and committee signatures, and locate name and date discrepancies for the same record across the two materials |
| Response limit | Matches the answer length required by the page | Check the switch and slider position in application settings, and observe the effect of maxResponse on the ending of a single answer |
Three common errors
- Symptom: The name, quantity, and date of the same record do not match across the two materials. Cause: Material sources are not synchronized, field entry standards are inconsistent, and there is no unified comparison baseline.
- Symptom: Versions are not synchronized, causing the discrepancy list to point to fields in an old version. Cause: Old files were not replaced after the reporting batch was updated, and the context still loads the old version content.
- Symptom: Missing signatures or receipts prevent the discrepancy list from closing the loop. Cause: The signature column is empty or the receipt was not submitted together with the materials, so there is no confirmation basis during comparison.
How to verify the setup
This function's acceptance: ask a question that requires a long answer, check whether the ending is complete, and confirm that the answer under maxResponse and maxContext is not truncated.
Business test: use a real record to find fields inconsistent with the ledger, and record the quoted text tokens corresponding to quoteMaxToken and the number of quotes.
- Check the response limit switch and slider position in application settings, and compare usage changes between two runs.
- Write back the reviewer's confirmation result for each item in the discrepancy list, and check whether signatures and receipts have been completed.