What this category's data looks like
This category's data involves three types of materials: course filing forms, study certificates, and credit recognition forms. The sources are training institutions, employers, and competent authorities, and the update cadence rolls with batch applications and supplementary entries. Field characteristics center on course name, credit hours, study start and end dates, signatures, and receipt numbers. When the materials enter the document parsing and chunking feature, the course filing form plays the role of the baseline for courses and credit hour limits, the study certificate plays the role of the individual's actual learning record, and the credit recognition form plays the role of summary application and signature confirmation. After parsing and chunking, the three types of materials each form data rows, bound to a unique data identifier, providing a comparable field basis for subsequent retrieval and discrepancy localization.
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 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, and the index transitions through the three states of parsed, indexing, and completed.
| Object | Check | Verification action |
|---|---|---|
| Course filing form | The course name and credit hours must correspond item by item with the study certificate, and signatures and receipts must not be missing | Check the file records and data rows separately, and confirm that after splitting by chunkSize and chunkSplitter, fields are not broken across chunks |
| Study certificate | The study start and end dates and credit hours must be consistent with the credit recognition form, and the version must be the latest | Open the data row to check the status, and confirm that it is not recalled while in parsed or indexing state, to avoid misjudging it as missing |
| Credit recognition form | The summarized credit hours and signature field must match across all three: the course filing form, the study certificate, and this form | Look at the data rows covered by the rebuild task, and confirm that the mode corresponding to trainingType only triggers rebuilds for indexed data |
| Data row | It is in one of the three states and consistent with the interface display; the same object name, quantity, and date are consistent across the two materials | Open the data row to check the status, and compare the respective identity identifiers of the file records and the data rows |
Three common errors
- Symptom: The credit hours for the same record do not match between the course filing form and the study certificate. Cause: The two materials are parsed and persisted separately, fields are not aligned by the same name, and the discrepancy is not exposed at the retrieval layer.
- Symptom: The study certificate has been replaced with a new version, but the recognition form still references the old date. Cause: The version was not synchronized, and the old data row is still in completed index state and is recalled.
- Symptom: The credit recognition form is missing a signature or receipt but still enters the summary. Cause: Parsing only produces data rows and index status; missing signatures and receipts must be located by retrieval and subsequent processing.
How to verify the setup
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 changing the model only rebuilds data whose index is completed.
Business test: Use one real record to find a field inconsistent with the ledger, and verify the name, quantity, and date of that record in the course filing form, study certificate, and credit recognition form.
- Check the file records and data rows separately, and confirm that the identifiers of the file and the data row are distinguishable and that the status values are consistent with the interface display.
- Look at the data rows covered by the rebuild task, and confirm that the rebuild scope only covers data whose index is completed, while the initial training covers data that is pending indexing and indexing.