What this category's data looks like
This page addresses graduate training process management. The materials come from three types of archived documents: training plans, proposal reports, and mid-term assessment forms. The update cadence advances in batches along with the training stages, and the field characteristics are concentrated in course names, credit numbers, proposal dates, assessment conclusions, and signature receipt columns. Training plans provide the course and credit baseline, proposal reports provide the topic selection and date anchor, and mid-term assessment forms provide the stage conclusion and signature column. In the multilingual materials and terminology processing scenario, when the three types of materials enter the multi-turn dialogue and prompt feature, they each take on the roles of comparison source, terminology extraction, and consistency verification. The unified terminology glossary and comparison draft are then completed by the model, for review before external release.
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 referenced. The unified terminology glossary and comparison draft are then completed by the model. The memory turns control how many previous dialogue turns can be referenced at most when answering. If the value is too small, the preceding text cannot be used; if the value is too large, irrelevant content is brought in and consumption increases.
| Object | Check | Verification action |
|---|---|---|
| Training plan | The course names, credit numbers, and proposal dates are written consistently in the proposal report and mid-term assessment form, and the signature and receipt columns are complete | Check the current memory turns value in the application settings, run a trial with two consecutive question turns, and check whether the second turn can carry forward the reference from the first turn; check the reference scope of messages and variables |
| Proposal report | The names, quantities, and dates of the same record match across the two materials, the version has been synchronized, and no signature or receipt is missing | Compare the usage records of two runs to confirm that consumption changes accordingly after adjusting the turns; check whether the conversation history corresponding to chatId covers only the required preceding text range |
| Mid-term assessment form | The assessment conclusion and date are consistent with the training plan and proposal report, the version is synchronized, and the signature and receipt are complete | Run a trial with two consecutive question turns and observe whether the second turn answers off-topic; check whether the number of items in the messages array and the tokens of the referenced text are recorded separately |
Three common errors
- Phenomenon: The same course name is written differently in the training plan and the mid-term assessment form, and the credit numbers do not match. Cause: The multilingual terminology has not been unified, the number of preceding turns referenced by the model is insufficient, or the prompt does not constrain the comparison source.
- Phenomenon: The proposal date is inconsistent between the proposal report and the assessment form, and the version has not been synchronized. Cause: The materials are submitted in batches, the memory turns bring in irrelevant old content, and the answer constraints do not lock the date field.
- Phenomenon: The mid-term assessment form is missing a signature or receipt, and this is discovered only before external release. Cause: The prompt does not cover verification of the signature column, and the answer only references the historical message range without pointing to the completeness of the material fields.
How to verify the setup
Acceptance of this feature: ask two consecutive follow-up questions, see whether the second question carries forward the reference from the first question, and check the reference scope of chatId, messages, and variables in the answer constraints.
Business test: sample three terms and check whether their writing is consistent throughout the entire document.
- Check the current memory turns value in the application settings, match it with the preceding text range required by the question, and compare the usage records of two runs.
- Run a trial with two consecutive question turns, check whether the second turn can correctly carry forward the reference from the first turn, and check whether the number of items in the
messagesarray and the tokens of the referenced text are recorded separately.