What this category's data looks like
This page addresses the scenario of the establishment and annual reports of Chinese-foreign cooperative education institutions. The core materials include the establishment application, cooperation agreement, articles of association, as well as annual report filing records and receipts. The establishment application states fields such as the institution name, education level, and proposed legal representative; the cooperation agreement states the names of the parties, contribution amounts, signing date, and seals; the articles of association state the governance structure, rules of procedure, and effective date. The three types of materials corroborate one another, and the name, quantity, date, and signature of the same record should correspond item by item. Materials are updated according to the submission batch and annual reporting rhythm. After version iteration, if old drafts are not marked as void, they can easily coexist with new drafts. After entering this function, the establishment application, cooperation agreement, and articles of association each serve as independent comparison sources, used to trace the original source of abnormal records and support the formation of review conclusions.
Configuration and implementation checks
This step is executed by the memory turns and prompt configuration in the application settings, outputting the reference range of historical messages and answer constraints. The exception list and review conclusions are then completed by the model. The memory turns determine how many previous dialogue turns can be referenced at most when answering. If the value is too small, the preceding text cannot be used; if the value is too large, irrelevant content is brought in and consumption increases.
| Object | Check | Verification action |
|---|---|---|
| Establishment application | Fields such as institution name, proposed legal representative, and education level are consistent item by item with the cooperation agreement and articles of association, and the signing date and signature are complete | Retrieve the original establishment application, compare it item by item with the cooperation agreement and articles of association by field, record the location of differences and the original page number, and check whether the historical turns in messages cover this record |
| Cooperation agreement | The names of the parties, contribution amounts, signing date, and seals correspond in two or more materials, and the version number and effective date are synchronized | Check the names, quantities, and dates in the cooperation agreement and articles of association, check whether the versions are synchronized and whether the receipt is retained, and use chatId to locate the traceability record within the same conversation |
| Articles of association | The governance structure, rules of procedure, and effective date do not conflict with the establishment application and cooperation agreement, and the signature or receipt is complete | Compare the dates and signature items of the articles of association with the other two materials, mark the source of missing items, and review abnormal entries in combination with the field values recorded in variables |
| Annual report filing record | The annual data is consistent with the existing fields of the establishment application, cooperation agreement, and articles of association, and abnormal entries are supported by original records | Retrieve the filing records by year, trace back to the corresponding original materials, confirm that each item in the exception list has a source and a reviewer's signature is retained |
Three common errors
- Phenomenon: The same institution name is written differently in the establishment application and the cooperation agreement, and the quantities and dates also do not match. Cause: The two materials were revised separately without cross-checking, and the differences were carried into the annual report.
- Phenomenon: The articles of association have been replaced with a new version, but the cooperation agreement still cites clauses from the old version, and the corresponding text cannot be found during tracing. Cause: The versions were not synchronized, the old draft was not marked as void, and the coexistence of materials caused the comparison baseline to drift.
- Phenomenon: After an abnormal entry is traced to the material, the signature column or receipt is missing, and the review conclusion cannot be written. Cause: The signing process was not closed-loop, the receipt was not archived, and the original record support is insufficient.
How to verify the setup
Acceptance of this function: run a trial with two consecutive follow-up questions. The first question points to a certain abnormal record, and the second question uses a reference to continue. See whether the second question accurately inherits the referent of the first question; at the same time, check whether the messages range and chatId correspond to the same conversation.
Business test: create an abnormal record, see whether it can be traced to the source material, and confirm that both the exception list and the review conclusion are supported by original records and retain the reviewer's signature.
- In the application settings, check the current value of memory turns, match it with the preceding text range required by the question, and after adjustment compare the usage records of two runs
- Run a trial with two consecutive questions, check whether the reference in the second round inherits the first round, and check whether the field values recorded in
variablesare consistent with the exception list