What this category's data looks like
The materials on this page are the re-examination plan, candidate score table, and transfer list in the graduate admissions re-examination and admission scenario. The re-examination plan is published by admissions year and includes the re-examination process, scoring rules, time and location, and signature fields; the candidate score table is generated by batch and includes candidate number, preliminary and re-examination scores, ranking, and date; the transfer list is updated by round and includes transfer candidate number, original application information, proposed admission opinion, and receipt. When these three types of materials enter the question handling and missing-item follow-up function, their roles differ: the re-examination plan provides the rule basis, the candidate score table provides the individual data basis, and the transfer list provides the list status and flow basis. In terms of field characteristics, the same candidate's name, number, and date in the score table and transfer list must be consistent, versions must be synchronized, and signatures and receipts must be complete; otherwise, it is treated as a missing item.
Configuration and implementation checks
This step is executed by workflow nodes (user selection and branching), outputting branch direction and interaction state records. "Handling records and items to be completed" is continued and completed by subsequent nodes according to the branch. When a node is triggered, the conversation enters the interaction state and records the workflow state; after the user completes the selection, execution continues along the branch corresponding to the selected option.
| Object | Check | Verification action |
|---|---|---|
| Re-examination plan | Check fields, dates, and signatures: whether the plan version, re-examination date, scoring items, and signature fields are complete and consistent with the score table | Check the options and branch connections one by one in the node, and run a trial once referencing the variables variable |
| Candidate score table | Check fields, dates, and signatures: whether the candidate number, scores, ranking, and date match the transfer list | Trigger once and check the node status in the run record and the branch corresponding to nodeId |
| Transfer list | Check fields, dates, and signatures: whether the transfer candidate number, proposed admission opinion, and receipt date are consistent with the score table | Reference the selection result variable in a subsequent node and run a trial to confirm that the corresponding branch is taken |
Three common errors
- Symptom: The same candidate's name, number, or date does not match between the score table and the transfer list. Cause: The two materials are entered separately without cross-checking, resulting in missed identification of missing items.
- Symptom: The re-examination plan version is not synchronized, and old scoring items are still referenced. Cause: After the plan is updated, it is not synchronized to the handling step, and the branch continues executing based on outdated materials.
- Symptom: The transfer list lacks a signature or receipt but still proceeds to the next step. Cause: The interaction state record is not bound to material completeness, and missing-item follow-up is not triggered.
How to verify the setup
This function's acceptance: run trials option by option, check the branch direction and interaction state in the run record, confirm that each option corresponds to one branch, that the selection result variable has been passed to subsequent nodes, and that variables, nodeId, and branch connections are consistent.
Business test: submit a question missing key information and see whether it asks a follow-up question before answering.
- Check the options and branch connections one by one in the node, trigger once to check the node status in the run record, and confirm that the interaction state is recorded and the selection result variable has been passed to subsequent nodes.
- Reference the selection result variable in a subsequent node and run a trial once, checking whether the fields, dates, and signatures of the re-examination plan, candidate score table, and transfer list are consistent, and whether missing items are followed up.