What this category's data looks like
This category's data relies on three types of materials: training notices, credit recognition forms, and attendance rosters. Training notices provide the project name, training start and end dates, and the organizing unit; credit recognition forms carry the credit amount, recognition conclusion, and the signature of the person in charge; attendance rosters record teacher names, units, ID document numbers, and sign-in receipts. Materials are usually summarized by batch or semester, and the update cadence follows training project completion and the credit review cycle, with field characteristics concentrated in five items: name, quantity, date, signature, and receipt. When entering the exception tracing and manual review function, the training notice serves as the source basis, the credit recognition form serves as the conclusion carrier, and the attendance roster serves as process evidence; the three must corroborate each other on the same record to form an exception list and review conclusion that can be confirmed by signature.
Configuration and implementation checks
This part is executed by the memory turns and prompt configuration in the app settings, outputting the referenced historical message range and answer constraints. Memory turns control how many previous dialogue turns can be referenced at most when answering; if the value is too small, the preceding text cannot be used, and if the value is too large, irrelevant content is brought in and consumption increases. The "exception list and review conclusion" is completed by the model next, while the external entry point and authorization are handled by the publishing service and file permissions.
| Object | Check | Verification action |
|---|---|---|
| Training notice | The project name, training start and end dates, organizing unit, and document number must be consistent with the credit recognition form; a missing receipt is regarded as an incomplete source | Check the current memory turns value in the app settings, run a trial with two consecutive questions, and observe whether the second question can carry forward the reference from the first; compare the name and date fields of the notice and the recognition form |
| Credit recognition form | The credit amount and recognition conclusion must have the signature of the person in charge; for the same record, the name, quantity, and date in the roster and the recognition form must not fail to match | Check whether the signature field and receipt are complete, and verify whether the versions are synchronized; bring in the record identifier through messages and variables in the dialogue, and confirm the historical message range referenced by the answer |
| Attendance roster | Teacher names, units, and sign-in receipts must correspond one by one with the training notice and credit recognition form; inconsistency in quantity and date triggers an exception | Use chatId to locate the same conversation, and compare the quantity and date fields of the roster and the recognition form; compare the usage records of two runs to confirm that consumption changes accordingly after adjusting the turns |
Three common errors
- Phenomenon: The project name, quantity, or date of the same record does not match between the training notice and the credit recognition form. Cause: Materials are filled in separately, lacking unified field validation and cross-comparison steps.
- Phenomenon: The attendance roster has been updated, but the credit recognition form still references the old version, causing the review conclusion to be based on outdated information. Cause: Versions are not synchronized, and the update cadence is disconnected from the review cycle.
- Phenomenon: The credit recognition form lacks the signature of the person in charge or the attendance roster lacks sign-in receipts, so the exception list cannot be closed. Cause: The receipt collection and signature process are not verified before submission.
How to verify the setup
This function's acceptance: ask two consecutive follow-up questions and see whether the second question carries forward the reference from the first; check the memory turns value in the app settings, and confirm that the referenced historical message range and answer constraints of the output meet expectations.
Business test: create an exception record and see whether the source material can be traced, and whether an exception list and review conclusion supported by original records and signed by the reviewer can be formed.
- Check the current memory turns value in the app settings, run a trial with two consecutive questions, and confirm that the second question can correctly carry forward the reference from the first.
- Compare the usage records of two runs to confirm that consumption changes accordingly after adjusting the turns; use
chatId,messages, andvariablesto locate the conversation and record identifier.