What this category's data looks like
In the investigation and handling of academic misconduct reports, material verification and discrepancy localization center on three types of core materials: report materials, investigation reports, and expert appraisal opinions. Report materials are submitted by the reporter and include the reported subject, time, factual description, and evidence attachments; investigation reports are written by the investigation team and include the investigation process, findings, and handling recommendations; expert appraisal opinions are issued by domain experts and include appraisal methods, judgment basis, and signature. The three types of materials have different update rhythms: report materials may be supplemented after a one-time submission; investigation reports are revised multiple times along the investigation stages; expert appraisal opinions are issued and signed at key milestones. When materials enter this function, report materials serve as the original comparison baseline, investigation reports serve as the object to be verified, and expert appraisal opinions serve as third-party corroboration. Field characteristics center on name, quantity, date, signature, and receipt; the same record should remain consistent across the three materials, versions need to be synchronized, and signatures and receipts must not be missing.
Configuration and implementation checks
This link is executed 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 uses a slider to control 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 |
|---|---|---|
| Report materials | Whether the name, quantity, and date are consistent with the investigation report | Compare the report materials and the investigation report field by field, record the discrepancy locations for name, quantity, and date, and check whether the versions are synchronized |
| Investigation report | Whether signatures and receipts are complete, and whether the date is consistent with the expert appraisal opinion | Check the signature column and receipt of the investigation report, compare the date field, and mark records missing signatures or receipts |
| Expert appraisal opinion | Whether the appraisal conclusion corresponds to the finding of the investigation report, and whether the date and signature are complete | Compare the conclusion fields of the expert appraisal opinion and the investigation report, check the date and signature, and record inconsistent items |
| Context range | Whether the material fields that can be accommodated in a single answer cover the three materials | Use maxContext and maxResponse to check the length of a single answer and the context range; the number of quotes is recorded separately, and quoteMaxToken only checks the tokens of the quoted text |
Three common errors
- Phenomenon: The name, quantity, and date of the same record do not match between the report materials and the investigation report. Cause: The two materials were filled in by different personnel at different stages, and no field-level comparison was performed.
- Phenomenon: The investigation report has been revised, but the expert appraisal opinion still cites the old version. Cause: The versions were not synchronized, and after revision there was no write-back or no notification to the appraisal expert.
- Phenomenon: The investigation report is missing a signature or receipt but still enters review. Cause: No signature and receipt check was set up in the material circulation process, and no item-by-item verification was performed before submission.
How to verify the setup
Acceptance of this function: ask a question that requires a long answer, see whether the ending is complete, confirm that the response limit matches the answer length required by the page, and that the answer does not break off in the middle of a sentence.
Business test: use a real record to find fields inconsistent with the ledger, record the discrepancies in name, quantity, and date, and submit them to the reviewer for confirmation and write-back.
- In the application settings, check the switch and slider position of the response limit, compare the usage of two runs, and confirm the change in single-run usage after adjusting the limit.
- Compare the name, quantity, date, signature, and receipt of the report materials, investigation report, and expert appraisal opinion field by field, mark discrepancies, and submit them to the reviewer for confirmation before write-back.