Method and device for managing auditors, electronic equipment and readable storage medium

Abstract

The application discloses a kind of management methods of auditing personnel, device, electronic equipment and computer readable storage medium, the application is by obtaining the article interaction operation of user to article on knowledge sharing platform;Article auditing personnel is selected based on article interaction operation;The article audit quantity on knowledge sharing platform is obtained, the personal audit result of at least one article of article auditing personnel is audited, and the final audit result of the article being audited;Based on article audit quantity, and the personal audit result of at least one article being audited, the participation rate of article auditing personnel is determined;Based on the personal audit result of the article being audited, and the final audit result of the article being audited, the audit quality of article auditing personnel is determined;Based on audit quality and participation rate, the audit qualification of article auditing personnel is determined, the audit right of article auditing personnel that audit qualification does not meet preset qualification condition is cancelled, to improve the reliability when article content is audited.

Description

Technical Field

[0001] This application relates to the field of management technology, and specifically to a method, apparatus, electronic device, and computer-readable storage medium for managing auditors. Background Technology

[0002] In the wave of the Internet, wiki systems, as open hypertext systems that allow multiple people to collaborate on creation, are becoming increasingly popular. People can freely edit the content of entries in wiki systems to generate user-generated content (UGC).

[0003] Currently, in order for the wiki system to operate healthily, it is necessary to review the content of user-edited entries on the wiki system. Generally, the content of entries on the wiki system can be reviewed by user volunteers. However, due to the uneven review capabilities of user volunteers, the reliability of the content review is low. Summary of the Invention

[0004] This application provides a method, apparatus, electronic device, and computer-readable storage medium for managing reviewers, which can improve the reliability of reviewing term content.

[0005] Firstly, embodiments of this application provide a method for managing auditors, the method comprising:

[0006] Acquire the interaction operations of multiple users on at least one term on a preset knowledge-sharing platform;

[0007] Based on the above-mentioned interaction operations of multiple users, the entry reviewers on the above-mentioned knowledge sharing platform were selected from the multiple users mentioned above.

[0008] Obtain the number of entries reviewed on the aforementioned knowledge-sharing platform, the individual review results of at least one entry reviewed by the aforementioned entry reviewers, and the final review results of at least one reviewed entry;

[0009] Based on the number of entries reviewed and the individual review results of at least one entry reviewed, the participation rate of the reviewers in reviewing the entries is determined.

[0010] Based on the individual review results of at least one term being reviewed, and the final review results of at least one term being reviewed, the review quality of the term reviewers is determined.

[0011] Based on the review quality and participation rate of the aforementioned reviewers, the review qualifications of the aforementioned reviewers are determined, and the review rights of reviewers whose qualifications do not meet the preset qualification conditions are revoked.

[0012] Secondly, embodiments of this application also provide a management device for auditors, the device comprising:

[0013] The operation acquisition module is used to acquire the interaction operations of multiple users on at least one term on a preset knowledge sharing platform;

[0014] The selection module is used to select the term reviewers on the knowledge-sharing platform from the aforementioned users based on their interactive operations with the aforementioned terms.

[0015] The information acquisition module is used to acquire the number of entries reviewed on the aforementioned knowledge-sharing platform, the individual review results of at least one entry reviewed by the aforementioned entry reviewers, and the final review results of at least one entry reviewed.

[0016] The participation rate determination module is used to determine the participation rate of the reviewers of the above-mentioned terms based on the number of terms reviewed and the individual review results of at least one term reviewed.

[0017] The quality determination module is used to determine the review quality of the terms reviewed by the reviewers based on the individual review results of at least one term being reviewed and the final review results of at least one term being reviewed.

[0018] The qualification determination module is used to determine the review qualifications of the aforementioned term reviewers based on their review quality and participation rate, and to cancel the review rights of term reviewers whose qualifications do not meet the preset qualification conditions.

[0019] Thirdly, embodiments of this application also provide an electronic device, including a memory storing multiple instructions; the processor loads instructions from the memory to execute steps in any of the reviewer management methods provided in embodiments of this application.

[0020] Fourthly, embodiments of this application also provide a computer-readable storage medium storing a plurality of instructions adapted for loading by a processor to execute steps in any of the auditor management methods provided in embodiments of this application.

[0021] In this embodiment, the interaction operations of multiple users on at least one term on a preset knowledge-sharing platform are acquired. Based on these interactions, term reviewers on the knowledge-sharing platform are selected from among the users. This approach, from the perspective of selecting term reviewers, utilizes user interactions on the platform to choose suitable term reviewers, thereby improving the reliability of term reviewers' reviews. Furthermore, the number of terms reviewed on the knowledge-sharing platform, the individual review results of at least one term reviewed by the term reviewers, and the final review results of at least one term reviewed are also acquired. Then, based on the number of terms reviewed and the individual review results of at least one term reviewed, the participation rate of the term reviewers in reviewing terms is determined; furthermore, based on the individual review results of at least one term reviewed and the final review results of at least one term reviewed, the review quality of the term reviewers is determined. Finally, from the perspective of evaluating the term reviewers, based on the review quality and participation rate of the aforementioned term reviewers, the review qualifications of the term reviewers are determined. In order to identify term reviewers whose review qualifications do not meet the standards and take appropriate action, that is, to cancel the review rights of term reviewers whose review qualifications do not meet the preset qualification conditions. In this way, term reviewers who review term content are managed from the two perspectives of personnel selection and personnel evaluation, so as to improve the reliability of term content review. Attached Figure Description

[0022] To more clearly illustrate the technical solutions in the embodiments of this application, the accompanying drawings used in the description of the embodiments will be briefly introduced below. Obviously, the accompanying drawings described below are only some embodiments of this application. For those skilled in the art, other drawings can be obtained based on these drawings without creative effort.

[0023] Figure 1 This is a schematic diagram illustrating a scenario of the reviewer management method provided in an embodiment of this application;

[0024] Figure 2 This is a flowchart illustrating one embodiment of the reviewer management method provided in this application.

[0025] Figure 3 This is a schematic diagram of the structure of the management device for reviewers provided in the embodiments of this application;

[0026] Figure 4 This is a schematic diagram of the structure of the electronic device provided in the embodiments of this application. Detailed Implementation

[0027] The technical solutions of the embodiments of this application will be clearly and completely described below with reference to the accompanying drawings. Obviously, the described embodiments are only some embodiments of this application, and not all embodiments. Based on the embodiments of this application, all other embodiments obtained by those skilled in the art without creative effort are within the scope of protection of this application.

[0028] Before providing a detailed explanation of the embodiments of this application, some terms involved in the embodiments of this application will be explained.

[0029] In the description of the embodiments of this application, the terms "first," "second," etc., may be used herein to describe various concepts, but unless specifically stated otherwise, these concepts are not limited by these terms. These terms are used only to distinguish one concept from another. Furthermore, the terms "comprising" and "having," and any variations thereof, are intended to cover non-exclusive inclusion. For example, a process, method, system, product, or device that includes a series of steps or units is not necessarily limited to those steps or units explicitly listed, but may include other steps or units not explicitly listed or inherent to these processes, methods, products, or devices.

[0030] This application provides a method, apparatus, electronic device, and computer-readable storage medium for managing auditors. Specifically, the method for managing auditors in this application can be executed by an electronic device, which can be a terminal or a server. The terminal can be a smartphone, tablet, laptop, touchscreen, game console, personal computer (PC), personal digital assistant (PDA), or other terminal device. The terminal can also include a client, which can be a game application client, a browser client carrying a game program, or an instant messaging client. The server can be an independent physical server, a server cluster or distributed system composed of multiple physical servers, or a cloud server that provides basic cloud computing services such as cloud services, cloud databases, cloud computing, cloud functions, cloud storage, network services, cloud communication, middleware services, domain name services, security services, CDN, and big data and artificial intelligence platforms.

[0031] For example, such as Figure 1As shown, the electronic device is illustrated using terminal 10 as an example. This terminal can acquire the interaction operations of multiple users on at least one term on a preset knowledge-sharing platform. Based on these interaction operations, it selects term reviewers from among the users on the knowledge-sharing platform. It acquires the number of terms reviewed on the knowledge-sharing platform, the individual review results of at least one term reviewed by the reviewers, and the final review result of the reviewed term. Based on the number of terms reviewed and the individual review results of the reviewed term, it determines the participation rate of the reviewers in reviewing terms. Based on the individual review results of the reviewed term and the final review result of the reviewed term, it determines the review quality of the reviewed terms. Based on the review quality and participation rate of the reviewers, it determines the review qualifications of the reviewers and cancels the review rights of reviewers whose qualifications do not meet the preset qualification conditions.

[0032] To address the aforementioned issues, this application provides a method, apparatus, electronic device, and computer-readable storage medium for managing reviewers, which can improve the reliability of reviewing term content.

[0033] The following is a detailed description in conjunction with the accompanying drawings. It should be noted that the order of description of the following embodiments is not intended to limit the preferred order of the embodiments. Although a logical order is shown in the flowcharts, in some cases, the steps shown or described may be performed in a different order than that shown in the drawings.

[0034] In this embodiment, a terminal is used as an example for illustration. This embodiment provides a method for managing reviewers, such as... Figure 2 As shown, the specific process for managing these auditors can be as follows:

[0035] 201. Obtain the interaction operations of multiple users on at least one term on a preset knowledge sharing platform.

[0036] In this embodiment, the terminal can obtain a series of term interaction operations performed by the user on the knowledge-sharing platform within a certain selected time period, thereby clarifying the user's activity information on the knowledge-sharing platform. Based on this activity information, the terminal can manage the user accordingly, enabling the user to better leverage their expertise and thus better maintain the development of the knowledge-sharing platform.

[0037] The aforementioned knowledge-sharing platform is user-oriented and provides knowledge to users. Users can perform related interactive operations on the entries on the knowledge-sharing platform, including but not limited to platform login, entry browsing, entry rating, entry editing, and entry uploading.

[0038] It is understood that the above-mentioned platform login operation refers to logging into the knowledge-sharing platform, the above-mentioned term browsing operation refers to browsing terms on the knowledge-sharing platform, the above-mentioned term rating operation refers to rating terms on the knowledge-sharing platform, for example, rating terms from 1 to 10, the above-mentioned term editing operation refers to modifying terms on the knowledge-sharing platform, and the above-mentioned term uploading operation refers to creating and editing terms on the knowledge-sharing platform to generate new terms.

[0039] For example, the aforementioned knowledge-sharing platform could be a wiki system.

[0040] In some embodiments, since user errors may sometimes occur on the aforementioned knowledge-sharing platform—for example, a user might accidentally browse an entry that does not meet their needs—to improve the accuracy of identifying user activity information on the knowledge-sharing platform and avoid recording entry interactions corresponding to erroneous operations that could affect the accuracy of subsequent data processing, this embodiment introduces limiting conditions when detecting user operations on the aforementioned knowledge-sharing platform to obtain entry interactions that meet the user's needs.

[0041] For example, the terminal can set a minimum operation time. For instance, when a user browses a term on the aforementioned knowledge-sharing platform, the terminal can detect the browsing time corresponding to the term browsing operation. If the browsing time is less than the minimum operation time, the term browsing operation is considered an erroneous operation and is not recorded.

[0042] In some embodiments, to facilitate later processing, each time a user performs a term interaction operation on the knowledge-sharing platform, the relevant attribute information corresponding to that term interaction operation must be recorded, such as the term ID of the term being interacted with, the start time of the term interaction operation, and the duration of the term interaction operation.

[0043] For example, when a user browses entries on the aforementioned knowledge-sharing platform, the terminal can record relevant attribute information corresponding to the entry browsing operation, including but not limited to the browsed entry ID, the start time of browsing the entry, and the duration of browsing the entry; or, when a user edits entries on the aforementioned knowledge-sharing platform, the terminal can record relevant attribute information corresponding to the entry editing operation, including but not limited to the edited entry ID, the start time of editing the entry, and the duration of editing the entry; or, when a user uploads entries on the aforementioned knowledge-sharing platform, the terminal can record relevant attribute information corresponding to the entry uploading operation, including but not limited to the uploaded entry ID, the start time of uploading the entry, and the duration of uploading the entry.

[0044] In some embodiments, since users do not complete every edit when editing entries, sometimes only a portion is edited but not finished. The currently edited but incomplete entry can be set as a draft file, saved, and associated with the edited entry upon saving. This allows for appropriate prompts when the user edits the same entry again, such as indicating whether the draft version has been updated. If the user triggers an update command, the draft file for that entry will be deleted, and the entry will be updated to the current version for the user to edit. The version ID of the draft file and the version ID of the current entry must be different; for example, different prefixes can be used for distinction.

[0045] In some embodiments, since the term rating operation involves users rating terms on the aforementioned knowledge-sharing platform, and it is understood that a higher term score on the platform indicates better term quality, rating restrictions can be introduced to improve the accuracy of term quality determination. This involves restricting the eligibility of users to rate terms, ensuring that only compliant users can rate terms.

[0046] Specifically, the above-mentioned scoring restrictions can be based on at least one of the user's platform login, entry browsing, entry editing, and entry uploading operations. For example, the restrictions can be made to ensure that the number of login days corresponding to the platform login operation meets a preset number of login days, the login time corresponding to the platform login operation meets a preset login time, the number of entry browsing operations meets a preset number of entry browsing operations, the number of entries browsed by the entry browsing operation meets a preset number of entries, the total browsing time corresponding to the entry browsing operation meets a preset browsing time, and the number of entry editing or entry uploading operations meets a preset number of edits or uploads, etc.

[0047] For example, the terminal can be set to only allow a user to perform a term rating operation when at least one of the following conditions is met: the user's platform login operation has been logged in for 10 days, the user's term browsing operation has browsed 50 terms, the user's total browsing time for term browsing operation has reached 120 minutes, and the user's term editing operation has reached 20 times.

[0048] Specifically, the above-mentioned scoring restrictions can also be based on the number of times a user scores within a first preset period. For example, the number of times a user can score a term in a day can be limited to 5.

[0049] Specifically, the above-mentioned scoring restrictions can also be based on the user's scoring behavior. For example, if it is found that a user scores a high-quality term with a score higher than a first preset score but lower than a second preset score, and the first preset score is higher than the second preset score, and this situation occurs a certain number of times, then the terminal can mark the user as an abnormal user, that is, a user who repeatedly gives low scores to high-quality terms. The terminal can record the time when the user is marked as an abnormal user, and prohibit the abnormal user from scoring terms for a preset period of time after the marking time.

[0050] In some embodiments, the scores given by different users to the same term within a second preset period can be obtained, and the average score given by different users to the same term can be calculated, and the average score can be used as the score for the same term.

[0051] Furthermore, if at least one abnormal user scores the same term within the second preset period, the terminal can mark the abnormal user's score for the same term as pending review, so that relevant staff on the knowledge-sharing platform can review the score of the same term in the pending review state. After the review is passed, the average of the abnormal user's score for the same term and the scores of other non-abnormal users for the same term can be calculated to obtain the score of the same term.

[0052] In some embodiments, the above-mentioned term interaction operation may also include term content feedback operation. That is, if a user finds that the term content of a certain term contains content that does not comply with regulations, the user can provide feedback on the term content. This allows the relevant staff on the knowledge-sharing platform to assign the term reviewers or personally verify the content of the term corresponding to the feedback operation. If non-compliant content is found, the non-compliant content will be modified. After modification, the term ID of the term corresponding to the feedback operation will be updated. The author of the term will remain unchanged, the original term ID will be invalidated, and no historical record will be recorded.

[0053] 202. Based on the above-mentioned interaction operations of multiple users, select the entry reviewers from the above-mentioned users on the knowledge sharing platform.

[0054] In this embodiment, by understanding the user's activity information on the knowledge-sharing platform through their interactive operations on the terminology, the terminal can better manage users based on this information. This involves selecting suitable users as terminology reviewers on the platform, thus broadening the review perspective and avoiding a singular review viewpoint. Furthermore, selecting users as terminology reviewers also improves the efficiency of terminology review.

[0055] It is understandable that, since knowledge-sharing platforms allow multiple users to edit and share entries, some entries may not comply with platform regulations. Therefore, it is necessary for some personnel to review the content of user-edited entries in order to enable the knowledge-sharing platform to develop better. The personnel who can review the content of user-edited and uploaded entries are the aforementioned entry reviewers.

[0056] In some embodiments, the selection of term reviewers on the knowledge-sharing platform from among the multiple users based on their term interaction operations may include: the terminal determining a user's activity level on the knowledge-sharing platform based on their term interaction operations on at least one term within a certain selection time, and selecting more active users as core users to review terms based on that user's activity level on the knowledge-sharing platform, i.e., selecting term reviewers. In this embodiment, the user's activity level can be accurately obtained through both global and local considerations.

[0057] Specifically, based on the aforementioned user's interaction with the aforementioned terms, the interaction result information corresponding to each type of interaction with each user is determined. This information is then used to accurately determine the user's activity level by considering both global and local factors. Specifically, based on the interaction result information corresponding to each type of interaction with each user, the target contribution value of each user to the term on the aforementioned knowledge-sharing platform is determined, thus obtaining the target contribution value for calculating activity level through global consideration. Based on the interaction result information corresponding to each type of interaction with each user, and the target contribution value corresponding to each user, the activity level of each user when interacting with terms on the aforementioned knowledge-sharing platform is determined. Users with activity levels greater than a preset threshold are selected from among the aforementioned users as term reviewers.

[0058] The interaction results for the different types of term interaction operations mentioned above vary. For example, the interaction results for the platform login operation include, but are not limited to, the number of login days and login duration; the interaction results for the term browsing operation include, but are not limited to, the number of views, the number of terms viewed, and the total browsing time; the interaction results for the term rating operation include, but are not limited to, the number of ratings and the number of times the rating was approved; the interaction results for the term editing operation include, but are not limited to, the number of edits, the number of times the edited term was approved, and the number of times the edited term was rated; and the interaction results for the term upload operation include, but are not limited to, the number of uploads, the number of times the upload was approved, and the number of times the uploaded term was rated.

[0059] It is understandable that the reviewers of the above-mentioned term scoring, editing, and uploading operations can be relevant staff members of the knowledge-sharing platform or term reviewers on the knowledge-sharing platform. As a result, each of the above-mentioned term scoring, editing, and uploading operations has a corresponding number of approvals, namely, the number of times the scoring is approved, the number of times the editing is approved, and the number of times the uploading is approved.

[0060] Specifically, determining the activity level of each user when performing term interaction operations on the knowledge-sharing platform based on the interaction result information corresponding to each term interaction operation of each user and the target contribution value corresponding to each user may include: the terminal may assign corresponding weights to the interaction result information corresponding to each term interaction operation of the user and the target contribution value corresponding to the user, thereby calculating the sum of the interaction result information corresponding to each term interaction operation after weighting and the target contribution value after weighting, so as to obtain the activity level of the user when performing term interaction operations on the knowledge-sharing platform.

[0061] Specifically, determining the activity level of each user when performing term interaction operations on the knowledge-sharing platform based on the interaction result information corresponding to each term interaction operation of each user and the target contribution value corresponding to each user can include: the terminal can calculate the ratio between the interaction result information corresponding to each term interaction operation of the user and the sum of the interaction result information corresponding to the same term interaction operation of all users, to obtain a first ratio of at least one interaction result information corresponding to each term interaction operation of the user; then calculate the second ratio between the target contribution value corresponding to the user and the sum of the target contribution values ​​of all users; then assign weights to at least one first ratio and the second ratio corresponding to each term interaction operation of the user, respectively, to calculate the sum of at least one first ratio and the second ratio after weighting, so as to obtain the activity level of the user when performing term interaction operations on the knowledge-sharing platform.

[0062] For example, if the interaction result information corresponding to each of the above-mentioned term interaction operations includes login days, number of views, total viewing time, number of ratings, number of edits, number of uploads, and number of approvals, the number of approvals can be at least one of the number of rating approvals, number of editing approvals, and number of upload approvals, or the sum of at least two of them.

[0063] Then, the following calculations are performed: First, the ratio between the number of login days for a given user within a selected time period and the total number of login days for all users within that time period; second, the ratio between the number of views for a given user within a selected time period and the total number of views for all users within that time period; third, the ratio between the total viewing time for a given user within a selected time period and the total viewing time for all users within that time period; fourth, the ratio between the number of ratings for a given user within a selected time period and the total number of ratings for all users within that time period; fifth, the ratio between the number of edits for a given user within a selected time period and the total number of edits for all users within that time period; sixth, the ratio between the number of uploads for a given user within a selected time period and the total number of uploads for all users within that time period; and seventh, the ratio between the number of approvals for a given user within a selected time period and the total number of approvals for all users within that time period. Finally, a second ratio is calculated between the target contribution value for a given user within a selected time period and the sum of the target contribution values ​​for all users within that time period.

[0064] Then, based on the interaction results information corresponding to each of the above-mentioned term interaction operations, a corresponding weight is assigned to the first ratio and a corresponding weight is assigned to the second ratio. Specifically, the weight of the second ratio is 5%, the weight of the first ratio for login days is 5%, the weight of the first ratio for page views is 10%, the weight of the first ratio for total page view duration is 10%, the weight of the first ratio for ratings is 12%, the weight of the first ratio for edits is 15%, the weight of the first ratio for uploads is 18%, and the weight of the first ratio for approved reviews is 25%. Finally, the sum of at least one first ratio and the weighted second ratio for each interaction operation is calculated to obtain the user's activity level when interacting with terms on the knowledge-sharing platform. Only two decimal places are retained in the calculated activity level for ease of comparison.

[0065] In some embodiments, the aforementioned term interaction operations include term upload operations and term editing operations. The aforementioned interaction result information includes the number of operations, the number of times the operation was approved, and the number of times the operated term was rated. Determining the target contribution value of each user to the term on the aforementioned knowledge-sharing platform based on the interaction result information corresponding to each user's term interaction operation may include: assigning corresponding operation contribution values ​​to the number of operations corresponding to the user's term upload and term editing operations; determining a first contribution value for the user based on the number of operations of the term upload and term editing operations assigned the operation contribution values, i.e., obtaining the contribution value corresponding to the user's operation, which is used to indicate the user's activity level; and assigning corresponding operation contribution values ​​to the number of operations approved for the user's term upload and term editing operations. The approval contribution value is used to determine the user's second contribution value, which represents the quality of the user's operation, based on the number of times the term upload and edit operations have been approved. Then, a scoring contribution value is assigned to each term uploaded and edited by the user, based on the number of times the edited terms have been scored. A third contribution value is then determined, representing the user's reliability, based on the number of scores given to the successfully edited terms. Finally, the sum of the first, second, and third contribution values ​​is determined as the target contribution value, representing the user's overall contribution value.

[0066] Specifically, the number of operations corresponding to the above-mentioned term upload operations is the aforementioned upload count; the number of times the above-mentioned term upload operations have passed review is the aforementioned upload review count; and the number of times the edited term has been rated is the aforementioned uploaded term's rating count. Similarly, the number of operations corresponding to the above-mentioned term editing operations is the aforementioned editing count; the number of times the above-mentioned term editing operations have passed review is the aforementioned edit review count; and the number of times the edited term has been rated is the aforementioned edited term's rating count.

[0067] Specifically, corresponding operation contribution values ​​are assigned to the number of times the aforementioned user uploads and edits entries. This is equivalent to calculating the product of the number of times the entry upload operation is performed and the corresponding operation contribution value, and vice versa. Correspondingly, corresponding approval contribution values ​​are assigned to the number of times the aforementioned user's entry upload and edit operations are approved. This is equivalent to calculating the product of the number of times the entry upload operation is approved and the corresponding approval contribution value, and vice versa. Accordingly, a corresponding scoring contribution value is assigned to the number of times the edited terms are scored for the aforementioned user's term upload operation and term editing operation. This is equivalent to calculating the product between the number of times the edited terms are scored for the term upload operation and the scoring contribution value corresponding to the term upload operation, and calculating the product between the number of times the edited terms are scored for the term editing operation and the scoring contribution value corresponding to the term editing operation.

[0068] Specifically, determining the first contribution value for the user based on the number of times the term upload and term editing operations are performed, and assigning the aforementioned operation contribution value, may include: determining the first product as the product of the number of times the term upload and term editing operations are performed and the operation contribution value; calculating the sum of the first products corresponding to both; and using the sum of the first products as the first contribution value. Alternatively, calculating the average of the first products corresponding to both; and using the average of the first products as the first contribution value.

[0069] Specifically, determining the second contribution value for the user based on the number of times the term upload and term editing operations, which are assigned the aforementioned approval contribution value, can include: determining the second product as the product of the number of times the term upload and term editing operations are approved and the approval contribution value; calculating the sum of the two corresponding second products; and using the sum of the two second products as the second contribution value. Alternatively, calculating the average of the two corresponding second products; and using the average of the two second products as the aforementioned second contribution value.

[0070] Specifically, determining the third contribution value for the user based on the number of times the edited terms in the aforementioned term upload and edit operations, which are assigned the aforementioned scoring contribution value, can include: determining the third product as the product between the number of times the edited terms in the term upload and edit operations are scored and the scoring contribution value; calculating the sum of the corresponding third products; and using the sum of the third products as the third contribution value. Alternatively, calculating the average of the corresponding third products; and using the average of the third products as the aforementioned third contribution value.

[0071] The contribution values ​​for the above-mentioned operations, approvals, and scores can be set based on requirements and are not limited here. For example, the contribution value for the above-mentioned entry upload operation is 100, and the contribution value for the above-mentioned entry editing operation is 20; the contribution value for the above-mentioned entry upload operation is 500, and the contribution value for the above-mentioned entry editing operation is 100; the contribution value for the above-mentioned entry upload operation is 2, and the contribution value for the above-mentioned entry editing operation is 2.

[0072] In some embodiments, the number of operations corresponding to the term rating operation can also be introduced, that is, a corresponding contribution value is assigned to the number of operations corresponding to the term rating operation. Based on the number of operations of the term rating operation with assigned contribution values, a fourth contribution value corresponding to the user is determined. Then, the sum of the first contribution value, the second contribution value, the third contribution value, and the fourth contribution value is determined as the target contribution value. The contribution value of the number of operations corresponding to the term rating operation can be set according to requirements and is not limited here; for example, 3.

[0073] In some embodiments, after identifying entry reviewers based on their activity levels, further screening can be conducted to improve their review qualifications. For example, the terminal can send a request message to the entry reviewers to participate in a qualification assessment. The request message may contain a preset number of review questions. Within a preset assessment time, the terminal receives responses from the entry reviewers to these questions. Based on these responses, the terminal calculates the accuracy rate of each reviewer, retains the entry reviewers with the highest accuracy rate (a preset number for assessment), and disqualifies the remaining reviewers. This assessment number can be determined based on the total number of entry reviewers, for example, from 10% to 15% of the total number of entry reviewers.

[0074] 203. Obtain the number of entries reviewed on the aforementioned knowledge-sharing platform, the individual review results of at least one entry reviewed by the aforementioned entry reviewers, and the final review results of at least one reviewed entry.

[0075] In this embodiment, in order to assess the qualifications of term reviewers, it is necessary to obtain relevant information about term reviewers during term review within a certain assessment period, such as the number of term reviews on the aforementioned knowledge-sharing platform, the individual review results of at least one term reviewed by the aforementioned term reviewers, and the final review results of at least one term reviewed. Thus, the term reviewers can be supervised through the aforementioned information.

[0076] The number of entries reviewed on the aforementioned knowledge-sharing platform refers to the number of entries reviewed by at least one reviewer on the platform within a certain evaluation period. Different reviewers can review the same entry or different entries.

[0077] It is understandable that reviewing entries will produce corresponding review results, which include, but are not limited to, entry ratings, approval results, and rejection results.

[0078] The aforementioned term rating is a score based on a specific term, which can be used to indicate the term's quality, value, etc.; the aforementioned approval result means that a term has passed the review, that is, the term belongs to the term that meets the requirements of the aforementioned knowledge-sharing platform and can be retained on the aforementioned knowledge-sharing platform. Conversely, the aforementioned disapproval result means that a term has failed the review, that is, the term does not belong to the term that meets the requirements of the aforementioned knowledge-sharing platform and cannot be retained on the aforementioned knowledge-sharing platform.

[0079] In some embodiments, if the final review result of the aforementioned term needs to be jointly determined by the individual review results of multiple term reviewers, the terminal can, based on the total number of term reviewers, calculate the number of comparisons required to determine the final review result by multiplying the total number of term reviewers by a preset coefficient. For example, the number of comparisons could be the product of the total number of term reviewers and 0.7. Therefore, when the number of approved reviews for a term is greater than or equal to the number of comparisons, that is, when the number of people agreeing that the term is approved is greater than or equal to the number of comparisons, the final review result for that term is determined to be an approved result.

[0080] Furthermore, if the final review result of a certain term is "approved", the version of the term will be updated to the latest version after a preset time, such as 2 hours later. The old version of the term will be recorded in the history, and the relevant user will be notified to remind the user that their contribution value has increased. If the final review result of the term is "failed", the term will be invalid, and the relevant user will be notified that the term failed the review.

[0081] In some embodiments, to facilitate supervision of the review process by relevant staff, if a reviewer's review result is "not approved," a reason prompt should be provided to the reviewer so that they can input the reason for the rejection. This allows the reason for the rejection to be obtained and recorded. Additionally, the time spent by the reviewer on each entry review can also be recorded.

[0082] In some embodiments, the aforementioned term reviewers may review whether the title and content of the term corresponding to the term uploaded or edited by the user match, whether the content of the term corresponding to the term is correct, and whether the content of the term corresponding to the term is legal, thereby reviewing the compliance of the term from multiple aspects.

[0083] For example, if the term being reviewed by the current reviewer has neither an online version nor a version awaiting release, the reviewer may only review the term content and whether the content and title match. If the term being reviewed by the current reviewer has no online version but a version awaiting release exists, the reviewer needs to compare the differences between the awaiting release version and the currently reviewed term to focus on those differences. If the term being reviewed by the current reviewer has an online version but no version awaiting release, the reviewer needs to compare the differences between the online version and the currently reviewed term to focus on those differences. If the term being reviewed by the current reviewer has both an online version and a version awaiting release, the reviewer needs to compare the differences between the awaiting release version, the online version, and the currently reviewed term to focus on those differences. The aforementioned online version refers to the entries already available on the aforementioned knowledge-sharing platform and accessible to users, while the aforementioned version to be launched refers to the entries that will be uploaded to the aforementioned knowledge-sharing platform.

[0084] In some embodiments, since the title of a term cannot be modified after it is created, when the title and content of a target term do not match, the terminal needs to create a new term based on the review results of the term reviewer, synchronize the content of the target term to the new term, and notify the author of the target term to perform operations such as changing the term in the new term, deleting the target term, or retaining the target term.

[0085] 204. Based on the number of entries reviewed above and the individual review results of at least one entry reviewed, determine the participation rate of the above entry reviewers in reviewing entries.

[0086] In this embodiment, based on the individual review results of at least one of the reviewed terms, the terminal can determine the number of terms reviewed by the individual reviewer within a certain evaluation period. By calculating the ratio between the number of terms reviewed by the individual reviewer and the number of terms reviewed on the knowledge-sharing platform, the terminal can obtain the participation rate of the individual reviewer in reviewing terms. This allows the terminal to evaluate the reviewer's qualifications based on the participation rate of the individual reviewer in reviewing terms.

[0087] Understandably, assuming all other conditions for entry reviewers remain the same, a higher participation rate indicates better reviewer qualifications.

[0088] 205. Based on the individual review results of at least one term being reviewed, and the final review results of at least one term being reviewed, determine the review quality of the terms reviewed by the aforementioned term reviewers.

[0089] It is understandable that, to ensure the accuracy of the term review results, the final review result of a term, i.e., the final term review result, needs to be determined jointly by the individual review results of multiple term reviewers, or by the relevant staff on the aforementioned knowledge-sharing platform. The relevant staff on the knowledge-sharing platform can reject the corresponding actions of term reviewers or users, such as rejecting terms approved by multiple term reviewers. Therefore, in this embodiment, the individual review results of the term reviewers only represent the term reviewer's own review result for that term. The individual review results and the final review result can be different or the same. Therefore, the terminal can evaluate the review quality of the term reviewers by using the individual review results of the term reviewers and the final review result of the reviewed term.

[0090] In some embodiments, since the term review results include, but are not limited to, term scores, approval results, and rejection results, the review quality of the term reviewers can be determined based on term scores, or approval results and rejection results.

[0091] Specifically, the aforementioned individual review results include the individual rating of the entry, the aforementioned final review results include the final rating of the entry, the aforementioned review quality includes the review quality score, and the aforementioned determination of the review quality of the entry reviewer based on the individual review results of at least one entry being reviewed and the final review results of at least one entry being reviewed may include: calculating the difference between the individual rating of the entry being reviewed and the final rating of the entry being reviewed; and determining the review quality score of the entry reviewer based on the difference of at least one entry being reviewed.

[0092] The aforementioned determination of the review quality score for a term reviewed by a reviewer based on the difference between at least one reviewed term can include: the terminal can preset a mapping relationship between the difference between the term's individual rating and its final rating, and the corresponding review quality score, thereby obtaining a mapping relationship table. Based on this mapping relationship table, when determining the difference between at least one reviewed term, the review quality score for the term reviewed by the reviewer is determined. Specifically, the larger the difference, the smaller the review quality score in the corresponding mapping relationship table.

[0093] The determination of the review quality score for a term reviewed by a reviewer based on the difference between at least one reviewed term may include: the terminal may preset a processing coefficient, which is less than 1; when the difference between at least one reviewed term is determined, the product between the difference and the processing coefficient is calculated, and the product is determined as the review quality score for the term reviewed by the reviewer. The larger the difference, the smaller the product, meaning a lower review quality score.

[0094] Specifically, the aforementioned individual review results include approved and unapproved results; the aforementioned final review results include approved and unapproved results; the aforementioned review quality includes the term pass rate; and the aforementioned determination of the term review quality based on the individual review results of at least one term being reviewed and the final review results of at least one term being reviewed may include: comparing the individual review results and the final review results of at least one term being reviewed to determine the number of approved terms, wherein the approved terms are those whose individual review results and the final review results are consistent; determining the number of terms reviewed by the term reviewer based on the individual review results of at least one term being reviewed; and calculating the ratio between the number of approved terms and the number of terms reviewed to obtain the term pass rate corresponding to the term reviewer.

[0095] 206. Based on the review quality and participation rate of the aforementioned term reviewers, determine the review qualifications of the aforementioned term reviewers, and cancel the review rights of term reviewers whose review qualifications do not meet the preset qualification conditions.

[0096] In this embodiment, the terminal calculates the review qualifications of the reviewers based on their review quality and participation rate. Based on these qualifications, the terminal excludes unqualified reviewers, thereby achieving a "renewal" of reviewers and positively maintaining their development to ensure high review efficiency.

[0097] Understandably, by regularly evaluating the aforementioned term reviewers to exclude those who do not meet the required qualifications, corresponding maintenance costs can also be saved.

[0098] In some embodiments, the aforementioned review qualifications include a qualification assessment score. The determination of the review qualifications of the aforementioned term reviewers based on the aforementioned review quality and the aforementioned participation rate includes: assigning corresponding weights to the aforementioned review quality and the aforementioned participation rate of the aforementioned term reviewers; calculating the sum of the review quality and the participation rate after assigning weights to obtain the qualification assessment score of the aforementioned term reviewers.

[0099] Accordingly, canceling the review rights of the aforementioned reviewers whose qualifications do not meet the preset qualification conditions includes: canceling the review rights of the reviewers with the lowest preset number of such reviewers based on their qualification assessment scores.

[0100] The weights corresponding to the above-mentioned review quality and participation rate can be set according to needs and are not limited here. For example, the weight corresponding to the above-mentioned review quality can be set to 0.6 and the weight corresponding to the above-mentioned participation rate can be set to 0.4.

[0101] Specifically, the aforementioned review quality includes a review quality score and an entry pass rate. Weights can be assigned to the review quality score and entry pass rate separately, and then combined with the participation rate to calculate the qualification assessment score. For example, the weight corresponding to the review quality score can be set to 0.4, the weight corresponding to the entry pass rate can be set to 0.4, and the weight corresponding to the participation rate can be set to 0.2.

[0102] In some embodiments, the review quality or participation rate can be compared with corresponding judgment thresholds to revoke the reviewer's review rights when the review quality or participation rate meets the corresponding judgment threshold. For example, the reviewer's review rights are revoked when the participation rate is below 0.5; or the reviewer's review rights are revoked when the pass rate is below 40%.

[0103] In some embodiments, if the review rights of a target term reviewer whose qualifications do not meet the preset qualification conditions are cancelled, the target term reviewer becomes a target user, and the target user cannot become a term reviewer again within a preset time period.

[0104] As can be seen from the above, the process involves acquiring the interaction data of multiple users on at least one term on a pre-defined knowledge-sharing platform. Based on these interactions, term reviewers are selected from among the users on the knowledge-sharing platform. This approach, from the perspective of selecting term reviewers, utilizes user interactions on the platform to choose suitable term reviewers, thereby improving the reliability of term reviewers' reviews. Furthermore, the process also acquires the number of terms reviewed on the knowledge-sharing platform, the individual review results of at least one term reviewed by the aforementioned term reviewers, and the final review result of at least one term reviewed. Then, based on the number of terms reviewed and the individual review results of at least one term reviewed, the participation rate of the term reviewers in reviewing terms is determined; furthermore, based on the individual review results of at least one term reviewed and the final review result of at least one term reviewed, the review quality of the term reviewers is determined. Finally, from the perspective of evaluating the term reviewers, based on the review quality and participation rate of the aforementioned term reviewers, the review qualifications of the term reviewers are determined. In order to identify term reviewers whose review qualifications do not meet the standards and take appropriate action, that is, to cancel the review rights of term reviewers whose review qualifications do not meet the preset qualification conditions. In this way, term reviewers who review term content are managed from the two perspectives of personnel selection and personnel evaluation, so as to improve the reliability of term content review.

[0105] To better implement the above methods, this application also provides a management device for auditors. This management device can be integrated into an electronic device, such as a computer device, which can be a terminal, server, or other similar device.

[0106] The terminal can be a mobile phone, tablet computer, smart Bluetooth device, laptop computer, personal computer, etc.; the server can be a single server or a server cluster composed of multiple servers.

[0107] For example, in this embodiment, the method of this application embodiment will be described in detail by taking the management device for auditors specifically integrated into the terminal as an example. This embodiment provides a management device for auditors, such as... Figure 3 As shown, the management device for the auditor may include:

[0108] The operation acquisition module 301 is used to acquire the word interaction operations of multiple users on at least one word on a preset knowledge sharing platform;

[0109] The selection module 302 is used to select the term reviewers on the knowledge-sharing platform from the multiple users based on the term interaction operations of the multiple users mentioned above.

[0110] The information acquisition module 303 is used to acquire the number of entries reviewed on the aforementioned knowledge sharing platform, the individual review results of at least one entry reviewed by the aforementioned entry reviewers, and the final review results of at least one entry reviewed.

[0111] The participation rate determination module 304 is used to determine the participation rate of the reviewers of the above-mentioned terms based on the number of terms reviewed and the individual review results of at least one term reviewed.

[0112] The quality determination module 305 is used to determine the review quality of the terms reviewed by the reviewers based on the individual review results of at least one term being reviewed and the final review results of at least one term being reviewed.

[0113] The qualification determination module 306 is used to determine the review qualifications of the aforementioned term reviewers based on their review quality and participation rate, and to cancel the review rights of term reviewers whose review qualifications do not meet the preset qualification conditions.

[0114] In some embodiments, the aforementioned individual review result includes an individual rating for the entry, the aforementioned final review result includes a final rating for the entry, the aforementioned review quality includes a review quality score, and the aforementioned quality determination module 305 is specifically used for:

[0115] Calculate the difference between the individual score of at least one reviewed term and the final score of the term;

[0116] The review quality score of the above-mentioned term reviewers is determined based on the difference between at least one term reviewed.

[0117] In some embodiments, the aforementioned individual review results include approved and rejected results, the aforementioned final review results include approved and rejected results, the aforementioned review quality includes the entry pass rate, and the aforementioned quality determination module 305 is specifically used for:

[0118] The individual review results and the final review results of at least one term to be reviewed are compared to determine the number of terms that have passed the review. The terms that have passed the review are those whose individual review results and the final review results are consistent.

[0119] Based on the individual review results of at least one term being reviewed, determine the number of terms reviewed by the aforementioned term reviewers;

[0120] Calculate the ratio between the number of approved entries and the number of approved entries to obtain the entry approval rate for the aforementioned entry reviewers.

[0121] In some embodiments, the aforementioned qualification review includes qualification assessment scores, and the qualification determination module 306 is specifically used for:

[0122] Assign corresponding weights to the reviewers of the above-mentioned terms for the review quality and participation rate;

[0123] The sum of the review quality after assigning weights and the participation rate after assigning weights is used to obtain the qualification assessment score of the reviewers of the above entries;

[0124] Based on the qualification assessment scores of the aforementioned term reviewers, the review rights of term reviewers with the lowest preset number of qualification assessment scores will be revoked.

[0125] In some embodiments, the selection module 302 is specifically used for:

[0126] Based on the above-mentioned term interaction operations of each of the above-mentioned users, determine the interaction result information corresponding to each term interaction operation of each of the above-mentioned users;

[0127] Based on the interaction result information corresponding to each term interaction operation of each of the above users, determine the target contribution value of each of the above users to the term on the above knowledge sharing platform;

[0128] Based on the interaction result information corresponding to each term interaction operation of each of the above users, and the target contribution value corresponding to each of the above users, the activity level of each of the above users when performing term interaction operations on the above knowledge sharing platform is determined.

[0129] Users whose activity level is greater than the preset threshold are selected from among the aforementioned users to serve as reviewers for the aforementioned entries.

[0130] In some embodiments, the above-mentioned term interaction operations include term upload operations and term editing operations, and the above-mentioned interaction result information includes the number of operations, the number of times the operation was approved, and the number of times the operated term was scored. The above-mentioned selection module 302 is also specifically used for:

[0131] Assign corresponding operation contribution values ​​to the number of operations corresponding to the above-mentioned term upload operations and the above-mentioned term editing operations of the above-mentioned users, and determine the first contribution value corresponding to the above-mentioned users based on the number of operations of the above-mentioned term upload operations and the above-mentioned term editing operations that have been assigned the above-mentioned operation contribution values;

[0132] Assign corresponding approval contribution values ​​to the number of times the above-mentioned term upload and term editing operations of the above-mentioned users are approved. Based on the number of times the above-mentioned term upload and term editing operations are approved with the above-mentioned approval contribution values, determine the second contribution value corresponding to the above-mentioned users.

[0133] Assign a corresponding scoring contribution value to the number of times the edited terms are scored for the aforementioned user’s term upload and term editing operations. Based on the number of times the edited terms are scored for the aforementioned term upload and term editing operations, the third contribution value corresponding to the aforementioned user is determined.

[0134] The sum of the first contribution value, the second contribution value, and the third contribution value is determined as the target contribution value.

[0135] In some embodiments, the above-mentioned term interaction operation further includes a term scoring operation, and the selection module 302 is further specifically used for:

[0136] Assign a corresponding operation contribution value to the number of operations corresponding to the above-mentioned term rating operations of the above-mentioned users, and determine the fourth contribution value corresponding to the above-mentioned users based on the number of operations of the above-mentioned term rating operations that have been assigned the above-mentioned operation contribution value.

[0137] The sum of the first contribution value, the second contribution value, the third contribution value, and the fourth contribution value is determined as the target contribution value.

[0138] As can be seen from the above, the reviewer management device in this embodiment acquires the interaction operations of multiple users on at least one term on a preset knowledge-sharing platform through the operation acquisition module 301. The selection module 302 then selects term reviewers from among the multiple users based on these interaction operations. This improves the reliability of term reviewers by selecting suitable reviewers based on user operations on the platform. Furthermore, the information acquisition module 303 acquires the number of terms reviewed on the knowledge-sharing platform, the individual review results of at least one term reviewed by the reviewers, and the final review results of the reviewed term. Then, the participation rate determination module 304 determines the participation rate of the reviewers based on the number of terms reviewed and the individual review results of the reviewed term; and the quality determination module 305 determines the review quality of the reviewed terms based on the individual review results of the reviewed term and the final review results of the reviewed term. Finally, from the perspective of evaluating the term reviewers, the qualification determination module 306 determines the review qualifications of the term reviewers based on their review quality and participation rate. This allows for the identification of term reviewers who do not meet the qualification standards and their corresponding actions, namely, canceling the review rights of term reviewers whose qualifications do not meet the preset qualification conditions. Thus, term reviewers who review term content are managed from the perspectives of personnel selection and personnel evaluation, thereby improving the reliability of term content review.

[0139] Accordingly, this application also provides an electronic device, which can be a terminal, such as a smartphone, tablet computer, laptop computer, touch screen, game console, personal computer (PC), personal digital assistant (PDA), or other terminal device. Figure 4 As shown, Figure 4 This is a schematic diagram of the structure of an electronic device provided in an embodiment of this application. The electronic device 400 includes a processor 401 with one or more processing cores, a memory 402 with one or more computer-readable storage media, and a computer program stored in the memory 402 and executable on the processor. The processor 401 and the memory 402 are electrically connected. Those skilled in the art will understand that the electronic device structure shown in the figure does not constitute a limitation on the electronic device, and may include more or fewer components than shown, or combine certain components, or have different component arrangements.

[0140] The processor 401 is the control center of the electronic device 400. It connects various parts of the electronic device 400 through various interfaces and lines. By running or loading software programs and / or modules stored in the memory 402, and calling data stored in the memory 402, it performs various functions of the electronic device 400 and processes data, thereby monitoring the electronic device 400 as a whole.

[0141] In this embodiment, the processor 401 in the electronic device 400 loads the instructions corresponding to the processes of one or more applications into the memory 402 according to the following steps, and the processor 401 runs the applications stored in the memory 402 to realize various functions:

[0142] Acquire the interaction operations of multiple users on at least one term on a preset knowledge-sharing platform;

[0143] Based on the above-mentioned interaction operations of multiple users, the entry reviewers on the above-mentioned knowledge sharing platform were selected from the multiple users mentioned above.

[0144] Obtain the number of entries reviewed on the aforementioned knowledge-sharing platform, the individual review results of at least one entry reviewed by the aforementioned entry reviewers, and the final review results of at least one reviewed entry;

[0145] Based on the number of entries reviewed and the individual review results of at least one entry reviewed, the participation rate of the reviewers in reviewing the entries is determined.

[0146] Based on the individual review results of at least one term being reviewed, and the final review results of at least one term being reviewed, the review quality of the term reviewers is determined.

[0147] Based on the review quality and participation rate of the aforementioned reviewers, the review qualifications of the aforementioned reviewers are determined, and the review rights of reviewers whose qualifications do not meet the preset qualification conditions are revoked.

[0148] In some embodiments, the aforementioned individual review results include an individual rating of the entry, the aforementioned final review results include a final rating of the entry, the aforementioned review quality includes a review quality score, and the aforementioned determination of the review quality of the entry reviewers based on the individual review results of at least one entry reviewed and the final review results of at least one entry reviewed includes:

[0149] Calculate the difference between the individual score of at least one reviewed term and the final score of the term;

[0150] The review quality score of the above-mentioned term reviewers is determined based on the difference between at least one term reviewed.

[0151] In some embodiments, the aforementioned individual review results include approval and rejection results, the aforementioned final review results include approval and rejection results, the aforementioned review quality includes the term approval rate, and the aforementioned determination of the term review quality by the term reviewers based on the individual review results of at least one term being reviewed and the final review results of at least one term being reviewed includes:

[0152] The individual review results and the final review results of at least one term to be reviewed are compared to determine the number of terms that have passed the review. The terms that have passed the review are those whose individual review results and the final review results are consistent.

[0153] Based on the individual review results of at least one term being reviewed, determine the number of terms reviewed by the aforementioned term reviewers;

[0154] Calculate the ratio between the number of approved entries and the number of approved entries to obtain the entry approval rate for the aforementioned entry reviewers.

[0155] In some embodiments, the aforementioned review qualifications include qualification assessment scores. The determination of the review qualifications of the aforementioned term reviewers, based on their review quality and participation rate, includes:

[0156] Assign corresponding weights to the reviewers of the above-mentioned terms for the review quality and participation rate;

[0157] The sum of the review quality after assigning weights and the participation rate after assigning weights is used to obtain the qualification assessment score of the reviewers of the above entries;

[0158] The aforementioned cancellation of the review rights of reviewers whose qualifications do not meet the preset qualification conditions includes:

[0159] Based on the qualification assessment scores of the aforementioned term reviewers, the review rights of term reviewers with the lowest preset number of qualification assessment scores will be revoked.

[0160] In some embodiments, the selection of term reviewers from among the multiple users based on their term interaction operations includes:

[0161] Based on the above-mentioned term interaction operations of each of the above-mentioned users, determine the interaction result information corresponding to each term interaction operation of each of the above-mentioned users;

[0162] Based on the interaction result information corresponding to each term interaction operation of each of the above users, determine the target contribution value of each of the above users to the term on the above knowledge sharing platform;

[0163] Based on the interaction result information corresponding to each term interaction operation of each of the above users, and the target contribution value corresponding to each of the above users, the activity level of each of the above users when performing term interaction operations on the above knowledge sharing platform is determined.

[0164] Users whose activity level is greater than the preset threshold are selected from among the aforementioned users to serve as reviewers for the aforementioned entries.

[0165] In some embodiments, the aforementioned term interaction operations include term upload operations and term editing operations. The aforementioned interaction result information includes the number of operations, the number of times the operation was approved, and the number of times the edited term was scored. Based on the interaction result information corresponding to each term interaction operation of each user, the target contribution value of each user to the term on the aforementioned knowledge-sharing platform is determined, including:

[0166] Assign corresponding operation contribution values ​​to the number of operations corresponding to the above-mentioned term upload operations and the above-mentioned term editing operations of the above-mentioned users, and determine the first contribution value corresponding to the above-mentioned users based on the number of operations of the above-mentioned term upload operations and the above-mentioned term editing operations that have been assigned the above-mentioned operation contribution values;

[0167] Assign corresponding approval contribution values ​​to the number of times the above-mentioned term upload and term editing operations of the above-mentioned users are approved. Based on the number of times the above-mentioned term upload and term editing operations are approved with the above-mentioned approval contribution values, determine the second contribution value corresponding to the above-mentioned users.

[0168] Assign a corresponding scoring contribution value to the number of times the edited terms are scored for the aforementioned user’s term upload and term editing operations. Based on the number of times the edited terms are scored for the aforementioned term upload and term editing operations, the third contribution value corresponding to the aforementioned user is determined.

[0169] The sum of the first contribution value, the second contribution value, and the third contribution value is determined as the target contribution value.

[0170] In some embodiments, the above-mentioned term interaction operation further includes a term scoring operation, wherein the target contribution value of each user to the term on the knowledge-sharing platform is determined based on the interaction result information corresponding to each term interaction operation of each user, including:

[0171] Assign a corresponding operation contribution value to the number of operations corresponding to the above-mentioned term rating operations of the above-mentioned users, and determine the fourth contribution value corresponding to the above-mentioned users based on the number of operations of the above-mentioned term rating operations that have been assigned the above-mentioned operation contribution value.

[0172] The sum of the first contribution value, the second contribution value, the third contribution value, and the fourth contribution value is determined as the target contribution value.

[0173] Therefore, the electronic device 400 provided in this embodiment can bring the following technical effects: improve the reliability of the review of entry content.

[0174] For details on the implementation of each of the above operations, please refer to the previous examples, which will not be repeated here.

[0175] Optional, such as Figure 4 As shown, the electronic device 400 also includes: a touch display screen 403, a radio frequency circuit 404, an audio circuit 405, an input unit 406, and a power supply 407. The processor 401 is electrically connected to the touch display screen 403, the radio frequency circuit 404, the audio circuit 405, the input unit 406, and the power supply 407. Those skilled in the art will understand that... Figure 4 The electronic device structure shown does not constitute a limitation on the electronic device and may include more or fewer components than shown, or combine certain components, or have different component arrangements.

[0176] The touch display screen 403 can be used to display a graphical user interface (GUI) and receive operation commands generated by the user interacting with the GUI. The touch display screen 403 may include a display panel and a touch panel. The display panel can be used to display information input by the user or information provided to the user, as well as various graphical user interfaces of the electronic device. These graphical user interfaces can be composed of graphics, text, icons, video, and any combination thereof. Optionally, the display panel can be configured using a liquid crystal display (LCD), organic light-emitting diode (OLED), or other similar technologies. The touch panel can be used to collect touch operations performed by the user on or near it (such as operations performed by the user using a finger, stylus, or any suitable object or accessory on or near the touch panel), generate corresponding operation commands, and execute the corresponding program according to the operation commands. Optionally, the touch panel may include two parts: a touch detection device and a touch controller. The touch detection device detects the user's touch location and the signal generated by the touch operation, transmitting the signal to the touch controller. The touch controller receives touch information from the touch detection device, converts it into touch point coordinates, and sends it to the processor 401. It can also receive and execute commands from the processor 401. The touch panel can cover the display panel. When the touch panel detects a touch operation on or near it, it transmits the information to the processor 401 to determine the type of touch event. Subsequently, the processor 401 provides corresponding visual output on the display panel based on the type of touch event. In this embodiment, the touch panel and the display panel can be integrated into the touch display screen 403 to achieve input and output functions. However, in some embodiments, the touch panel and the touch display screen 403 can be implemented as two independent components to achieve input and output functions. That is, the touch display screen 403 can also be used as part of the input unit 406 to achieve input functions.

[0177] The radio frequency circuit 404 can be used to transmit and receive radio frequency signals to establish wireless communication with network devices or other electronic devices, and to transmit and receive signals with network devices or other electronic devices.

[0178] Audio circuit 405 can be used to provide an audio interface between a user and an electronic device via a speaker and a microphone. Audio circuit 405 can convert received audio data into electrical signals and transmit them to the speaker, where the speaker converts them into sound signals for output. Conversely, the microphone converts collected sound signals into electrical signals, which are then received by audio circuit 405, converted back into audio data, and then processed by processor 401 before being transmitted via radio frequency circuit 404 to, for example, another electronic device, or output to memory 402 for further processing. Audio circuit 405 may also include an earphone jack to provide communication between peripheral headphones and electronic devices.

[0179] The input unit 406 can be used to receive input numbers, characters, or user characteristic information (such as fingerprints, iris, facial information, etc.), and to generate keyboard, mouse, joystick, optical, or trackball signal inputs related to user settings and function control.

[0180] Power supply 407 is used to supply power to various components of electronic device 400. Optionally, power supply 407 can be logically connected to processor 401 through a power management system, thereby enabling functions such as charging, discharging, and power consumption management through the power management system. Power supply 407 may also include one or more DC or AC power supplies, recharging systems, power fault detection circuits, power converters or inverters, power status indicators, and other arbitrary components.

[0181] although Figure 4 As not shown in the diagram, the electronic device 400 may also include a camera, sensor, wireless fidelity module, Bluetooth module, etc., which will not be described in detail here.

[0182] In the above embodiments, the descriptions of each embodiment have different focuses. For parts not described in detail in a certain embodiment, please refer to the relevant descriptions in other embodiments.

[0183] Those skilled in the art will understand that all or part of the steps in the various methods of the above embodiments can be performed by instructions, or by instructions controlling related hardware. These instructions can be stored in a computer-readable storage medium and loaded and executed by a processor.

[0184] Therefore, embodiments of this application provide a computer-readable storage medium storing a plurality of computer programs that can be loaded by a processor to execute steps in any of the reviewer management methods provided in embodiments of this application. For example, the computer program can execute the following steps:

[0185] Acquire the interaction operations of multiple users on at least one term on a preset knowledge-sharing platform;

[0186] Based on the above-mentioned interaction operations of multiple users, the entry reviewers on the above-mentioned knowledge sharing platform were selected from the multiple users mentioned above.

[0187] Obtain the number of entries reviewed on the aforementioned knowledge-sharing platform, the individual review results of at least one entry reviewed by the aforementioned entry reviewers, and the final review results of at least one reviewed entry;

[0188] Based on the number of entries reviewed and the individual review results of at least one entry reviewed, the participation rate of the reviewers in reviewing the entries is determined.

[0189] Based on the individual review results of at least one term being reviewed, and the final review results of at least one term being reviewed, the review quality of the term reviewers is determined.

[0190] Based on the review quality and participation rate of the aforementioned reviewers, the review qualifications of the aforementioned reviewers are determined, and the review rights of reviewers whose qualifications do not meet the preset qualification conditions are revoked.

[0191] In some embodiments, the aforementioned individual review results include an individual rating of the entry, the aforementioned final review results include a final rating of the entry, the aforementioned review quality includes a review quality score, and the aforementioned determination of the review quality of the entry reviewers based on the individual review results of at least one entry reviewed and the final review results of at least one entry reviewed includes:

[0192] Calculate the difference between the individual score of at least one reviewed term and the final score of the term;

[0193] The review quality score of the above-mentioned term reviewers is determined based on the difference between at least one term reviewed.

[0194] In some embodiments, the aforementioned individual review results include approval and rejection results, the aforementioned final review results include approval and rejection results, the aforementioned review quality includes the term approval rate, and the aforementioned determination of the term review quality by the term reviewers based on the individual review results of at least one term being reviewed and the final review results of at least one term being reviewed includes:

[0195] The individual review results and the final review results of at least one term to be reviewed are compared to determine the number of terms that have passed the review. The terms that have passed the review are those whose individual review results and the final review results are consistent.

[0196] Based on the individual review results of at least one term being reviewed, determine the number of terms reviewed by the aforementioned term reviewers;

[0197] Calculate the ratio between the number of approved entries and the number of approved entries to obtain the entry approval rate for the aforementioned entry reviewers.

[0198] In some embodiments, the aforementioned review qualifications include qualification assessment scores. The determination of the review qualifications of the aforementioned term reviewers, based on their review quality and participation rate, includes:

[0199] Assign corresponding weights to the reviewers of the above-mentioned terms for the review quality and participation rate;

[0200] The sum of the review quality after assigning weights and the participation rate after assigning weights is used to obtain the qualification assessment score of the reviewers of the above entries;

[0201] The aforementioned cancellation of the review rights of reviewers whose qualifications do not meet the preset qualification conditions includes:

[0202] Based on the qualification assessment scores of the aforementioned term reviewers, the review rights of term reviewers with the lowest preset number of qualification assessment scores will be revoked.

[0203] In some embodiments, the selection of term reviewers from among the multiple users based on their term interaction operations includes:

[0204] Based on the above-mentioned term interaction operations of each of the above-mentioned users, determine the interaction result information corresponding to each term interaction operation of each of the above-mentioned users;

[0205] Based on the interaction result information corresponding to each term interaction operation of each of the above users, determine the target contribution value of each of the above users to the term on the above knowledge sharing platform;

[0206] Based on the interaction result information corresponding to each term interaction operation of each of the above users, and the target contribution value corresponding to each of the above users, the activity level of each of the above users when performing term interaction operations on the above knowledge sharing platform is determined.

[0207] Users whose activity level is greater than the preset threshold are selected from among the aforementioned users to serve as reviewers for the aforementioned entries.

[0208] In some embodiments, the aforementioned term interaction operations include term upload operations and term editing operations. The aforementioned interaction result information includes the number of operations, the number of times the operation was approved, and the number of times the edited term was scored. Based on the interaction result information corresponding to each term interaction operation of each user, the target contribution value of each user to the term on the aforementioned knowledge-sharing platform is determined, including:

[0209] Assign corresponding operation contribution values ​​to the number of operations corresponding to the above-mentioned term upload operations and the above-mentioned term editing operations of the above-mentioned users, and determine the first contribution value corresponding to the above-mentioned users based on the number of operations of the above-mentioned term upload operations and the above-mentioned term editing operations that have been assigned the above-mentioned operation contribution values;

[0210] Assign corresponding approval contribution values ​​to the number of times the above-mentioned term upload and term editing operations of the above-mentioned users are approved. Based on the number of times the above-mentioned term upload and term editing operations are approved with the above-mentioned approval contribution values, determine the second contribution value corresponding to the above-mentioned users.

[0211] Assign a corresponding scoring contribution value to the number of times the edited terms are scored for the aforementioned user’s term upload and term editing operations. Based on the number of times the edited terms are scored for the aforementioned term upload and term editing operations, the third contribution value corresponding to the aforementioned user is determined.

[0212] The sum of the first contribution value, the second contribution value, and the third contribution value is determined as the target contribution value.

[0213] In some embodiments, the above-mentioned term interaction operation further includes a term scoring operation, wherein the target contribution value of each user to the term on the knowledge-sharing platform is determined based on the interaction result information corresponding to each term interaction operation of each user, including:

[0214] Assign a corresponding operation contribution value to the number of operations corresponding to the above-mentioned term rating operations of the above-mentioned users, and determine the fourth contribution value corresponding to the above-mentioned users based on the number of operations of the above-mentioned term rating operations that have been assigned the above-mentioned operation contribution value.

[0215] The sum of the first contribution value, the second contribution value, the third contribution value, and the fourth contribution value is determined as the target contribution value.

[0216] As can be seen, the computer program can be loaded by the processor to execute the steps in any of the reviewer management methods provided in the embodiments of this application, thereby bringing about the following technical effects: improving the reliability of reviewing entry content.

[0217] For details on the implementation of each of the above operations, please refer to the previous examples, which will not be repeated here.

[0218] The computer-readable storage medium may include: read-only memory (ROM), random access memory (RAM), disk or optical disk, etc.

[0219] Since the computer program stored in the computer-readable storage medium can execute the steps in any of the auditer management methods provided in the embodiments of this application, the beneficial effects that any of the auditer management methods provided in the embodiments of this application can achieve can be realized, as detailed in the preceding embodiments, and will not be repeated here.

[0220] The foregoing has provided a detailed description of a method, apparatus, electronic device, and computer-readable storage medium for managing auditors, as provided in the embodiments of this application. Specific examples have been used to illustrate the principles and implementation methods of this application. The descriptions of the embodiments above are only for the purpose of helping to understand the method and core ideas of this application. At the same time, for those skilled in the art, there will be changes in the specific implementation methods and application scope based on the ideas of this application. Therefore, the content of this specification should not be construed as a limitation of this application.

Claims

1. An audit staff management method characterized by, The method comprises: acquiring a plurality of user word entry interaction operations on at least one word entry on a preset knowledge sharing platform; selecting word entry auditors on the knowledge sharing platform from the plurality of users based on the word entry interaction operations of the plurality of users; acquiring a word entry audit quantity on the knowledge sharing platform, a personal audit result of at least one word entry audited by the word entry auditors, and a final audit result of the at least one word entry being audited; determining a participation rate of the word entry auditors in auditing word entries based on the word entry audit quantity and the personal audit result of the at least one word entry being audited; determining an audit quality of the word entry auditors in auditing word entries based on the personal audit result of the at least one word entry being audited and the final audit result of the at least one word entry being audited, wherein the audit quality comprises an audit quality score determined based on a difference between a word entry personal score and a word entry final score in a case where the personal audit result comprises the word entry personal score and the final audit result comprises the word entry final score, or the audit quality comprises a word entry pass rate determined based on a comparison result between the personal audit result and the final audit result in a case where the personal audit result comprises an audit pass result and an audit fail result and the final audit result comprises an audit pass result and an audit fail result; determining an audit qualification of the word entry auditors based on the audit quality and the participation rate corresponding to the word entry auditors, and canceling an audit right of a word entry auditor whose audit qualification does not meet a preset qualification condition.

2. The management method of auditors according to claim 1, wherein The determining of the audit quality of the word entry auditors in auditing word entries based on the personal audit result of the at least one word entry being audited and the final audit result of the at least one word entry being audited comprises: calculating a difference between a word entry personal score and a word entry final score of the at least one word entry being audited; determining an audit quality score of the word entry auditors in auditing word entries based on the difference of the at least one word entry being audited.

3. The management method of auditors according to claim 1, wherein The determining of the audit quality of the word entry auditors in auditing word entries based on the personal audit result of the at least one word entry being audited and the final audit result of the at least one word entry being audited comprises: comparing the personal audit result and the final audit result of the at least one word entry being audited to determine an audit pass quantity corresponding to an audit pass word entry, wherein the audit pass word entry is a word entry whose personal audit result and final audit result are consistent; determining an audit quantity of the word entry auditors in auditing word entries based on the personal audit result of the at least one word entry being audited; calculating a ratio between the audit pass quantity and the audit quantity to obtain a word entry pass rate corresponding to the word entry auditors.

4. The management method of auditors according to claim 1, wherein The audit qualification comprises a qualification examination score, and the determining of the audit qualification of the word entry auditors based on the audit quality and the participation rate corresponding to the word entry auditors comprises: assigning corresponding weights to the audit quality and the participation rate corresponding to the word entry auditors, respectively. The sum of the reviewed quality after the value assignment and the participation rate after the value assignment is calculated to obtain a qualification examination score of the term review personnel; The method further includes: Based on the qualification examination score of the term review personnel, the review right of a preset number of term review personnel with the smallest qualification examination score is cancelled.

5. The management method of auditors according to any one of claims 1 to 4, characterized in that, The method further includes: Based on the term interaction operation of each user, interaction result information corresponding to each term interaction operation of each user is determined; Based on the interaction result information corresponding to each term interaction operation of each user, a target contribution value of each user on the term on the knowledge sharing platform is determined; Based on the interaction result information corresponding to each term interaction operation of each user and the target contribution value corresponding to each user, an activity level of each user when performing the term interaction operation on the knowledge sharing platform is determined; Users with an activity level greater than a preset threshold are selected from the users as the term review personnel.

6. The management method of auditors according to claim 5, wherein The term interaction operation includes a term uploading operation and a term editing operation, the interaction result information includes an operation number, an operation review passing number, and a scoring number of an operated term, and the target contribution value of each user on the term on the knowledge sharing platform is determined based on the interaction result information corresponding to each term interaction operation of each user, including: An operation number corresponding to the term uploading operation and the term editing operation of the user is respectively assigned a corresponding operation contribution value, and a first contribution value corresponding to the user is determined based on the operation number of the term uploading operation and the term editing operation to which the operation contribution value is assigned; An operation review passing number corresponding to the term uploading operation and the term editing operation of the user is respectively assigned a corresponding review passing contribution value, and a second contribution value corresponding to the user is determined based on the operation review passing number of the term uploading operation and the term editing operation to which the review passing contribution value is assigned; A scoring number of an operated term corresponding to the term uploading operation and the term editing operation of the user is respectively assigned a corresponding scoring contribution value, and a third contribution value corresponding to the user is determined based on the scoring number of the operated term of the term uploading operation and the term editing operation to which the scoring contribution value is assigned; The sum of the first contribution value, the second contribution value, and the third contribution value is determined as the target contribution value.

7. The management method of auditors according to claim 6, wherein The term interaction operation further includes a term scoring operation, and the target contribution value of each user on the term on the knowledge sharing platform is determined based on the interaction result information corresponding to each term interaction operation of each user, including: The operation contribution value is assigned to the operation number of the word scoring operation corresponding to the user, and a fourth contribution value corresponding to the user is determined based on the operation number of the word scoring operation to which the operation contribution value is assigned; The sum of the first contribution value, the second contribution value, the third contribution value and the fourth contribution value is determined as the target contribution value.

8. An auditing staff management apparatus characterized by comprising: The device comprises: An operation obtaining module is configured to obtain word interaction operations of a plurality of users on at least one word on a preset knowledge sharing platform; An selecting module is configured to select word auditing personnel on the knowledge sharing platform from the plurality of users based on the word interaction operations of the plurality of users; An information obtaining module is configured to obtain a word auditing quantity on the knowledge sharing platform, a personal auditing result of at least one word audited by the word auditing personnel, and a final auditing result of the at least one word being audited; A participation rate determining module is configured to determine a participation rate of the word auditing personnel in auditing words based on the word auditing quantity and the personal auditing result of the at least one word being audited, wherein the auditing quality comprises an auditing quality score determined based on a difference between the word personal score and the word final score, or the auditing quality comprises a word passing rate determined based on a comparison result between the personal auditing result and the final auditing result, in a case where the personal auditing result comprises a word personal score and the final auditing result comprises a word final score, or in a case where the personal auditing result comprises an auditing pass result and an auditing fail result and the final auditing result comprises an auditing pass result and an auditing fail result; A quality determining module is configured to determine an auditing quality of the word auditing personnel in auditing words based on the personal auditing result of the at least one word being audited and the final auditing result of the at least one word being audited; A qualification determining module is configured to determine an auditing qualification of the word auditing personnel based on the auditing quality and the participation rate corresponding to the word auditing personnel, and cancel the auditing right of the word auditing personnel whose auditing qualification does not meet a preset qualification condition.

9. An electronic device, comprising: The device comprises a processor and a memory, and the memory stores a plurality of instructions; the processor loads the instructions from the memory to perform the steps in the management method of the auditing personnel according to any one of claims 1 to 7.

10. A computer-readable storage medium, characterized in that, The computer readable storage medium stores a plurality of instructions, and the instructions are suitable for being loaded by a processor to perform the steps in the management method of the auditing personnel according to any one of claims 1 to 7.

Images