What this category's data looks like
Application materials for National Key R&D Program projects usually consist of three types: the project application, the budget application, and the cooperation agreement. The project application gives the research objectives, task breakdown, and assessment indicators; the budget application lists funding categories, calculation bases, and allocation ratios; the cooperation agreement specifies the division of labor among participating units, intellectual property ownership, and funding disbursement milestones. The three types of materials come from different sources, are prepared by different people, and are updated on inconsistent schedules: the application is revised as guidelines change, the budget is revised as category calculations change, and the cooperation agreement is supplemented with signatures as each party applies its seal. When entering the exception tracing and manual review scenario, the project application serves as the primary record of tasks and indicators, the budget application serves as the comparison record of amounts and categories, and the cooperation agreement serves as the supporting record of unit names, dates, and signatures; together, the three support the generation of the exception list and review conclusions.
Configuration and implementation checks
This part is executed by the memory turns and prompt configuration in the application settings, and outputs the range of historical messages referenced and the answer constraints. 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. The exception list and review conclusions are then completed by the model, while the external entry point and authorization are handled by the publishing service and file permissions.
| Object | Check | Verification action |
|---|---|---|
| Project application | Whether the name, quantity, date, and signature are consistent with the cooperation agreement | Retrieve the corresponding pages of the application and verify the project name, number of participating units, start and end dates, and seal positions |
| Budget application | Whether the funding categories, calculation bases, and allocation ratios correspond to the tasks in the application | Compare the category amounts and task division item by item, and confirm that the version number and preparation date are not mismatched |
| Cooperation agreement | Whether the names of participating units, seal dates, and receipts are complete | Check the signatures and receipts of all parties, and confirm whether supplementary agreements have been synchronized to the latest version |
| Multi-turn dialogue | Whether the second-round follow-up can carry forward the references from the first round | Run a test with two consecutive question turns and check whether the transmission of chatId and variables in messages meets expectations |
Three common errors
- Phenomenon: The same participating unit is written with different names in the application and the cooperation agreement. Cause: The two materials were prepared separately, no unified verification was performed, and the versions were not synchronized.
- Phenomenon: The category amounts in the budget application do not match the task calculations in the project application. Cause: After the calculation basis was revised, it was not backfilled into the other material, and the dates and quantities became disconnected.
- Phenomenon: The cooperation agreement lacks signatures or receipts, yet the review conclusion is still submitted. Cause: The seal application process was not closed-loop, and the supporting records were not archived together with the materials.
How to verify the setup
Acceptance of this feature: with two consecutive follow-up questions, see whether the second question carries forward the references from the first question, and check whether chatId and variables in messages are correctly brought in with the turns.
Business test: create an exception record, see whether it can be traced back to the source material, and confirm that the exception is supported by original records and, after the reviewer signs, is handed to the person in charge for handling.
- In the application settings, check the current value of memory turns and match it with the range of preceding text required by the question
- Run a test with two consecutive question turns to confirm that the second round can correctly carry forward the references from the first round