What this category's data looks like
This page addresses three types of materials in the enterprise independent skill talent evaluation scenario: filing forms, evaluation specifications, and candidate rosters. Filing forms provide the institution, occupation, level, and filing date; evaluation specifications give assessment methods, scoring, and terminology definitions; rosters carry candidate names, ID numbers, declared levels, and signed receipts. Materials are updated by batch or year, and version numbers and effective dates often change with policy adjustments. When entering multilingual materials and terminology processing, filing forms and evaluation specifications serve as terminology sources and translation-name bases, while rosters are used to verify personnel fields and signature status; together the three support the generation of a unified terminology glossary and a comparison draft, ensuring that the same term is consistent throughout and that translated names can refer back to the source text.
Configuration and implementation checks
This part is executed by the memory turn count and prompt configuration in the application settings, outputting the historical message range and answer constraints referenced. The unified terminology glossary and comparison draft are then completed by the model. The memory turn count determines how many previous turns of dialogue can be referenced at most when answering; if the value is too small, the preceding text cannot be used, and if the value is too large, irrelevant content is brought in and consumption increases.
| Object | Check | Verification action |
|---|---|---|
| Enterprise evaluation filing form | Institution name, occupation, level, filing date, and signature must be consistent with the corresponding fields in the evaluation specification | Check the current memory turn count value in the application settings, and run a trial with two consecutive questions to confirm that the second turn can carry on the reference from the first turn |
| Evaluation specification | Terminology definitions and translated names must be consistent throughout and able to refer back to the source text; version number and effective date must be synchronized | Compare the usage records of two runs, check the change in run consumption after adjusting the turn count; verify the historical message range in messages |
| Candidate roster | Name, ID number, declared level, quantity, and signed receipt must match the filing form and evaluation specification | Use chatId and variables to track whether the name, quantity, and date of the same record are consistent across the two materials |
| Unified terminology glossary and comparison draft | The same term is written consistently throughout, and the translated name can refer back to the source text | Sample three terms to check whether their writing is consistent throughout, and confirm that the tokens of the quoted text and the number of array entries are recorded separately |
Three common errors
- Symptom: The name, quantity, and date of the same record do not match between the filing form and the roster. Cause: The two materials are maintained separately, and no field-level cross-check was performed.
- Symptom: The evaluation specification version is not synchronized, and the terminology glossary still uses the old translated names. Cause: The update cadence is inconsistent, and the effective date and version number were not adjusted with policy changes.
- Symptom: The roster lacks a signature or receipt, and the signature column in the filing form is blank. Cause: No receipt confirmation was set up in the material circulation process, and signature status was not included in the check.
How to verify the setup
Acceptance of this feature: ask two consecutive follow-up questions, see whether the second question carries on the reference from the first question, and verify the historical message range and answer constraints referenced by the answer.
Business test: sample three terms to check whether their writing is consistent throughout, and confirm that the translated names can refer back to the source text.
- Check the current memory turn count value in the application settings, and match it with the preceding text range required by the question.
- Compare the usage records of two runs, and confirm that run consumption changes accordingly after adjusting the turn count.