What this category's data looks like
This page focuses on the external authorization scenario for enterprise independent skill talent evaluation. Materials include the enterprise evaluation filing form, evaluation specifications, and the candidate roster. The filing form provides the evaluation entity, occupational direction, and authorization level; the evaluation specifications state the assessment modules, scoring criteria, and signature fields; the roster records candidate identity, batch, and receipt status. When these three types of materials enter the knowledge base retrieval and recall function, the filing form and specifications serve as the basis for rules and scope, while the roster serves as the basis for personnel and batches, together forming the source for determining authorized access. The update cadence is per batch, with qualification changes, specification revisions, and roster supplements each triggering version replacement of the corresponding materials. Field characteristics center on names, quantities, dates, and signature receipts, which need to remain consistent across materials to avoid discrepancies in the same record between the filing form and the roster.
Configuration and implementation checks
This step is performed 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 externally available entry points and authorization scope are then completed by subsequent nodes or manually.
| Object | Check | Verification action |
|---|---|---|
| Enterprise evaluation filing form | Whether the name, quantity, date, and signature are consistent with the evaluation specifications | In the search test, switch searchMode and check whether the candidate chunks simultaneously cover the same record in the filing form and the specifications |
| Evaluation specifications | Whether the version is synchronized and whether signatures or receipts are complete | Enable and disable usingReRank, compare the ranking changes of the top candidate chunks, and confirm that chunks from the specification version are prioritized |
| Candidate roster | Whether the name, quantity, and date of the same record match between the roster and the filing form | Retrieve with a restricted identity, record the number of candidate chunks and the similarity score, and check whether the visible scope falls within the authorized batch |
| Knowledge base retrieval service | Whether candidate chunks and similarity scores have undergone merge, rerank, filter, and limit trimming | Adjust limit to observe changes in the number of candidate chunks, record the tokens of the referenced text separately, and do not equate the number of chunks with the budget |
Three common errors
- Symptom: The name, quantity, or date of the same candidate does not match between the filing form and the roster. Cause: The two materials are entered in different steps, and no cross-material field comparison or receipt verification has been performed.
- Symptom: The evaluation specifications have been revised, but retrieval still recalls clauses from the old version. Cause: The version is not synchronized, old chunks have not been replaced or marked invalid, and old and new are mixed in the candidates.
- Symptom: After the external entry point is opened, a restricted identity sees chunks beyond the authorized batch. Cause: The authorization scope is not bound to the roster batch, and filter conditions are not trimmed by identity.
How to verify the setup
This function's acceptance: test once each with synonym-rewritten questions, compare candidate chunks and similarity scores, then toggle usingReRank to see the ranking of the top chunks.
Business test: access once with a restricted identity and see whether the visible scope matches the settings.
- In the search test, switch
searchMode, record the number of candidate chunks and scores, and check whether the fields, dates, and signatures of the filing form and roster are consistent. - Adjust
limitand record the referenced text tokens separately, check version synchronization and receipt signatures, and confirm that unauthorized chunks are not visible.