What this category's data looks like
This page focuses on the student disciplinary and appeal processing category. The materials come from the school disciplinary committee and the appeal intake department, and the update cadence is synchronized with the archiving of each disciplinary decision and appeal. The core materials include three types: factual materials on violations, disciplinary decisions, and appeals, each playing a different role: factual materials on violations provide the original record and chain of evidence, disciplinary decisions give the formal conclusion and basis, and appeals carry the student's objections and supplementary statements. Field characteristics center on name, student ID, violation date, disciplinary type, signature, and receipt fields, and multilingual versions need to be aligned item by item. When materials enter the multi-turn dialogue and prompt feature, the preceding context range determines whether the model can compare the same term across materials. Too few memory turns will lose references from the preceding context, while too many will bring in irrelevant content. The terminology glossary and parallel text need to be manually reviewed after the model responds, to ensure the same term is consistent throughout and the translated name can refer back to the original text.
Configuration and implementation checks
This part 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 parallel text are then completed by the model, while the external entry point and authorization are handled by the publishing service and file permissions.
| Object | Check | Verification action |
|---|---|---|
| Factual materials on violations | Name, quantity, and date are consistent item by item with the disciplinary decision, and signatures and receipts are complete | Check the memory turns value in the application settings, run a trial with two consecutive follow-up questions, check whether the second question can carry forward the reference from the first question, and verify the preceding context range in messages |
| Disciplinary decision | Disciplinary type and effective date correspond to the receipt field of the appeal, and the version number is synchronized | Compare the usage records of two runs to confirm that after adjusting the turns, the historical messages associated with chatId do not bring in irrelevant content |
| Appeal | Student name, student ID, and violation date are consistent with the factual materials; missing signatures or receipts must be marked | Use variables to fix terminology fields, sample three terms to check whether their usage is consistent throughout, and refer back to the original text to verify the translated names |
Three common errors
- Phenomenon: The name, quantity, and date of the same violation record do not match between the factual materials and the disciplinary decision. Cause: Field mapping was not aligned during multilingual conversion, and insufficient preceding context turns led to lost references.
- Phenomenon: The versions of the disciplinary decision and the appeal are not synchronized, and the old receipt field is still referenced. Cause: Too many memory turns brought in expired historical messages, and the preceding context range was not segmented by material version.
- Phenomenon: An appeal missing a signature or receipt is still treated as valid material and processed further. Cause: The prompt did not constrain the answer scope, and the model directly reused unverified fields from the preceding context.
How to verify the setup
Acceptance for this feature: with two consecutive follow-up questions, see whether the second question carries forward the reference from the first question, and verify the historical message range corresponding to messages and chatId.
Business test: sample three terms to check whether their usage is consistent throughout, and confirm that the translated names can refer back to the original text.
- Check the current memory turns value in the application settings and match it with the preceding context range required by the question.
- Run a trial with two consecutive question sentences, check whether the second round correctly carries forward the reference from the first round, and record the usage of fixed terms in
variables.