What this category's data looks like
Primary and secondary school admissions organizations advance in parallel on three types of materials: admission plans, application material checklists, and admission lists, and multilingual materials and terminology processing become a prerequisite for cross-language external release. The admission plan contains batches, school districts, time nodes, and signature fields; the application material checklist contains document names, number of copies, submission dates, and receipts; the admission list contains student names, admission categories, publicity dates, and handler signatures. The three types of materials often use Chinese as the source and multilingual versions as reference drafts, and their update rhythm follows policy batches and publicity nodes. When the materials enter multi-turn dialogue and prompt configuration, the admission plan serves as the source of terminology definitions, the application material checklist serves as the field comparison draft, and the admission list serves as the sample for back-referencing translated names; the historical message range and answer constraints are determined accordingly, and the unified terminology glossary and reference draft are then completed by the model.
Configuration and implementation checks
This step is executed by the memory turns and prompt configuration in the application settings, and outputs the historical message range and answer constraints for reference. The unified terminology glossary and reference draft are then completed by the model. Memory turns control how many previous turns of dialogue can be referenced at most when answering, and the value only needs to match the preceding context range required by the question.
| Object | Check | Verification action |
|---|---|---|
| Admission plan | Whether batches, school districts, time nodes, and signature fields are consistent across the three types of materials | Check how the same batch name, date, and signature field are written in the three materials, and record the corresponding historical message range in messages |
| Application material checklist | Whether document names, number of copies, submission dates, and receipts match between the two materials | Compare the checklist and the admission list publicity fields item by item, and confirm that the terminology values in variables are consistent |
| Admission list | Whether student names, admission categories, publicity dates, and handler signatures are consistent with the plan | Spot-check three terms, back-reference the original text of the admission plan, and check the historical message range associated with chatId |
| Unified terminology glossary and reference draft | The same term is consistent throughout, and translated names can back-reference the original text | Spot-check three terms to see whether their writing is consistent throughout, and confirm that the reference draft can back-reference the original text |
Three common errors
- Phenomenon: The name, quantity, and date of the same record do not match between the application material checklist and the admission list. Cause: The two materials are maintained separately, and the fields have not undergone unified terminology checking.
- Phenomenon: The admission plan has been updated, but the reference draft still uses the old batch name and time nodes. Cause: The versions are not synchronized, and the historical message range brings in old content.
- Phenomenon: The admission list publicity draft lacks handler signatures or receipts, and this is discovered only before external release. Cause: Signature fields and receipts have not been included in the terminology comparison check items.
How to verify the setup
Acceptance of this feature: Ask two consecutive follow-up questions and see whether the second question carries on the reference from the first question, confirming that the memory turns value matches the preceding context range required by the question.
Business test: Spot-check three terms to see whether their writing is consistent throughout, and confirm that translated names can back-reference the original text.
- In the application settings, check the current value of memory turns, run a trial with two consecutive questions, and observe whether the second question carries on the reference from the first question.
- Compare the usage records of two runs, confirm that the run consumption changes accordingly after adjusting the turns, and check that the opening message is not treated as preceding context.