What this category's data looks like
This page addresses the compulsory education dropout prevention and school retention scenario. Materials come from dropout risk ledgers, persuasion-to-return records, home visit records, and multilingual parallel texts, with an update cadence that rolls with the semester and the persuasion-to-return progress. The ledger contains student identifiers, risk levels, dates, and signatures; the persuasion-to-return records contain persuasion methods, counts, and receipts; the home visit records contain visitor, time, and parent signature. During multilingual materials and terminology processing, the ledger enters parsing and chunking as the master data row, the persuasion-to-return records and home visit records are stored as supporting materials under the same data identifier, and the terminology table and parallel texts are generated during the retrieval and subsequent processing stages. Field characteristics center on names, quantities, dates, signatures, and receipts, and it is necessary to ensure that the same term is consistent throughout the entire text and that translated names can refer back to the source text.
Configuration and implementation checks
This step is executed by the parsing and training task (server-side task), which outputs data rows and index status (parsed, indexing, indexed). "Unified terminology table and parallel texts" is then completed by retrieval and subsequent processing.
| Object | Check | Verification action |
|---|---|---|
| Dropout risk ledger | The name, quantity, and date of the same student do not match across the two materials | Check the student identifier, risk level, and date in the ledger and the persuasion-to-return records to confirm the fields are consistent |
| Persuasion-to-return record | Missing signature or receipt, and versions are not synchronized | Check the persuasion-to-return count, receipt, and signature, and compare the version numbers of the two materials |
| Home visit record | The visitor and parent signature are missing, and the date is inconsistent with the ledger | Check the visitor, time, and parent signature, and cross-compare with the ledger date |
| Data row | Is in one of the three states parsed, indexing, indexed and is consistent with the interface display | Open the data row to check the status, and check the configurations corresponding to chunkSize, chunkSplitter, and trainingType |
Three common errors
- Symptom: newly uploaded materials cannot be found. Cause: the data row is in parsed or indexing, and data pending indexing does not participate in recall, so you must wait for indexing to complete.
- Symptom: the name, quantity, and date of the same record do not match across the two materials. Cause: the versions of the ledger, persuasion-to-return records, and home visit records are not synchronized, and signatures or receipts are missing.
- Symptom: an empty data row remains after training fails. Cause: training interruption leaves orphan data, and you must edit or delete the failed data row and then re-enqueue it.
How to verify the setup
This feature acceptance: upload one material, observe the data row status transitions and the coverage scope of the rebuild task, confirm the transition from parsed to indexing to indexed, and check that the rebuild covers only data whose indexing has completed.
Business test: sample three terms and check whether their spelling is consistent throughout the entire text, confirm that translated names can refer back to the source text, and submit the terminology table and parallel texts for external release.
- Open the data row to check the status, confirm it is consistent with the interface display, and separately check the identity identifiers of the file record and the data row.
- View the data rows covered by the rebuild task, confirm that it covers only data whose indexing has completed, and that the initial training covers data that is pending indexing and indexing.