What this category's data looks like
The materials for undergraduate program revision include the program plan, course syllabi, and the credit structure table; the fields, dates, and signatures of the three must correspond to one another. The program plan provides the disciplinary direction and the total credit framework, the course syllabi provide course names, class hours, and assessment methods, and the credit structure table lists the credit amounts and proportions of each module. The material sources are exports from the academic affairs system and submissions from departments; the update cadence follows the revision batch, and uploads are usually concentrated before deliberation. When entering the knowledge base retrieval node, the program plan participates in vector search as the main document, while the course syllabi and credit structure table are retrieved as associated supporting materials; their roles differ but together they must support citation traceability. In terms of field characteristics, course names, credit numbers, revision dates, and signature fields are the key points of comparison; it is common for the same record to have mismatched names, quantities, or dates across two materials, or for versions to be out of sync or signature receipts to be missing.
Configuration and implementation checks
This link is executed by the citation output of the knowledge base retrieval node, which outputs an array of cited content, each entry containing an original text snippet and a source identifier, and the length may be 0. The handover-ready deployment status and operation records are completed subsequently by AI nodes, code nodes, or manual work.
| Object | Check | Verification action |
|---|---|---|
| Program plan | Check whether course names, credit numbers, revision dates, and signature fields are consistent with the course syllabi | Open the citation superscripts, trace each one back to the original paragraph, and record the discrepant fields |
| Course syllabi | Check whether class hours, assessment methods, and the quantities and dates of the corresponding modules in the credit structure table match | Compare against the source documents and check whether version numbers and signature receipts are in sync |
| Credit structure table | Check whether the total credits of each module are consistent with the total credit framework of the program plan, and whether dates and signatures are complete | Run a test query with no matching materials and see whether the citation array is empty while the chain continues |
| Knowledge base retrieval node | Check whether the associated knowledge base uses the same vector model, and whether the search parameters match the values in the knowledge base retrieval section | Open the search parameter panel and check item by item, recording quoteMaxToken and quoteList in responseData (non-streaming module results returned with detailed output enabled) |
Three common errors
- Symptom: the same course has mismatched names and credit numbers in the program plan and the course syllabi. Cause: the two materials were revised by different people in different batches, without field-level cross-checking.
- Symptom: the course syllabus version is out of sync, and the citation still points to the previous revision draft. Cause: old files were not replaced by batch during upload, and multiple versions exist simultaneously in the associated knowledge base.
- Symptom: the credit structure table lacks signatures or receipts, making the deliberation status unconfirmable at handover. Cause: signature fields were signed on paper afterward and were not uploaded together with the electronic draft, leaving the record chain incomplete.
How to verify the setup
This feature's acceptance: ask a program plan course credit question that has textual support, and check whether the citation array and superscripts can point back to the original text; then ask a question with no matching materials, and confirm that the array is empty while the chain runs through; the number of citations is the array length, and quoteMaxToken is the content budget, and the two are not compared for equality.
Business testing: check item by item once according to the handover form, see which record is missing, and focus on checking whether the version, connection, and task record are consistent.
- Open the citation superscripts in the conversation and check the name, quantity, date, and signature fields against the source documents
- Open the search parameter panel, check the associated knowledge base vector model and search parameter values, and record the number of citations and the
quoteMaxTokenbudget