What this category's data looks like
This page addresses the scenario of multilingual materials and terminology handling in academic education management of technical colleges. The materials come from daily teaching management documents such as student registration forms, teaching plans, and skills training records, and are continuously updated by semester registration, teaching weeks, and skills assessment milestones. When these materials enter the document parsing and chunking function, the student registration form serves as the field source for student identity and registration status, the teaching plan provides the structural basis for course names, class hours, and week numbers, and the skills training records carry training items, quantities, and signed receipt information. Multilingual materials and terminology handling require that the same term be written consistently across the three types of materials—registration, teaching, and training—and that translated names can refer back to the original text. At the field level, it is necessary to check whether names, quantities, dates, and signatures match, whether versions are synchronized, and whether receipts are complete.
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). The "unified terminology glossary and comparison draft" is then completed by retrieval and subsequent processing. After parsing is completed, parsing and chunking are immediately persisted as visible data rows and bound to a unique data identifier. The index transitions through three states, and data pending indexing does not participate in recall.
| Object | Check | Verification action |
|---|---|---|
| Student registration form | Fields, dates, and signatures must match the teaching plan and skills training records; the name, quantity, and date of the same record must not be inconsistent across the two materials | Check the file records and data rows separately, open the data rows to verify whether the status is parsed, indexing, or indexed, and check whether the chunks corresponding to chunkSize and chunkSplitter cover the registration fields |
| Teaching plan | Course names, class hours, and week numbers are written consistently in the multilingual comparison draft, translated names can refer back to the original text, and the version is synchronized with the registration form | Sample three terms and check whether their writing is consistent throughout the document, verify trainingType and the processing mode classification, and confirm that the rebuild task covers only data rows whose indexing has been completed |
| Skills training records | Training items, quantities, dates, and signed receipts are complete; when the quantity and date of the same record do not match across different materials, it must be flagged | Look at the data rows covered by the rebuild task, confirm that data pending indexing does not participate in the rebuild, and check whether records missing signatures or receipts have entered the pending-processing state |
Three common errors
- Symptom: newly uploaded materials cannot be found. Cause: successful parsing does not mean retrieval will necessarily match; the index status must also be checked, and data pending indexing is naturally isolated at the retrieval layer and is not recalled.
- Symptom: the name, quantity, and date of the same record do not match across two materials. Cause: versions are not synchronized, the student registration form and the teaching plan are updated separately, and terminology writing is not unified.
- Symptom: empty data rows are left after a training failure. Cause: training interruption leaves orphaned data, and records missing signatures or receipts are not edited or deleted in time.
How to verify the setup
Acceptance of this function: upload one material, observe the status transitions of the data rows and the coverage scope of the rebuild task, and confirm that the status transitions among parsed, indexing, and indexed and is consistent with the interface display.
Business test: sample three terms and check whether their writing is consistent throughout the document, confirm that translated names can refer back to the original text, and that the same term is written consistently in the student registration form, teaching plan, and skills training records.
- Check the file records and data rows separately, confirm that the identities of the file records and data rows are distinguishable, and that the data row status is in one of the three states and is consistent with the interface display.
- Look at the data rows covered by the rebuild task, and confirm that changing the model rebuilds only data whose indexing has been completed, while data pending indexing does not participate in the rebuild chain.