What this category's data looks like
This page addresses the scenario of exception tracing and manual review for enterprise self-directed skilled talent evaluation. The materials include three types: enterprise evaluation filing forms, evaluation specifications, and candidate rosters. The filing form records the evaluation occupation, level, batch, and filing date; the evaluation specification states the assessment method, scoring criteria, and passing line; the roster lists candidate names, ID numbers, declared occupations, and qualifications. The three types of materials are archived by batch and updated in batches as evaluation progresses, with the version determined by the signature page and receipt date. When entering the knowledge base retrieval and recall function, the filing form and evaluation specification are retrieved as the rule basis, and the roster is retrieved as the factual base register; the exception list and review conclusions are supported by the candidate fragments obtained through retrieval and then manually organized.
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 trimming). The "exception list and review conclusions" are completed by subsequent nodes or manually.
| Object | Check | Verification action |
|---|---|---|
| Enterprise evaluation filing form | Fields include evaluation occupation, level, batch, filing date, and signature column; the name, quantity, and date of the same batch in the two materials must be consistent | In the search test, retrieve using a combination of batch number and occupation, check whether the returned candidates cover the original text of the filing form, and record the number of candidates and scores |
| Evaluation specification | The assessment method, scoring criteria, passing line, and version date must correspond to the filing form batch, and old versions must not be mixed in | Switch searchMode to semantic, full-text, and hybrid and retrieve once each, compare the specification version and date in the candidate fragments, then enable usingReRank to observe changes in the ranking of the top few results |
| Candidate roster | The name, ID number, declared occupation, and qualification fields must match the filing form's number of people and occupation distribution; missing signatures or receipts must be flagged | Retrieve using candidate name and ID number, check whether the returned candidates hit the original text of the roster, and inspect the tokens and array count of the cited text after similarity and limit trimming |
Three common errors
- Phenomenon: The name, quantity, and date of the same batch do not match between the filing form and the roster. Cause: The two entries come from different sources and no field-level comparison was performed, so retrieval recalls different versions for each.
- Phenomenon: The evaluation specification version is not synchronized, and the old passing line is still recalled. Cause: Multiple versions coexist in the knowledge base, retrieval is not filtered by batch, and reranking does not distinguish version dates.
- Phenomenon: The roster lacks signatures or receipts, and exception records cannot be traced back to the source materials. Cause: Scanned copies were stored before being completed, so retrieval can only return incomplete fragments, and the reviewer cannot confirm by signature.
How to verify the setup
This function's acceptance: test once each with synonym-rewritten questions, compare candidates and scores, then toggle reranking on and off to observe the ranking of the top few results; at the same time, check the values of searchMode, similarity, limit, and usingReRank, and record the number of candidates and scores.
Business test: create an exception record, see whether it can be traced back to the source materials, and check whether the fields, dates, and signatures in the filing form, evaluation specification, and roster are consistent.
- In the knowledge base search test, retrieve the same batch number separately in semantic, full-text, and hybrid modes, record the number of candidates, scores, and tokens of the cited text, and confirm that the array count and citation budget are recorded separately.
- Trace each returned candidate back to the original text of the filing form, evaluation specification, and roster, check the name, quantity, date, and signature receipt, and list inconsistent items in the exception list for the responsible person to handle.