What this category's data looks like
This page addresses the scenario of regular higher education institution admissions enrollment filing. Materials include enrollment plans, filing rules, and admission rosters. Enrollment plans are published by year and batch, containing fields for institution-major groups, planned numbers, elective subjects, and tuition; filing rules set out the filing ratio, tie-breaking order, and adjustment scope, and are updated with provincial policies; admission rosters record candidate numbers, filing scores, majors, and admission status, and must have handler signatures and receipts. When these three types of materials enter acceptance Q&A, enrollment plans and filing rules are used to determine eligibility and order, admission rosters are used to verify results and signatures, and missing-item follow-up questions are used to locate the fields to be supplemented accordingly.
Configuration and implementation checks
This part is executed by the memory turn count and prompt configuration in the application settings, outputting the reference historical message range and answer constraints. The acceptance record and the supplemented question items are completed by the model next. The external entry point and authorization are handled by the publishing service and file permissions; this feature does not generate access entry points and does not perform identity or file authentication.
| Object | Check | Verification action |
|---|---|---|
| Enrollment plan | The institution-major group name, planned number, elective subjects, and tuition fields must be consistent with the batch of the current year, and the date must be within the validity period | Retrieve the original plan text, compare the institution-major group and planned number involved in the acceptance question, and list any missing items as follow-up questions |
| Filing rules | The filing ratio, tie-breaking order, and adjustment scope fields must be consistent with the latest provincial version; if the version is not synchronized, it is deemed missing | Check the rule document number and effective date, confirm they match the batch in the question, and if they do not match, ask a follow-up question about the applicable version |
| Admission roster | The candidate number, filing score, major, and admission status must match the plan and rules, and signatures and receipts must be complete | Compare the names, quantities, and dates in the roster against the plan and rules; if signatures or receipts are missing, generate follow-up items to complete them |
| Multi-turn dialogue context | The second-round reference must carry forward the first-round question items, and the messages range must be consistent with the chatId ownership | Run a trial with two consecutive rounds of questions, and check whether variables bring in the missing fields and trigger follow-up questions |
Three common errors
- Symptom: The same candidate's name, quantity, and date do not match across two materials. Cause: During acceptance, no item-by-item field comparison was performed, and missing items were not identified as follow-up points.
- Symptom: The filing rule version was not synchronized, and the question was answered according to the old ratio. Cause: The material update cadence and Q&A acceptance were not aligned, and historical messages brought in expired constraints.
- Symptom: The admission roster lacked a handler signature or receipt but was still treated as complete evidence. Cause: The follow-up checklist did not cover the signature and receipt fields, so the handler could not verify them.
How to verify the setup
This feature's acceptance check: use two consecutive rounds of follow-up questions, see whether the second question carries forward the reference from the first question, and verify the range and ownership of messages, chatId, and variables in the acceptance record.
Business test: submit a question missing key information, see whether it asks a follow-up question before answering, and whether the supplemented question items land on specific fields in the enrollment plan, filing rules, and admission roster.
- In the application settings, check the current value of the memory turn count, match it against the prior context range required by the question, and after adjusting, compare the usage records of two runs.
- Run a trial with two consecutive rounds of questions, confirm that the second round correctly carries forward the reference from the first round, and that the opening message is not treated as prior context.