What this category's data looks like
Graduate admissions re-examination and admission materials include the re-examination plan, candidate score sheets, and adjustment lists, along with the accompanying parent or supervisor viewing entry points and authorization scope descriptions. The re-examination plan is usually released in batches by college and major, containing the re-examination format, time and location, scoring dimensions, and signature fields; the candidate score sheet is registered column by column by preliminary examination, re-examination, and total score, containing the candidate number, name, scores for each subject, and date; the adjustment list contains the adjustment batch, vacancies, proposed admission order, and receipt. The three types of materials have different update rhythms: the re-examination plan is finalized before the re-examination, the score sheet is updated daily after the re-examination, and the adjustment list rolls forward with each batch. When the materials enter workflow orchestration, the re-examination plan corresponds to the authorization scope setting of the externally accessible entry point, the score sheet corresponds to matching visitor identity with visible scope, and the adjustment list corresponds to the branch judgment that unauthorized access must not see, each taking on the roles of entry, matching, and interception.
Configuration and implementation checks
This link is executed by workflow nodes (user selection and branching), outputting branch directions and interaction state records. The externally accessible entry points and authorization scope are completed by subsequent nodes continuing execution according to the branch. When the user selection node is triggered, the conversation enters the interaction state and records the workflow state; after the user completes the selection, execution continues along the branch corresponding to the selected option.
| Object | Check | Verification action |
|---|---|---|
| Re-examination plan | Whether the fields, dates, and signatures are consistent with the finalized version, and whether the name, quantity, and date of the same record match across the two materials | Check the plan fields, dates, and signature fields item by item, compare the name, quantity, and date of the same record in the two materials, and check the options and branch connections one by one in the node |
| Candidate score sheet | Whether the candidate number, name, scores for each subject, and date are consistent with the score sheet, and whether the versions are synchronized | Check the correspondence between candidate number and name, check whether the score and date versions are synchronized, reference the selection result variable in a subsequent node, and run a trial once |
| Adjustment list | Whether the adjustment batch, vacancies, proposed admission order, and receipt are complete, and whether missing signatures or receipts have been completed | Check the adjustment batch and number of vacancies, check the proposed admission order and receipt signature, and trigger a check of the node status in the run record once |
| Externally accessible entry points and authorization scope | Whether visitor identity matches the visible scope, and whether unauthorized access is not visible | Access once with a restricted identity, check whether the visible scope matches the setting, and check the branch direction and interaction state records |
Three common errors
- Symptom: The name, quantity, and date of the same candidate do not match between the score sheet and the adjustment list. Cause: The two materials are maintained separately, the field definitions are not unified, and no cross-comparison has been done.
- Symptom: The re-examination plan has been updated, but the external entry point still displays the old version's date and signature fields. Cause: The versions are not synchronized, and the entry point was not republished after the material was finalized.
- Symptom: The adjustment list is missing a signature or receipt, yet it can still be seen by a restricted identity. Cause: The authorization scope does not intercept based on signature status, and the branch judgment does not cover this situation.
How to verify the setup
This feature's acceptance: run a trial for each option one by one, check the branch direction and interaction state in the run record, confirm that each option corresponds to one branch, that the selection result variable has been passed to subsequent nodes, and that the state value only takes records that actually exist in this feature.
Business test: access once with a restricted identity, see whether the visible scope matches the setting, that unauthorized access is not visible, and check whether the references to variables and nodeId in the run record are consistent.
- Check the options and branch connections one by one in the node, trigger a check of the node status in the run record once, and confirm that the process continues downward after the interaction is completed.
- Reference the selection result variable in a subsequent node and run a trial once, check the reference positions of
variablesandnodeId, and confirm that the branch direction is consistent with the interaction state records.