What this category's data looks like
Annual progress and acceptance materials for research projects include three types: annual progress reports, mid-term review materials, and acceptance reports. Annual progress reports are submitted at annual milestones, with fields including project name, principal investigator, start and end dates, stage results, and fund execution; mid-term review materials are formed in the middle of the project cycle, focusing on indicator completion and adjustment explanations; acceptance reports summarize all indicators, signatures, and receipts at project closure. When the three types of materials enter the authorized access and external service function, annual progress reports serve as process-based evidence, mid-term review materials serve as the source for milestone verification, and acceptance reports serve as the source of final conclusions. The material update cadence is tied to project milestones, and whether signatures and receipts are complete directly affects the scope of external visibility. The name, quantity, and date of the same record in the three materials must be compared item by item; when versions are not synchronized or signatures are missing, the external entry point should restrict visibility.
Configuration and implementation checks
This part is executed by the memory turns and prompt configuration in the application settings, outputting the referenced historical message range and answer constraints. The externally available entry points and authorization scope are determined by the publishing service and file permissions, and the model only processes filtered materials. Memory turns control how many previous dialogue turns can be referenced at most when answering; too small a value makes prior context unusable, while too large a value brings in irrelevant content and increases consumption.
| Object | Check | Verification action |
|---|---|---|
| Annual progress report | Consistent with the name, quantity, and date in the mid-term review materials and acceptance report | Check the current value in the application settings, and access once with a restricted identity to see whether the visible scope matches the setting |
| Mid-term review materials | Matches the indicator completion and dates in the annual progress report and acceptance report | Run a trial with two consecutive question turns; the second turn should correctly carry forward the reference from the first turn |
| Acceptance report | Signatures and receipts are complete, and the version is synchronized with the process materials | Compare the usage records of two runs to confirm that usage changes accordingly after adjusting the number of turns |
| Continuous follow-up questions | The second turn can correctly carry forward the reference from the first turn | Use chatId, messages, and variables to check the historical message range and answer constraints |
Three common errors
- Symptom: the same project name is written differently in the annual progress report and the acceptance report. Cause: versions are not synchronized, and the external entry point displays the old version.
- Symptom: the quantity in the mid-term review materials does not match the acceptance report. Cause: process records were not backfilled, and signatures or receipts are missing.
- Symptom: the second question answers off-topic when using a reference. Cause: the memory turns are too small, the prior context range is insufficient, and the answer constraints do not take effect.
How to verify the setup
Acceptance for this feature: ask two consecutive follow-up questions and see whether the second question carries forward the reference from the first question.
Business test: access once with a restricted identity and see whether the visible scope matches the setting.
- Check the current value of memory turns in the application settings and match it with the prior context range required by the question.
- Use
chatId,messages, andvariablesto record the reference range and answer constraints of two consecutive question turns.