What this category's data looks like
In self-funded study abroad application services, material verification and discrepancy localization revolve around three types of texts: study abroad service contracts, school application forms, and personal statements. The contract is signed by the service provider and the applicant, with fields including service items, fee terms, signature, and date; the school application form is filled out and submitted by the applicant, with fields including name, date of birth, intended major, intake term, and signature; the personal statement is written by the applicant, with fields including name, application number, date, and signature. The three types of materials come from different sources and have different update rhythms: the contract is signed or supplemented as service stages progress, the application form is submitted according to school batches, and the personal statement often undergoes multiple rounds of revision. When entering the knowledge base retrieval node, each is cited in the form of original text fragments for subsequent comparison of whether names, quantities, dates, and signatures are consistent, and to locate fields whose versions are not synchronized or whose receipts are missing.
Configuration and implementation checks
This step is executed by the citation output of the knowledge base retrieval node, which outputs an array of cited content, each item containing an original text fragment and a source identifier, and the length can be 0. The "discrepancy list" is completed subsequently by an AI node, code node, or manually.
| Object | Check | Verification action |
|---|---|---|
| Study abroad service contract | The name, quantity, and date of the same record in the contract and the ledger are consistent, and signatures and receipts are complete | Retrieve the original contract fragment and source identifier, compare field by field against the ledger, mark inconsistent items, and record quoteList |
| School application form | The name, date of birth, intended major, and intake term in the application form are consistent with the contract and personal statement | Use the citation array to refer back to the original paragraph of the application form, verify fields and dates, register discrepancies, and check responseData (non-streaming module results returned with detailed output enabled) |
| Personal statement | The name, application number, and date in the personal statement are consistent with the contract and application form, and the version is the latest | Compare the cited fragment with the latest version, confirm that no old draft is mixed in, and register the number of citations and the quoteMaxToken budget separately |
| Citation content output | The number of returned items is consistent with the matched materials; empty is also normal, and the pipeline continues | Run a test with a question that has no matching materials, confirm that the array is empty while the output pipeline works |
Three common errors
- Symptom: The name, quantity, and date of the same record do not match between the contract and the application form. Cause: The two materials are filled out separately without cross-checking, and the field definitions are inconsistent.
- Symptom: Old draft content appears in the personal statement. Cause: The version is not synchronized, and the original text fragment in the knowledge base was not replaced after revision.
- Symptom: The contract lacks a signature or receipt. Cause: The signing process was not completed before archiving, and the retrieved fragment lacks the signature page or receipt identifier.
How to verify the setup
This feature acceptance: ask a question with original text evidence, and check whether the citation array and footnote markers can refer back to the original text; then ask a question with no matching materials, confirm that the array is empty while the pipeline works, and record the number of array items and the quoteMaxToken budget separately.
Business test: use a real record to find fields inconsistent with the ledger, submit them to a reviewer for confirmation, and write back.
- Turn on citation footnote markers, check the original text fragments and source identifiers one by one against the source documents, and confirm that each citation can refer back to the original paragraph.
- Open the search parameter panel and check the values item by item, confirm that they are consistent with the values set in the knowledge base retrieval section, and check that the selected knowledge base uses the same vector model.