What this category's data looks like
The core materials in the student disciplinary and appeal handling category include disciplinary fact materials, disciplinary decision documents, and appeal statements. Disciplinary fact materials record the course of conduct, time and place, involved personnel, and evidence list; disciplinary decision documents state the applicable provisions, type of disciplinary action, effective date, and delivery signature; appeal statements include the appeal request, factual grounds, submission date, and receipt. The three types of materials have different sources and different update rhythms: fact materials are supplemented and corrected as the investigation proceeds, decision documents are finalized as approval is completed, and appeal statements change as the parties submit and supplement them. When the materials enter the knowledge base retrieval and recall function, each is segmented, vectorized, and indexed as an independent fragment, serving as a candidate source for subsequent nodes or manual work to generate the version ledger and change records accordingly. Field characteristics are concentrated in names, quantities, dates, signatures, and receipts. If any field is inconsistent between two materials, it will affect the uniqueness of the current version and reference synchronization.
Configuration and implementation checks
This step is performed by the knowledge base retrieval service (retrieval node and search test), which outputs candidate fragments and similarity scores (after mode, merge, rerank, filter, and limit trimming). The version ledger and change records are then completed by subsequent nodes or manual work.
| Object | Check | Verification action |
|---|---|---|
| Disciplinary fact materials | Names, quantities, dates, and signatures must align item by item with the decision document | In the search test, run one retrieval for each synonymous question, record the number of candidates and scores, and check whether the fragments returned under searchMode contain the fact fields |
| Disciplinary decision document | Applicable provisions, type of disciplinary action, effective date, and delivery signature must be consistent with the fact materials | Switch searchMode to compare semantic, full-text, and hybrid candidates, and see whether the decision document fragments consistently rank at the top |
| Appeal statement | The appeal request, factual grounds, submission date, and receipt must correspond to the decision document | Test once each with usingReRank enabled and disabled, compare the ranking of the top few results, and confirm that the appeal field fragments are not trimmed out |
| Version ledger and change records | The current version is unique, old versions are traceable, and references are synchronized | After changing one piece of content, retrieve again, check whether the reference text is synchronously updated after similarity filtering, and record the array count separately |
Three common errors
- Symptom: The name, quantity, and date of the same record do not match between the fact materials and the decision document. Cause: The two materials are updated separately, without field-level alignment and version synchronization.
- Symptom: The appeal statement has been supplemented and submitted, but the decision document still references the old version of the facts. Cause: The old version is traceable, but the current version is not unique, and references are not synchronized with changes.
- Symptom: The decision document lacks a delivery signature or the appeal statement lacks a receipt. Cause: The signature and receipt fields were not checked when the materials were ingested, and retrieval still returns that fragment.
How to verify the setup
This feature's acceptance: run one test for each synonymously rewritten question, compare the number of candidates and scores, then toggle rerank to see the ranking of the top few results; check the outputs corresponding to similarity, limit, searchMode, and usingReRank.
Business test: change one piece of content and see whether the version number and references are synchronously updated.
- In the search test, switch retrieval modes in sequence, record the number of candidates and scores each time, and confirm that the candidates cover both semantic and full-text results.
- After changing one material field, retrieve again, check the reference text tokens and array count, and confirm that the old version is traceable and references are synchronized.