What the Data for This Category Looks Like
The core data for this category centers on the full lifecycle of investment projects. Typical sources include state-owned assets supervision investment management systems, enterprise ERP and project management systems, industry market data, audit and financial statements. Data is updated quarterly. Daily associated documents cover annual investment plans, project proposals, feasibility study reports, due diligence reports, asset appraisal reports, post-investment evaluation reports, and more. Fields cover core business information such as project number, investment amount, construction period, risk control opinions, and others. The main participating entities are central enterprise strategic investment departments, project companies, state-owned assets supervision departments, and external consulting and evaluation institutions. Business processes must align with specific requirements for central enterprise board investment decisions, negative lists, and post-investment evaluation.
Constraints on Forms and Interactions from These Characteristics
The data characteristics of this category directly constrain the design logic of forms and interactions. The need for multi-source data synchronization requires forms to support cross-system field association, to avoid errors caused by manual entry. The quarterly update frequency requires that the form submission and data synchronization rhythm matches the quarterly cycle, and high-frequency submission restrictions should not be set. The field differences across multiple types of documents require forms to flexibly configure exclusive fields for different business stages. For example, the approval stage requires a feasibility study approval document number, while the post-evaluation stage requires post-launch operation data. Strict business compliance requirements mean that forms must include built-in role permission verification, allowing only specified entities to submit or modify data. At the same time, required field verification and risk control prompts must be added to prevent state-owned asset losses or accountability due to missing information. Differences from government investment approval processes require forms to adapt to specific links of central enterprise board investment decisions, and do not need to include exclusive approval fields for government ends.
Configuration Settings
| Configuration Item | Recommended Approach | Rationale |
|---|---|---|
formInput | Configure 10-15 core business fields, including project number, investment amount, feasibility study approval document number | Align with standard document fields for this category, covering core information for approval and post-evaluation |
userSelect | Restrict to three types of roles: strategic investment department, project company, state-owned assets supervision department | Fit the typical participating entities of this category, avoiding invalid form submissions from unrelated users |
formInput | Support switching field configurations by business stage | Adapt to different field requirements for the approval and post-evaluation stages |
| Single submission limit | 1 per working day | Match the quarterly data update rhythm, preventing high-frequency submissions from disrupting data synchronization processes |
| Context length | 800–1200 characters | Fit the core summary length of a single feasibility study report, avoiding exceeding processing thresholds |
| Timeout period | 600 seconds | Match the average time required for cross-system data retrieval, preventing failures from cross-system calls |
| Rearrangement configuration | Calibrate based on actual measurements | Adapt to the text characteristics of industry reports, optimizing the relevance of consultation responses |
Three Common Misconfigurations
- Issue: The rearrangement function cannot select a model adapted to specified industry reports, and the interface only displays general model options. Cause: The model adaptation rules associated with
formInputwere not configured based on the business document characteristics of this category, resulting in the model selection range not covering the text processing requirements of industry reports. - Issue: After submitting the form, a prompt indicating invalid username appears, and identity verification cannot be completed. Cause: The role range configured in
userSelectdoes not include the entity type to which the current user belongs, and the system verification logic does not match the participating entity list for this category. - Issue: More than 10 minutes pass after form submission, and the synchronization success status is still not displayed. Cause: A reasonable timeout period was not set, and cross-system data retrieval time exceeded the default threshold, resulting in unhandled request timeouts.
How to Verify Successful Configuration
- Enter the corresponding scenario in FastGPT v4.17.0, create a test form, and check whether the core fields configured in
formInputare fully displayed and can be entered normally. - Switch test accounts with different roles, verify whether the role range configured in
userSelecttakes effect, and unauthorized roles cannot submit the form. - Submit test data including project number and investment amount, check whether the synchronization success status is displayed within 600 seconds after form submission.
- Trigger the consultation response function, check whether the rearrangement configuration takes effect, and whether the response result matches the relevance requirements of industry reports.
The values provided here are common starting points and should be measured against the reader's own samples.
Question material comes from public community discussions. Configuration values are common starting points and should be measured against your own samples. Verified on 2026-09-28.