What this category's data looks like
Primary and secondary school admissions organizations form a complete chain across three types of materials: admission plans, application material checklists, and admission lists. The material sources are school admissions offices, district and county education authorities, and registration system export files. The update rhythm follows admission season milestones: the plan is published first, the material checklist starts with registration, and the admission list is publicized after review. Field characteristics center on student name, ID number, registration serial number, material name, quantity, date, and signature field. When the three types of materials enter the knowledge base retrieval service, their roles differ: the admission plan provides the rule basis and time nodes, the application material checklist provides the required materials and receipt requirements, and the admission list provides the final results and signature confirmation records. Exception tracing and manual review require aligning the fields of the same record across the three materials. The retrieval service is responsible for recalling relevant fragments as candidates for subsequent nodes or manual comparison of whether names, quantities, dates, and signature receipts are consistent.
Configuration and implementation checks
This step is executed by the knowledge base retrieval service (retrieval node and search test), outputting candidate fragments and similarity scores (after pattern, merge, rerank, filter, and limit truncation). The "exception list and review conclusions" are completed by subsequent nodes or manually.
| Object | Check | Verification action |
|---|---|---|
| Admission plan | Fields, dates, and signatures must align with the application material checklist and admission list, and the version must be the currently effective one | In the search test, use the plan name, date, and signature field as clues to retrieve, verify whether candidates under searchMode cover the same version, and record the number of candidates and scores |
| Application material checklist | Material names, quantities, dates, and receipts must correspond one by one with the admission list; missing signatures or receipts means inconsistency | Retrieve using a combination of material name and quantity, compare semantic and full-text candidates, and check whether receipt fragments are retained after similarity filtering |
| Admission list | Student names, ID numbers, registration serial numbers, and admission conclusions must be consistent with the plan and material checklist | Retrieve by name and registration serial number, toggle rerank to compare the ordering of the top few entries, and check changes in candidate order before and after usingReRank |
| Exception list and review conclusions | Each exception must be supported by original records and signed by the reviewer, and the destination is handover to the person in charge for handling | Trace back from the exception record to the source material fragments, confirm that candidates can be traced to the original text of the plan, checklist, or list, and record the number of cited entries after limit truncation |
Three common errors
- Phenomenon: The same student's name or ID number does not match between the admission list and the application material checklist. Cause: The two materials were entered at different stages and were not backfilled and checked against the same registration serial number.
- Phenomenon: The admission plan has been updated, but the application material checklist still references the old version's dates and material names. Cause: Versions were not synchronized, and retrieval candidates mixed in fragments from historical versions.
- Phenomenon: The material checklist lacks a signature or receipt, but the admission list already shows passed. Cause: The review stage did not treat the receipt as a release condition, and the exception was not marked.
How to verify the setup
Acceptance of this feature: test once each with synonym-rewritten questions, compare candidates and scores, then toggle rerank to inspect the ordering of the top few entries; record the number of candidates, similarity, and the difference before and after usingReRank; when citation limits are involved, check the tokens of the cited text, and record array item counts separately.
Business test: create an exception record and see whether it can be traced to the source material.
- In the knowledge base search test, switch
searchMode, run semantic, full-text, and hybrid retrieval separately on the same exception clue, record the number of candidates and scores, and confirm that after multi-route merging both types of results are included. - For each review conclusion, check back one by one against the original fragments of the admission plan, application material checklist, and admission list, verify names, quantities, dates, and signature receipts, and confirm that the exception is supported by original records.