What this category's data looks like
Undergraduate program setup and dynamic adjustment involve three core types of materials: program setup application forms, talent cultivation plans, and expert review opinions. The program setup application form records fields such as the proposed program name, code, length of study, degree-granting category, enrollment scale, faculty and educational conditions, and is attached with the signature and date of the person in charge; the talent cultivation plan states the cultivation objectives, curriculum system, credit structure, practical components, and graduation requirements, and includes the revision version number and approval signature; the expert review opinions summarize the review meeting time, expert list, review conclusions, and signed receipts. The three types of materials are updated by academic year or adjustment batch, and the same program forms multiple versions across the application, review, and filing stages. When entering the knowledge base retrieval node, the application form provides the basis for setup, the cultivation plan provides the curriculum and credit standards, and the review opinions provide evidence of procedural compliance, each being cited as an independent source.
Configuration and implementation checks
This step is executed by the citation output of the knowledge base retrieval node, which outputs an array of cited content, each item containing the original text snippet and source identifier, and the length may be 0. Even if no content is retrieved, the output chain still completes. The exception list and review conclusions are then completed by subsequent AI nodes, code nodes, or manual work.
| Object | Check | Verification action |
|---|---|---|
| Program setup application form | Whether the proposed program name, code, length of study, degree category, enrollment scale, faculty and conditions fields, and signature date are complete | In the node, check the selected knowledge base and vector model; open the citation markers, trace the cited snippets back to the original paragraphs of the application form, and compare the name, quantity, and date field by field |
| Talent cultivation plan | Whether the cultivation objectives, curriculum system, credit structure, practical components, graduation requirements, version number, and approval signature are consistent with the standards in the application form | Check whether the number of cited content outputs matches the hit materials; run a test query with no matching materials to see whether the array is empty while the chain continues, then compare the version number and signature against the original plan text |
| Expert review opinions | Whether the review meeting time, expert list, review conclusions, signatures, and receipts are complete, and whether they connect with the dates in the application form and plan | Open the search parameter panel and check the values item by item; inspect the citation array length and the quoteList field in responseData (non-streaming module results returned with detailed output enabled) to confirm that each citation can be traced back to the original review opinion text |
Three common errors
- Symptom: the same program name or enrollment number does not match between the application form and the cultivation plan. Cause: the two materials were revised separately, no field-level cross-check was performed, and one segment was taken from each when citing.
- Symptom: the cultivation plan version was not synchronized, and old-version courses and credits were cited. Cause: the knowledge base contains multiple versions at the same time, retrieval hit the old version, and the version number and date were not checked.
- Symptom: the expert review opinions lack signatures or receipts, making the procedural evidence chain incomplete. Cause: the scanned copy omitted the signature page, and no completeness check was performed at ingestion.
How to verify the setup
This feature's acceptance: ask a question with textual support and check whether the citation array and markers can be traced back to the original text; then ask a question with no matching materials and confirm that the array is empty while the chain completes.
Business test: create an exception record and see whether it can be traced back to the source material.
- In the conversation, open the citation markers, check each cited snippet against the source document and the original paragraphs, and record the number of citations and the
quoteMaxTokenbudget; do not compare the two for equality. - Open the search parameter panel and check the values item by item, confirm that the selected knowledge base uses the same vector model, and inspect the citation array length in
quoteListwithinresponseData.