Knowledge Base Retrieval for Vocational College Skills Competition Organization: Trace Exceptions and Review Results

Skills Competitions: review retrieval for exception review. Check source versions, input mappings and the values received by downstream nodes.

What this category's data looks like

This page addresses the vocational college skills competition organization scenario, with materials drawn from three categories: competition regulations, registration forms, and training plans. Competition regulations contain event names, dates, and signature fields; registration forms contain contestant names, quantities, and acknowledgments; training plans contain phase arrangements and coach signatures. Materials are updated according to the pre-competition, during-competition, and post-competition rhythm, and version numbers and signature status are field characteristics. When entering the knowledge base retrieval and recall function, competition regulations serve as the rule basis, registration forms serve as the source of personnel and quantities, and training plans serve as process records; together the three support exception tracing and manual review.

Configuration and implementation checks

This step is executed by the knowledge base retrieval service (retrieval node and search test), outputting candidate chunks and similarity scores (after pattern, merge, rerank, filter, and limit trimming). The exception list and review conclusions are completed by subsequent nodes or manually.

ObjectCheckVerification action
Competition regulationsWhether the name, date, and signature fields are consistent with the registration formIn the search test, switch searchMode to hybrid retrieval, and check whether the same event name and date in the regulations and registration form match
Registration formWhether the contestant quantity and acknowledgment signature are consistent with the training planTest once each with synonymous questions, compare the number of candidates and scores, and check whether the registration form quantity matches the training plan headcount
Training planWhether the phase dates and coach signature are synchronized with the regulations versionCompare the order of the top few items before and after enabling usingReRank, and check whether the training plan version number and the regulations version are synchronized
Knowledge base retrieval serviceWhether candidate chunks and similarity scores have undergone merge, rerank, and filterAdjust similarity and limit, record the number of candidates and scores, and confirm that the returned reference text tokens and array count are recorded separately

Three common errors

  • Phenomenon: The same contestant name is written differently in the registration form and training plan. Cause: The name field was not unified when the two materials were entered, so retrieval candidates cannot correspond to the same record.
  • Phenomenon: The dates in the competition regulations and training plan do not match. Cause: The versions were not synchronized; the old regulations version was not updated along with the training plan, and the dates of the candidate chunks returned by retrieval are inconsistent.
  • Phenomenon: The registration form lacks a signature or acknowledgment. Cause: The signature field was not checked when the materials were archived, and the candidate chunks returned by retrieval lack signature information, so manual review cannot confirm it.

How to verify the setup

This function's acceptance: test once each with synonymously rewritten questions, compare the number of candidates and similarity scores, then toggle rerank on and off to observe the ordering of the top few items, and check the values of searchMode, similarity, and limit.

Business test: create an exception record and see whether the source material can be traced.

  • In the knowledge base search test, switch searchMode to semantic, full-text, or hybrid, compare the number of candidates and scores, and confirm that the multi-route merged results simultaneously contain semantic and full-text candidates.
  • Compare the order of the top few items before and after enabling usingReRank, and after adjusting similarity and limit, record the number of candidates and reference text tokens, confirming that key chunks of the original text are still retained after trimming.