What this category's data looks like
This page addresses the scenario of kindergarten operation behavior and quality self-assessment, involving three types of materials: self-assessment reports, issue lists, and rectification plans. Sources include daily kindergarten records, assessment indicators, and rectification ledgers, with updates advancing along assessment cycles and rectification milestones. When materials enter the knowledge base retrieval service, each plays a different role: self-assessment reports provide overall conclusions and evidence leads, issue lists focus on specific items and responsibility attribution, and rectification plans specify deadlines and sign-off requirements. Field characteristics center on names, quantities, dates, signatures, and version numbers. During retrieval, the recall method must be matched to the material form to ensure the same record is traceable and verifiable across different materials, providing consistent candidate snippets for subsequent drafting and handover.
Configuration and implementation checks
This step is executed by the knowledge base retrieval service (retrieval node and search test), outputting candidate snippets and similarity scores (after pattern, merge, re-rank, filter, and limit trimming). Signable material drafts and handover records are completed by subsequent nodes or manually.
| Object | Check | Verification action |
|---|---|---|
| Self-assessment report | Fields complete, responsible person clear, version and date consistent | In the search test, use synonymous questions to retrieve, check whether candidate snippets cover the name, quantity, date, and signature fields in the report, and record the number of candidates and the similarity score |
| Issue list | The name, quantity, and date of the same record match between the self-assessment report and the issue list | Switch searchMode to semantic, full-text, or hybrid, compare candidate results, confirm that list items are consistent with report references, and check the ranking changes before and after toggling usingReRank |
| Rectification plan | Can be blocked when the version is not synchronized, signatures or receipts are missing | Draft a rectification plan according to the template and go through one handover, verify the version number, date, and signature fields in the plan, and observe whether missing items are blocked by retrieval results or handover records |
| Handover record | Responsible person clear, date and version consistent, receipt complete | Retrieve snippets related to the handover record, verify the sign-off person and date fields, record the number of references and the number of candidates after limit trimming, and confirm that receipt information is traceable |
Three common errors
- Symptom: The name, quantity, or date of the same record does not match between the self-assessment report and the issue list. Cause: The two materials were drafted separately, without verifying fields against the same candidate snippet.
- Symptom: The rectification plan version is not synchronized, and the handover still references old content. Cause: Retrieval did not filter by the latest version, and candidate snippets mixed in historical versions without date annotations.
- Symptom: The handover record lacks signatures or receipts, and the next step cannot sign off. Cause: Signatures and receipts were not listed as required fields during drafting, and retrieval did not recall relevant template snippets.
How to verify the setup
Acceptance for this feature: test once each with synonym-rewritten questions, compare candidate snippets and similarity scores, then toggle usingReRank to see ranking changes in the top few results, record the number of candidates and the tokens of referenced text, record the array count separately, and do not compare the number of references with the reference content budget as equal.
Business test: draft one according to the template and complete one handover, and see whether missing items are blocked.
- In the knowledge base search test, switch
searchModeto semantic, full-text, or hybrid, compare whether candidate results include both semantic and full-text sources, and record the number of candidates and scores. - Verify the fields, dates, and signatures of the self-assessment report, issue list, and rectification plan, confirm that the name, quantity, and date of the same record are consistent, and proceed to handover only after the version and receipt are complete.