What this category's data looks like
In the continuing education credit recognition scenario, materials usually come from three categories: course filing forms, study certificates, and credit recognition forms. They are updated on a rolling basis by batch along with the training cycle, and the fields include course name, credit hours, recognition date, handler signature, and receipt number. The course filing form is the source of terminology and course names, the study certificate carries individual completion records, and the credit recognition form aggregates the first two into a publishable recognition conclusion. During multilingual materials and terminology processing, the three materials play different roles when entering the parsing and chunking stage: the filing form provides standard translated names and course definitions, the study certificate provides record-level fields, and the recognition form provides summary fields and signature fields. If the name, quantity, or date of the same record does not match across two materials, the versions are not synchronized, or a signature or receipt is missing, the terminology glossary and comparison draft will lose the ability to refer back to the source text before external release.
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). "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 |
|---|---|---|
| Course filing form | The course name and translated name definitions must be verbatim consistent with the study certificate and credit recognition form, and the signature and date fields must be complete | Check the course name and translated name in the filing form, confirm that they match the records with the same name in the other two materials, and check whether the signature and receipt number are in place |
| Study certificate | The name, quantity, and date of record-level fields must be able to refer back to the original text of the filing form; missing signature or receipt is regarded as incomplete | Compare the course name, credit hours, and recognition date record by record, mark rows that do not match, and trace them back to the original materials |
| Credit recognition form | The summary fields and signature fields must be from the same source as the filing form and study certificate, and must not enter publication when versions are not synchronized | Check the one-to-one correspondence between summary rows and source rows, confirm that the version number and signature date are synchronized, and then hand off to retrieval and subsequent processing |
| Data row status | It is in one of the three states and is consistent with the interface display; data pending indexing does not participate in recall | Open the data row to check the status, confirm that trainingType matches the index status, and observe the transition from parsed to indexing to indexed |
Three common errors
- Symptom: The course name, credit hours, or recognition date in the same study certificate and credit recognition form do not match. Cause: The two materials are entered separately, versions are not synchronized, and the terminology glossary has not undergone full-document consistency back-reference validation.
- Symptom: The filing form has updated the course definition, but the study certificate still uses the old translated name, resulting in two spellings in the comparison draft. Cause: Materials are updated on a rolling basis by batch, old versions are not marked invalid, and the rebuild scope only covers data that has already been indexed.
- Symptom: The credit recognition form lacks a handler signature or receipt number but is still circulated as publishable material. Cause: Signature and receipt fields are not included in field verification, and successful parsing is mistakenly treated as guaranteed retrieval hits.
How to verify the setup
Acceptance for this feature: upload one material, observe the data row status transitions and the coverage scope of the rebuild task, confirm the chunking and training modes corresponding to chunkSize, chunkSplitter, and trainingType, and ensure the status only takes parsed / indexing / indexed.
Business test: sample three terms and check whether their spellings are consistent throughout the document, confirming that the same term has a unified translated name across the filing form, study certificate, and recognition form and can refer back to the source text.
- Separately verify the identity identifiers of file records and data rows, confirm that the two can be distinguished, and then open the data row to check whether the status is consistent with the interface display.
- Check the data rows covered by the rebuild task, confirm that it only targets data that has already been indexed, and that the initial training covers data pending indexing and indexing; the two are not interchangeable.