What this category's data looks like
This page addresses the graduate admissions re-examination and admission scenario. Materials come from re-examination plans, candidate score sheets, and adjustment lists. The update cadence changes with the advancement of admission batches and departmental supplementary admission notices. Fields cover candidate name, ID, preliminary and re-examination scores, proposed admission conclusion, date, and signed receipt. When these materials enter the model integration and configuration function, the re-examination plan provides the process and scoring criteria, the candidate score sheet provides itemized scores and ranking basis, and the adjustment list provides supplementary and adjustment records. Multilingual materials and terminology processing require the same term to be consistent throughout and translated names to be traceable back to the source text. The final output is a unified glossary and a comparison draft. Before external release, it must be checked whether the name, quantity, and date of the same record are consistent across all materials, whether versions are synchronized, and whether signatures or receipts are complete.
Configuration and implementation checks
This step is executed by the server-side model channel configuration, outputting model binding relationships and channel responses. The unified glossary and comparison draft are then completed by dialogue and retrieval using this model. Models are divided into five categories: language, indexing, reranking, speech synthesis, and speech recognition. Different stages bind different model types. During configuration, the type label and the model name returned by the channel must be checked item by item.
| Object | Check | Verification action |
|---|---|---|
| Re-examination plan | Whether the process fields, dates, and signatures match those in the candidate score sheet and adjustment list | Compare the scoring criteria and dates in the plan, check the corresponding fields in the score sheet and adjustment list, and check whether signatures or receipts are complete |
| Candidate score sheet | Whether the candidate names, quantities, and dates are consistent with the adjustment list, and whether versions are synchronized | Compare names, IDs, and scores one by one, check dates and version numbers, and confirm there are no missing signatures or receipts |
| Adjustment list | Whether the batch dates and proposed admission conclusions are consistent with the re-examination plan | Check the dates and conclusions in the list against the plan batches, and check whether the name and quantity of the same record match across all materials |
| Model type and model identifier | Whether it corresponds to the stage to be used and matches the names listed in the documentation | Check the type label in the model configuration, compare it with the model name returned by the channel, and confirm that language, indexing, reranking, speech synthesis, and speech recognition are each in their proper place |
Three common errors
- Symptom: The name, quantity, or date of the same candidate does not match between the score sheet and the adjustment list. Cause: The two materials are maintained separately, without item-by-item comparison and version synchronization.
- Symptom: The same term is written inconsistently in different paragraphs of the glossary, and the translated name cannot be traced back to the source text. Cause: The model types bound to the indexing and reranking stages are different, and terminology has not been uniformly calibrated.
- Symptom: The re-examination plan lacks a signature or receipt, and the adjustment list version is not synchronized. Cause: The material circulation step did not check receipt records, and the old version is still being referenced.
How to verify the setup
This function's acceptance: run one dialogue and one retrieval, check the model identifiers in the responses, confirm that the language model and indexing model are bound correctly respectively, and check whether the values of maxContext, maxTokens, and quoteMaxToken in the configuration are consistent with the reference budget.
Business test: sample three terms and check whether their spelling is consistent throughout
- In the model configuration, check the type labels and the model names returned by the channel for each stage: language, indexing, reranking, speech synthesis, and speech recognition.
- Against the re-examination plan, candidate score sheet, and adjustment list, check the name, quantity, date, and signature receipt of the same record item by item, and confirm version synchronization.