What this category's data looks like
This category's data looks like this. The filing materials for program offerings at vocational colleges comprise three types: the program offering filing form, the talent demand justification, and the faculty and equipment list. The filing form carries the program name, code, program length, enrollment scale, and signature fields; the talent demand justification records industry research, job correspondence, and dates; the faculty and equipment list sets out the number of teachers, professional titles, training equipment names, and unit counts. When these three types of materials enter the knowledge base retrieval node, each is split as an independent document and a vector index is built; during retrieval, fragments are matched by semantics, and the citation output is only responsible for returning the matched original text fragments together with source identifiers as a group. The material update cadence is synchronized with the application batches; it is common for the same batch of materials to be revised multiple times, and for the old version to coexist with the new version before it has been withdrawn, causing the same program name, quantity, or date to fail to match between the two materials, and missing signatures or receipts also get mixed in with the versions.
Configuration and implementation checks
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 fragment and a source identifier, and the length may be 0. The handover-ready deployment state and operation records are then completed by subsequent AI nodes, code nodes, or manual work.
| Object | Check | Verification action |
|---|---|---|
| Program offering filing form | Whether the program name, code, program length, enrollment scale, and signature fields are consistent item by item with other materials in the same batch | Open the citation superscript to trace back to the original paragraph in the filing form, check the fields and signature, and record the number of citations, i.e. the array length |
| Talent demand justification | Whether the research date, job correspondence, and justification conclusion match the program name and date filled in the filing form | Run a trial with a question containing the program name, see whether the matched fragment comes from the justification material, and check the tokens of the cited text under the quoteMaxToken budget |
| Faculty and equipment list | Whether the number of teachers, professional titles, equipment names, and unit counts are consistent with the filing form and justification material, and whether receipts are complete | Compare the records with the same names across the three materials item by item, mark entries missing signatures or receipts separately, and do not merge them into the discrepancy list |
| Associated knowledge base | Whether the selected knowledge base is one with the same vector model, and whether the search parameters are consistent with the values in the knowledge base retrieval section | Check the selected collection and vector model in the node, open the search parameter panel and check item by item, and view the hit information in responseData (non-streaming module results returned with detailed output enabled) and quoteList |
Three common errors
- Symptom: the same program name, quantity, or date fails to match between the filing form and the faculty and equipment list. Cause: the two materials belong to different revision batches, and the old version coexists with the new version before it has been withdrawn, so which version is matched depends on the wording of the question.
- Symptom: there is no citation superscript in the answer, or the cited fragment does not match the original text. Cause: first check whether this round hit anything and which material was hit, then look at trimming; do not directly attribute it to length trimming.
- Symptom: there is an answer but the citation array is empty, and it is misjudged as a retrieval failure. Cause: an empty array is a normal output, and the pipeline still runs through; you need to confirm whether the question truly has no matching material, and this also happens when materials have not been ingested or versions are not synchronized.
How to verify the setup
How to verify the setup. Acceptance for this feature: ask a question with an original-text basis, and check whether the citation array and superscripts can trace back to the original text; then ask a question with no matching material, and confirm that the array is empty while the pipeline runs through. The number of citations is the array length, and quoteMaxToken is the citation content budget; the two are not compared for equality; when the citation upper limit is involved, check the tokens of the cited text, and record the array entry count separately.
Business test: check item by item once according to the handover sheet, see which record is missing, and focus on checking the fields, dates, and signatures of the filing form, talent demand justification, and faculty and equipment list, as well as whether the version, connection, and task record are consistent.
- In the conversation, open the citation superscripts, trace back to the original paragraphs item by item against the source documents, and confirm that each citation can land on a specific material.
- Run a trial with a question that has no matching material, see that the output is empty while the pipeline continues, and record the array length and the tokens of the cited text under the
quoteMaxTokenbudget.