What this category's data looks like
This page focuses on exception tracing and manual review in degree conferral and certificate information reporting, involving three types of materials: degree application forms, thesis review forms, and defense resolutions. The degree application form records the applicant's basic information, course grades, and degree category, and is the starting basis for reported data; the thesis review form carries the review conclusion, reviewer signature, and review date, and is used to determine whether the academic evaluation step is compliant; the defense resolution records the defense time, voting result, and defense committee signatures, and is the key evidence for the degree conferral decision. Materials enter the reporting process by batch, updated once per batch, with fields including name, student ID, major, degree type, date, signature, and receipt status. The three types of materials each play different roles in the function: the degree application form is used to compare basic identity and degree category, the thesis review form is used to check review opinions and dates, and the defense resolution is used to confirm the voting result and signature completeness. During exception tracing, the original record is used as the source, checking item by item whether the name, quantity, and date of the same record are consistent across different materials, and checking whether version synchronization and signature receipts are complete.
Configuration and implementation checks
This step is executed by the memory turns and prompt configuration in the app settings, outputting the historical message range and answer constraints for reference. The exception list and review conclusion are then completed by the model. Memory turns control how many previous turns of dialogue 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.
| Object | Check | Verification action |
|---|---|---|
| Degree application form | Whether the fields, dates, and signatures are consistent with the thesis review form and defense resolution | Check the name, student ID, degree category, date, and signature fields, and check whether the name and quantity of the same record match across the three materials |
| Thesis review form | Whether the review conclusion, reviewer signature, and review date are complete and synchronized with the defense resolution | Compare the review opinions, review date, signature, and receipt, and confirm that when the version is not synchronized, the latest version prevails |
| Defense resolution | Whether the defense time, voting result, and defense committee signatures are complete | Check the defense date, number of votes, signatures, and receipt, and trace the original records missing signatures or receipts |
| Continuous follow-up questions | Whether the second turn correctly carries forward the references from the first turn | Run a test with two consecutive question turns, check whether messages and chatId are correctly referenced, and whether variables are updated with the turns |
Three common errors
- Symptom: The name, quantity, or date of the same record does not match between the degree application form and the thesis review form. Cause: The two materials are entered in different steps, and field-level comparison and version synchronization were not performed.
- Symptom: The defense resolution lacks defense committee signatures or a receipt. Cause: The signature step was not closed-loop, and the receipt status was not written back, resulting in incomplete reported data.
- Symptom: When the second question uses a reference, the answer does not address the question, or the answer becomes slower and consumption rises. Cause: If memory turns are too small, the preceding text cannot be used; if too large, irrelevant content is brought in and consumption increases.
How to verify the setup
This function's acceptance: ask two consecutive follow-up questions and see whether the second question carries forward the references from the first question; check the behavior of messages, chatId, and variables within the historical message range and answer constraints.
Business test: create an exception record, see whether the source material can be traced, confirm that the exception is supported by an original record and a reviewer signature, and hand it over to the responsible person for handling.
- In the app settings, check the current value of memory turns, match it with the preceding text range required by the question, and compare the usage records of two runs.
- Run a test with two consecutive question turns, check whether the references in the second turn carry forward the first turn, and confirm that the opening message is not treated as preceding text.