What this category's data looks like
This page addresses the category of school safety hazard inspections and campus incident reporting. Materials include three types: safety inspection checklists, hazard rectification ledgers, and emergency incident reports. Sources are on-campus patrols, grade-level submissions, and logistics receipts. The update cadence is weekly inspections, monthly summaries, and immediate incident reporting. When the three types of materials enter the document parsing and chunking function, their roles differ: the safety inspection checklist serves as an itemized list providing the field skeleton, the hazard rectification ledger serves as a dated and signed transaction record providing cross-reference relationships, and the emergency incident report serves as narrative text providing incident elements. Field characteristics center on inspection item names, hazard descriptions, rectification deadlines, responsible person signatures, reporting dates, and receipt numbers. Multilingual materials and terminology handling require unifying the same term throughout the entire document, with translated names able to refer back to the source text, ultimately forming a unified terminology glossary and a comparison draft.
Configuration and implementation checks
Parsing and training tasks (server-side tasks) only output data rows and index status (parsed, indexing, indexed). The unified terminology glossary and comparison draft must be handled subsequently by retrieval and downstream processing. After parsing is complete, parsed chunks are immediately persisted as visible data rows and bound to a unique data identifier. The index transitions through three states. Data pending indexing does not participate in recall. When switching models, only data with completed indexing is rebuilt.
| Object | Check | Verification action |
|---|---|---|
| Safety inspection checklist | Inspection item names, hazard descriptions, rectification deadlines, and signature fields are complete across all materials and dates are consistent | Verify whether the name, quantity, and date of the same inspection item match across the ledger and the report, and check whether signatures or receipts are missing |
| Hazard rectification ledger | The responsible person, deadline, and receipt number in the rectification transaction can refer back to the original inspection checklist | Check whether chunk boundaries cut off terms according to chunkSize and chunkSplitter, and verify whether trainingType and the data row status are parsed, indexing, or indexed |
| Emergency incident report | Incident elements, reporting date, and signature are consistent between the report and the ledger, and versions are synchronized | Verify the file record and the data row separately, and confirm that the name, quantity, and date of the same record do not conflict between the two materials |
| Data row | Is in one of the three states parsed, indexing, or indexed, and is consistent with the interface display | Open the data row to verify the status, confirm that data pending indexing does not participate in recall, and that rebuilding only covers data with completed indexing |
Three common errors
- Symptom: The name, quantity, and date of the same hazard do not match between two materials. Cause: Multilingual terminology is not unified, and after chunking the same record is split into different data rows.
- Symptom: The rectification ledger and the emergency incident report versions are not synchronized, and an old draft is referenced. Cause: After the materials were updated, they were not re-parsed and persisted, and the index status still remains at completed.
- Symptom: The checklist lacks a signature or receipt, and it cannot be traced after reporting. Cause: The signature field was not retained during chunking, and retrieval and downstream processing cannot refer back to the source text.
How to verify the setup
Acceptance of this feature: Upload one material, observe the data row status transitions and the coverage scope of the rebuild task, and confirm that parsed chunks are immediately persisted as visible data rows and bound to a unique data identifier after parsing is complete, that the index transitions through the three states parsed, indexing, and indexed, that when switching models only data with completed indexing is rebuilt, and that the initial training covers data pending indexing.
Business test: Sample three terms and check whether their spelling is consistent throughout the entire document and whether the translated names can refer back to the source text. After forming the unified terminology glossary and comparison draft, hand it over for external release.
- Verify the file record and the data row separately, and confirm that the identities of the file record and the data row are distinguishable and that the status is consistent with the interface display.
- Check the data rows covered by the rebuild task, confirm that only data with completed indexing is covered, and verify
chunkSize,chunkSplitter,trainingType, and the tokens of the referenced text; record the array count separately.