Vector Models and Indexes for Academic Misconduct Reports and Investigations: Maintain Document Versions and Changes

What this category's data looks like

In the investigation and handling of academic misconduct reports, three types of materials—report materials, investigation reports, and expert appraisal opinions—form a multi-version chain around the same record. Report materials are submitted by the reporter and include the reported person, incident time, evidence list, and signed receipt; investigation reports are issued by the investigation team and include verification conclusions, handling recommendations, the team leader's signature, and date; expert appraisal opinions are provided by the expert group and include appraisal matters, basis, conclusions, and expert signatures. The fields of the three types of materials intersect, and dates and signatures are the markers of version effectiveness. After the materials enter the vector model and indexing function, each material serves as an independent data row, and its multiple vector identifiers are recorded by the index field. The update rhythm changes with supplementary evidence, review opinions, or signed receipts; old versions are retained and traceable, the current version is unique, and references are synchronized to point to the current version.

Configuration and implementation checks

This part is executed by the indexing service and vector database, outputting vectors and index status (whether recall is possible, whether data in the same group is merged). The version ledger and change records are then completed by subsequent AI nodes, code nodes, or manual work (retrieval and reference trimming only take supporting materials). The indexing model must be consistent with the vector model actually used by the knowledge base, and the index field of the data row must fully record multiple vector identifiers.

Three common errors

• Symptom: The name, quantity, and date of the same record do not match between the report materials and the investigation report. Inspect the following: The two materials were not aligned to the same version ledger, and references were not synchronized to the current version.
• Symptom: The expert appraisal opinions lack a signature or receipt, and the date of the investigation report cannot connect with the appraisal date. Inspect the following: The signature and receipt fields were not included in the version effectiveness conditions, and old versions were not marked as invalid.
• Symptom: After changing the model, recall quality decreases, and a data row has content but cannot be retrieved. Inspect the following: The rebuild task did not cover all data that has completed indexing, and the indexing model is inconsistent with the vector model actually used by the knowledge base.

How to verify the setup

Acceptance of this function: sample one data row to inspect the index field and confirm that multiple vector identifiers are all present; then run a retrieval once to see whether data in the same group is merged, with the score taking the highest value; check the status value indexed and the rebuild task records.

Business test: change content in one place and see whether the version number and references are updated synchronously; record the number of references separately, and check reference text tokens against the quoteMaxToken budget, without comparing them for equality with the array length.

• In the knowledge base settings, check the indexing model and the data row index field, and confirm that multiple vector identifiers of one data row are all present and the status is indexed.
• View the data scope covered by the rebuild task, and confirm that after changing the model only data that has completed indexing is triggered; check the defaultToken and maxToken settings.