What this category's data looks like
Enterprise sales product training involves three types of materials: product manuals, sales scripts, and channel training schedules, with multilingual versions running in parallel. Product manuals provide feature names, parameters, and operating steps; sales scripts carry selling-point statements and response wording; channel training schedules record course names, instructors, dates, and signed receipts. The material sources are product documents, sales script wording, and schedule templates in each language version, and the update cadence changes with version iterations and channel scheduling. Field characteristics center on terminology names, quantities, dates, signatures, and version numbers, and the names, quantities, and dates of the same record across two materials are prone to mismatch. When materials enter this feature, product manuals and sales scripts serve as the source data for terminology extraction and comparison, while schedules serve as auxiliary data for schedule and receipt verification, each taking on the roles of terminology, wording, and scheduling.
Configuration and implementation checks
| Object | Check | Verification action |
|---|---|---|
| Product manual | Whether the name, quantity, date, and signature are consistent with the source file, and whether the terminology translation can refer back to the original text | Open the data row to verify that the status matches the interface display, and check the chunk boundaries corresponding to chunkSize and chunkSplitter |
| Sales terminology | The same terminology is written consistently throughout, and the version number matches the channel course schedule date | Verify the file records and data rows separately, and confirm that trainingType matches the processing mode |
| Channel training course schedule | Dates, quantities, signatures, or acknowledgments are complete, and places where the version is not synchronized are marked | Look at the data rows covered by the rebuild task, and confirm that only data with completed indexing is covered |
| Unified terminology glossary and comparison draft | The translation can refer back to the original text, and the terminology is written consistently throughout | Sample three terms and check whether their writing is consistent throughout |
Three common errors
- Symptom: materials that were just uploaded cannot be found. Cause: the data rows are in the parsed or indexing state, and data pending indexing is naturally isolated at the retrieval layer and is not recalled.
- Symptom: empty data rows are left behind after training fails. Cause: interrupted training leaves orphan data behind, failed data is not edited or deleted in time, and the identities of data rows and file records are not verified separately.
- Symptom: the names, quantities, and dates of the same record across two materials do not match. Cause: versions are not in sync, signatures or receipts are missing, and the terminology table and comparison draft do not cover all materials.
How to verify the setup
Acceptance for this feature: upload one material, observe the status transitions of the data rows and the coverage scope of the rebuild task, confirm the transitions from parsed to indexing to indexed, and after changing the model, confirm that the rebuild covers only data rows whose indexing is already completed.
Business test: sample three terms to check whether their spelling is consistent throughout, and verify that the translated names in the terminology table and comparison draft can refer back to the source text.
- Open the data rows to verify the status, separately verify the file records and the data rows, and confirm that the data identifier binding is unique.
- Look at the data rows covered by the rebuild task, confirm that only data whose indexing is already completed is covered, and that data pending indexing does not participate in the rebuild.