What this category's data looks like
This page addresses multilingual materials and terminology processing in the social evaluation of occupational skill level certification. The materials come from evaluation implementation plans, candidate registration forms, and assessor dispatch forms, and the update cadence advances with batches and language versions. The implementation plan determines the evaluation scope and language requirements, the registration form carries candidate identity and language information, and the dispatch form records assessor arrangements and signed receipts. When these three types of materials enter the model integration and configuration stage, their roles differ: the implementation plan provides the terminology source and comparison scope, the registration form provides personnel fields and dates, and the dispatch form provides dispatch records and signature status. Field characteristics center on names, quantities, dates, signatures, and receipts. Translated names must remain traceable back to the source text within the same terminology table and comparison draft, and the same term must be written consistently throughout.
Configuration and implementation checks
This step is executed by the server-side model channel configuration, which outputs model binding relationships and channel responses. The "unified terminology table and comparison draft" is then completed by conversations and retrieval using that model. Models fall into five categories: language, indexing, reranking, speech synthesis, and speech recognition. Different stages bind different model types, and the type labels and the model names returned by the channel must be checked in the model configuration.
| Object | Check | Verification action |
|---|---|---|
| Evaluation implementation plan | The terminology source and comparison scope must be consistent with the names, quantities, and dates in the registration form and dispatch form | Check the language requirements and terminology entries in the plan, confirm that the same record can be traced back to itself across the three materials, and check whether the model identifiers match the names listed in the document |
| Candidate registration form | Personnel fields, dates, and signed receipts must match the implementation plan and dispatch form | Compare item by item the names, languages, dates, and signature status in the registration form, confirm version synchronization, and record the tokens and array counts of the referenced text |
| Assessor dispatch form | Dispatch records, signatures, and receipts must be consistent with the implementation plan and registration form | Check the assessor names, quantities, dates, and signature fields in the dispatch form, and confirm that missing signatures or receipts do not affect the publication destination of the terminology table and comparison draft |
| Model binding relationships | The five model categories—language, indexing, reranking, speech synthesis, and speech recognition—must correspond to the stages in which they are used | Check the type labels in the model configuration against the model names returned by the channel, and confirm that the values of maxContext, maxTokens, quoteMaxToken, and toolChoice match the stage |
Three common errors
- Symptom: The names, quantities, and dates of the same record do not match between the implementation plan and the registration form. Cause: The two materials are updated separately and versions are not synchronized by batch, resulting in two different ways of writing in the terminology table and comparison draft.
- Symptom: The dispatch form lacks a signature or receipt, yet the terminology table is still released externally. Cause: Signatures and receipts are not treated as pre-release check items, and the material circulation records are incomplete.
- Symptom: Retrieval reports indexing-model-related errors, or the answer style changes abruptly after switching models. Cause: Model types and stage bindings are inconsistent. Channel keys only affect whether calls succeed; they do not determine whether personnel can read knowledge base materials.
How to verify the setup
Acceptance for this feature: run one conversation and one retrieval, check the model identifiers in the responses, confirm that the language model and indexing model are bound to their corresponding stages, and check that the values of maxContext, maxTokens, quoteMaxToken, and toolChoice are consistent with the channel responses.
Business test: sample three terms and check whether their writing is consistent throughout, confirm that translated names can be traced back to the source text, and check the names, quantities, dates, and signed receipts in the implementation plan, registration form, and dispatch form.
- In the model configuration, check the model type labels and the model names returned by the channel, and confirm that the five model categories—language, indexing, reranking, speech synthesis, and speech recognition—correspond to the stages in which they are used.
- Compare the fields, dates, and signatures of the implementation plan, registration form, and dispatch form, and confirm that the names, quantities, and dates of the same record are consistent, that versions are synchronized, and that no signatures or receipts are missing.