Task information examination and evaluation method and device, equipment and medium

Abstract

The invention discloses a task information review evaluation method, device and equipment and a medium, and relates to the technical field of railway design review, and the method comprises the steps: obtaining initial railway design task information, annotating the initial railway design task information, obtaining an examination and approval opinion, associating the examination and approval opinion with the initial railway design task information, and obtaining an examination and approval result; the updated railway design task information is obtained, the updated railway design task information is scored through a preset review evaluation table, and review evaluation data is obtained. Through a systematized process, online annotation of design task information, generation of approval opinions, associated updating and evaluation table scoring are realized, review evaluation data are automatically collected, and the review efficiency is improved.

Description

Technical Field

[0001] The present invention relates to the technical field of railway design review, and in particular to a task information review and evaluation method, device, equipment and medium. Background Art

[0002] With the rapid development of the railway industry, the quality of railway design results directly affects the safety and reliability of railway projects. Design result review and evaluation is a key link to ensure design quality, which involves strict inspection of the compliance, accuracy and rationality of design drawings and documents. Traditional review and evaluation methods rely on manual operation, are inefficient, and are easily affected by subjective judgment.

[0003] Some existing systems may provide basic submission and review process management, but lack in-depth analysis and evaluation of the review process.

[0004] Although the existing technology has made some progress, it still has obvious shortcomings. The existing review and evaluation technology has not established a complete closed-loop management process of submission-review-evaluation-confirmation, resulting in the tracking and management of review opinions being not systematic enough, lacking the accumulation and analysis of review and evaluation data, and unable to form a systematic evaluation knowledge base, thus unable to effectively support the continuous improvement of design quality. In addition, due to reliance on manual operations, the review efficiency and accuracy are limited by personal ability and experience. Therefore, developing an efficient and standardized railway design results review and evaluation method is of great significance to improving the design level of the entire industry. Summary of the invention

[0005] The main purpose of this application is to provide a task information review and evaluation method, device, equipment and medium, aiming to solve the technical problem of how to improve the review efficiency of railway design results.

[0006] To achieve the above objectives, this application proposes a task information review and evaluation method, the method comprising:

[0007] Obtain initial railway design mission information;

[0008] Annotate the initial railway design task information and obtain approval opinions;

[0009] Associating the approval opinion with the initial railway design task information to obtain updated railway design task information;

[0010] The updated railway design task information is scored using the review and evaluation form to obtain review and evaluation data.

[0011] In one embodiment, the step of annotating the initial railway design task information to obtain approval opinions includes:

[0012] Graphically and textually annotate the initial railway design task information to obtain annotation content to identify specific areas or content in the initial railway design task information;

[0013] According to the content of the annotation, the approval opinion is obtained.

[0014] In one embodiment, the step of associating the approval opinion with the initial railway design task information to obtain updated railway design task information includes:

[0015] Associating the approval opinions with corresponding parts of the initial railway design task information to obtain associated information;

[0016] Based on the initial approval task information, the associated information is stored in the form of metadata according to the division attributes to obtain updated railway design task information, wherein the division attributes include submission time, review opinion content, question type and opinion location.

[0017] In one embodiment, before the step of scoring the updated railway design task information through a preset review and evaluation table to obtain review and evaluation data, the step includes:

[0018] Determining evaluation criteria for multiple evaluation dimensions, wherein the evaluation dimensions include compliance, accuracy, rationality, and innovation;

[0019] According to the evaluation criteria, specific inspection items are obtained;

[0020] assigning scores to a plurality of the specific inspection items based on the specific inspection items to obtain evaluation information;

[0021] A preset review evaluation table is established based on the evaluation information.

[0022] In one embodiment, the step of scoring the updated railway design task information using a preset review and evaluation table to obtain review and evaluation data includes:

[0023] Scoring the updated railway design task information using a preset review evaluation form to obtain scores for multiple evaluation items, wherein the preset review evaluation form includes multiple evaluation items;

[0024] The scores of the plurality of evaluation items are aggregated to obtain review evaluation data.

[0025] In one embodiment, after the step of scoring the updated railway design task information through a preset review and evaluation table to obtain review and evaluation data, the following steps are included:

[0026] Conducting quantitative and qualitative analysis on the review and evaluation data to obtain analysis results;

[0027] Extracting common evaluation words and viewpoints based on the analysis results to build an evaluation knowledge base;

[0028] Through the evaluation knowledge base, the evaluation conditions of tasks of multiple periods and types are obtained, so as to improve the efficiency of the review work.

[0029] In one embodiment, after the step of scoring the updated railway design task information through a preset review and evaluation table to obtain review and evaluation data, the step further includes:

[0030] When the review and evaluation data does not meet the preset requirements, a task return reminder is sent;

[0031] After completing the modification of the review opinions, obtain new railway design task information and re-evaluate until the preset requirements are met.

[0032] In addition, to achieve the above purpose, the present application also proposes a task information review and evaluation device, the task information review and evaluation device comprising:

[0033] An acquisition module is used to obtain initial railway design task information;

[0034] The acquisition module is also used to annotate the initial railway design task information to obtain approval opinions;

[0035] An association module, used to associate the approval opinion with the initial railway design task information to obtain updated railway design task information;

[0036] The result module is used to score the updated railway design task information through a preset review and evaluation table to obtain review and evaluation data.

[0037] In addition, to achieve the above-mentioned purpose, the present application also proposes a medium, which is a computer-readable medium, on which a computer program is stored, and when the computer program is executed by a processor, the steps of the task information review and evaluation method described above are implemented.

[0038] In addition, to achieve the above-mentioned purpose, the present application also provides a computer program product, which includes a computer program, and when the computer program is executed by a processor, it implements the steps of the task information review and evaluation method described above.

[0039] This application obtains the initial railway design task information, annotates the initial railway design task information, obtains the approval opinion, associates the approval opinion with the initial railway design task information, obtains the updated railway design task information, and scores the updated railway design task information through a preset review and evaluation form to obtain the review and evaluation data. Through a systematic process, online annotation of design task information, generation of approval opinions, associated updates, and scoring of evaluation forms are realized, and review and evaluation data are automatically collected, thereby improving review efficiency. BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS

[0040] In order to more clearly illustrate the embodiments of the present application or the technical solutions in the prior art, the drawings required for use in the embodiments or the description of the prior art will be briefly introduced below. Obviously, for ordinary technicians in this field, other drawings can be obtained based on these drawings without paying any creative labor.

[0041] Figure 1 This is a flowchart of the first embodiment of the task information review and evaluation method of this application;

[0042] Figure 2 This is a review flow chart of the first embodiment of the task information review and evaluation method for this application;

[0043] Figure 3 This is a flowchart of the second embodiment of the task information review and evaluation method of this application;

[0044] Figure 4 This is a schematic diagram of the module structure of the task information review and evaluation device of the embodiment of the present application;

[0045] Figure 5 A schematic diagram of the device structure of the hardware operating environment involved in the task information review and evaluation method in the embodiment of the present application;

[0046] The purpose, features and advantages of this application will be further described in conjunction with the embodiments and with reference to the accompanying drawings. DETAILED DESCRIPTION

[0047] It should be understood that the specific embodiments described herein are only used to explain the technical solutions of the present application and are not used to limit the present application.

[0048] In order to better understand the technical solution of the present application, a detailed description will be given below in conjunction with the accompanying drawings and specific implementation methods.

[0049] The main solution of the embodiment of the present application is: by obtaining initial railway design task information, annotating the initial railway design task information, obtaining approval opinions, associating the approval opinions with the initial railway design task information, obtaining updated railway design task information, and scoring the updated railway design task information through a preset review and evaluation form to obtain review and evaluation data.

[0050] Based on this, the present application embodiment provides a task information review and evaluation method, referring to Figure 1 , Figure 1 This is a flow chart of the first embodiment of the task information review and evaluation method of this application.

[0051] In this embodiment, the task information review and evaluation method includes steps S10 to S40:

[0052] Step S10, obtaining initial railway design task information.

[0053] It should be noted that obtaining initial railway design task information is the first step in the railway design results review and evaluation method, which involves collecting all relevant design documents and information from the design team or designers. This information usually includes but is not limited to design drawings, technical specifications, bills of quantities, construction plans, environmental impact assessment reports, and other documents related to railway design. These materials need to fully reflect all technical details and requirements of railway design to ensure the accuracy and completeness of the review process.

[0054] After obtaining this information, the system will digitize the design task information so that it can be effectively managed and used in the review and evaluation system. This may include scanning paper documents into electronic format, converting CAD drawings into editable digital files, and converting text files into a format that the system can recognize. Reviewers use a lightweight graphics engine to view files online and can review the files according to the review process in Table 1:

[0055] Table 1 Railway design results review process

[0056]

[0057]

[0058] According to Table 1, Figure 2 As shown in the review flow chart, if there are no comments, the file will be automatically submitted to the next review stage; if there are comments, the review comments need to be entered and the file will be returned to the designer for modification.

[0059] In addition, the process of obtaining the initial railway design task information also needs to ensure the completeness and accuracy of the information to avoid review delays or design quality problems caused by missing or incorrect information. Therefore, before submitting the design task information, the design team needs to conduct a thorough self-examination and proofreading to ensure that the submitted information meets the review requirements. Once the information is successfully obtained and preliminarily verified, it will serve as the starting point of the review and evaluation process and enter the subsequent annotation, approval and scoring stages.

[0060] Step S20, annotate the initial railway design task information to obtain approval opinions.

[0061] It should be noted that annotating the initial railway design task information is a key step to ensure that the design meets the requirements of the specifications, safety standards and engineering quality. This process involves the reviewers to conduct in-depth analysis of the design documents to identify potential problems and room for improvement. Reviewers use their professional knowledge and experience to conduct detailed inspections of design drawings, technical documents, etc., and use online annotation tools to directly mark the areas that need attention or modification on the electronic documents, including freehand drawings, single lines, multi-lines, circles, multi-line text, cloud lines, annotation marks, etc. for the review documents. For 3D models, the function of selecting annotations for components is supported. Annotations may include questions about design parameters, suggestions for construction methods, emphasis on safety standards, or considerations of cost-effectiveness. Reviewers can also add text descriptions to provide specific suggestions for improvement or alternatives. In this way, reviewers not only point out problems in the design, but also provide clear guidance and feedback to the design team to help them better understand the review opinions and make corresponding adjustments.

[0062] Furthermore, the initial railway design task information is graphically and textually annotated to obtain annotation content to identify specific areas or content in the initial railway design task information, and approval opinions are obtained based on the annotation content. Reviewers use professional graphical tools, such as freehand drawing, single line, multi-line, circle, etc., to directly mark key points or potential problem areas on the design drawings, so that specific areas or content in the design are clearly identified. These graphical annotations intuitively point out the focus of the design, making it easier for designers to quickly identify and understand the intentions of the reviewers. At the same time, reviewers will also add detailed text annotations to supplement the graphically marked areas and provide specific review opinions and improvement suggestions. The text annotations contain questions about design parameters, suggestions for construction methods, emphasis on safety standards, or considerations of cost-effectiveness.

[0063] As the online annotations are completed, the reviewer will generate approval opinions based on the annotations. These opinions integrate all the key points in the review process to form a detailed review report. The report includes not only a specific evaluation of the design documents, but also an overall evaluation of the design team, such as their innovation, responsiveness and cooperation attitude in the design process.

[0064] Step S30, associating the approval opinion with the initial railway design task information to obtain updated railway design task information.

[0065] It should be noted that this process involves integrating the specific modification suggestions and feedback proposed by the reviewers directly into the original design file to form an updated version of the design task information. The association operation is usually achieved through an advanced review and evaluation system that can automatically identify and match the approval opinions with the relevant parts of the design documents to ensure that each opinion is accurately mapped to the specific content of the design.

[0066] The updated design task information not only contains the original design intent and parameters, but also incorporates the improvements proposed during the review process. This integrated information management method greatly improves the efficiency of design revisions because it allows the design team to see the original design and review opinions at the same time in a single view, so as to more fully understand the reviewers' feedback and make corresponding adjustments. In addition, the process of associating approval opinions also involves version control to ensure that every design update can be tracked and recorded. In this way, the design team can clearly see the history of design evolution and understand the background and reasons for each modification. For complex railway design projects, this transparency and traceability are crucial. They help maintain design quality while providing support for project management and decision-making.

[0067] Furthermore, the approval comments are associated with the corresponding parts of the initial railway design task information to obtain associated information. In this process, each approval comment is precisely located to a specific part of the design document, whether it is a mark on the drawing or a parameter in the technical specification. This association is usually achieved through a digital system, using functions such as hyperlinks, tags or annotations to enable the review comments to be directly linked to the relevant pages or paragraphs of the design document. Through this association, the design team can quickly locate the areas that need to be modified or paid attention to, so as to optimize the design more targetedly. At the same time, this also facilitates the subsequent review and approval of the design documents, because the reviewers can easily view and verify the implementation of each opinion. The accuracy and completeness of the associated information are crucial to the improvement of design quality. It not only improves the efficiency of design modification, but also helps to reduce communication errors and review cycles. In addition, the process of associating approval comments also involves a version control mechanism to ensure that every update of the design document can be recorded and tracked by the system. In this way, even if the design undergoes multiple rounds of review and modification, a clear record of changes can be maintained, providing transparent information flow and decision support for project participants.

[0068] Furthermore, the associated information is stored in the form of metadata according to the division attributes based on the initial approval task information, and the updated railway design task information is obtained, wherein the division attributes include the time of submission, the content of the review opinion, the type of question, and the location of the opinion. Based on the initial approval task information, the storage of the associated information in the form of metadata allows the digital ecosystem of the design document to be more orderly and queryable. The setting of the division attributes, such as the time of submission, the content of the review opinion, the type of question, and the location of the opinion, provides a clear context and index for each review opinion, making information retrieval and analysis faster and more accurate. After being stored as metadata, these attributes not only help maintain the historical integrity of the design document, but also support in-depth analysis of the review process. For example, by recording the time of submission, the evolution of the review opinion and the response speed can be tracked; the detailed record of the content of the review opinion ensures the specificity and enforceability of the opinion; the classification of the problem type helps to quickly identify common or special problems in the design; and the precise marking of the opinion location directly points to the specific part of the design document, which is convenient for the design team to quickly locate and respond.

[0069] In addition, the storage method of metadata also lays the foundation for the automated processing and intelligent analysis of design documents. Using these metadata, the system can automatically generate review reports, provide statistical analysis of design quality, and even predict potential design risks. This data-driven approach greatly improves the quality and efficiency of design review, and also provides strong support for the continuous improvement and knowledge accumulation of railway design tasks.

[0070] Step S40, scoring the updated railway design task information through a preset review and evaluation table to obtain review and evaluation data.

[0071] It should be noted that scoring the updated railway design task information through the preset review and evaluation form involves comparing the design task information with each evaluation item in the review and evaluation form, each of which corresponds to a specific design standard or quality requirement. The reviewer scores each evaluation item based on the actual performance of the design task information, and these scores reflect the compliance or advantages of the design task in a specific aspect. The review and evaluation form usually contains multiple dimensions, such as the innovation, safety, economy, maintainability, etc. of the design, and each dimension is further subdivided into specific scoring items. In this way, the review and evaluation not only focuses on the compliance of the design, but also covers the overall performance of the design. During the scoring process, the professional judgment of the reviewer is combined with the quantitative standards provided by the system to ensure the objectivity and accuracy of the evaluation. The review and evaluation data obtained are an important basis for design optimization and decision-making. These data can reveal the advantages and disadvantages in the design and provide a clear direction for improvement for the design team. At the same time, the review and evaluation data also provide a quantitative progress tracking and quality control method for project management, helping project managers monitor the progress of the design and adjust the design strategy in a timely manner. In addition, the collection and analysis of review and evaluation data can also promote the accumulation and sharing of design knowledge. Through statistical and trend analysis of historical evaluation data, organizations can identify common problems and successful practices in the design process, thereby continuously improving design capabilities and project management levels.

[0072] Furthermore, when the review and evaluation data does not meet the preset requirements, a task return reminder is sent. After the review opinions are modified, new railway design task information is obtained for re-evaluation until the preset requirements are met. When the review and evaluation data fails to meet the preset requirements, the system automatically triggers the task return process and sends a reminder to the design team. This mechanism ensures strict quality control of the design tasks and requires the design team to re-examine and correct the aspects that do not meet the standards. The return reminder usually contains the evaluation items that did not meet the standards, specific review opinions, and necessary guidance and suggestions, providing the design team with a clear direction for rectification.

[0073] After receiving the task return reminder, the design team will conduct in-depth analysis and modification of the design task information based on the review opinions. This may involve adjustments to design parameters, optimization of structural layout, re-evaluation of material selection, or improvements to construction methods. After completing the modification, the design team needs to obtain updated railway design task information and resubmit it to the review system for evaluation. The re-evaluation process is not only a re-examination of the design quality, but also a re-verification of the review process. This cycle ensures that the design task information will not enter the next stage before all preset requirements are met. In this way, the review and evaluation system promotes continuous improvement of the design and improves the quality and reliability of the final design results.

[0074] This embodiment provides a task information review and evaluation method, which obtains initial railway design task information, annotates the initial railway design task information, obtains approval opinions, associates the approval opinions with the initial railway design task information, obtains updated railway design task information, and scores the updated railway design task information through a preset review and evaluation form to obtain review and evaluation data. Through a systematic process, online annotation of design task information, generation of approval opinions, associated updates, and scoring of evaluation forms are realized, and review and evaluation data are automatically collected, thereby improving review efficiency.

[0075] Based on the first embodiment of the present application, in the second embodiment of the present application, the same or similar contents as those in the above-mentioned embodiment 1 can refer to the above introduction, and will not be repeated later. Figure 3 The task information review and evaluation method further includes steps S401 to S402 after step S40:

[0076] Step S401, using a preset review and evaluation form to score the updated railway design task information to obtain scores of multiple evaluation items, wherein the preset review and evaluation form includes multiple evaluation items.

[0077] It should be noted that before using the preset review evaluation form, it is necessary to construct the preset review evaluation form. First, the evaluation criteria of multiple evaluation dimensions are calibrated, including compliance, accuracy, rationality and innovation. Then, according to the evaluation criteria, specific inspection items are obtained, and then scores are assigned to multiple specific inspection items based on the specific inspection items to obtain evaluation information. Finally, the preset review evaluation form is established based on the evaluation information. Compliance, accuracy, rationality and innovation are the core evaluation dimensions, and each dimension has its own unique evaluation criteria and consideration points. The compliance evaluation standard focuses on whether the design complies with relevant laws and regulations and industry specifications, accuracy evaluates the degree of match between design details and actual engineering requirements, rationality evaluation standards consider the logic and feasibility of design solutions, and innovation measures the application degree of new technologies, new materials or new methods in the design and the originality of the innovation points. After the evaluation criteria are established, specific inspection items are refined according to these criteria, such as structural strength, material selection, construction technology, etc. These inspection items are the actual operation of the evaluation criteria, providing reviewers with a clear review focus. Based on these specific inspection items, scores are further assigned to form evaluation information. The allocation of scores reflects the importance and weight of each inspection item in the overall design quality, ensuring that the evaluation results can fully reflect the comprehensive performance of the design. A preset review evaluation form is constructed based on the above evaluation information.

[0078] Furthermore, during the scoring process, the reviewer will evaluate each evaluation item one by one according to the specific content of the design task information. This not only involves an in-depth analysis of the design details, but also includes the identification of design innovations and potential risks. In this way, the scoring results can fully reflect the performance of the design task in each evaluation dimension and provide a clear optimization direction for the design team. The application of preset review evaluation forms helps to achieve standardization and automation of design reviews, improve review efficiency, and reduce human bias.

[0079] Step S402, summarizing the scores of multiple evaluation items to obtain review evaluation data.

[0080] It is important to understand that aggregating the scores of multiple evaluation items is a key step in the review and evaluation process, which involves quantitatively analyzing each evaluation item according to its score and weight to form a comprehensive objective review and evaluation data set, and then combining the reviewer's subjective evaluation score to obtain the final review and evaluation data. This data not only reflects the specific performance of the design task in each evaluation dimension, but also provides an assessment of the overall quality of the design through a comprehensive score.

[0081] When aggregating the scores, the relative importance of different evaluation items may be taken into account, and a weighted average or other mathematical method may be used to ensure the balance and fairness of the scores. For example, safety and compliance may be given higher weights to ensure that high standards in these key areas are met. The resulting review evaluation data provides important reference information for design teams and decision makers.

[0082] Furthermore, the review and evaluation data are analyzed quantitatively and qualitatively to obtain analysis results. Quantitative analysis focuses on using statistical methods, such as mean score, standard deviation, correlation analysis, etc., to quantify the performance of each evaluation dimension of the design results, so as to identify the strengths and weaknesses in the design. This analysis can reveal the consistency and variability in the design process and provide data support for design optimization. Qualitative analysis focuses on the content and context of the review opinions, and through methods such as text analysis and case studies, deeply understand the reviewers' opinions and the design team's responses. This helps to reveal the logic and assumptions behind design decisions and evaluate the design innovation and adaptability. The analysis results obtained by combining these two analysis methods can provide comprehensive feedback to the design team to help them understand the performance and potential impact of the design in practical applications.

[0083] Furthermore, based on the analysis results, common evaluation vocabulary and viewpoints are extracted to construct an evaluation knowledge base. Through the evaluation knowledge base, the evaluation of multiple periods and multiple types of tasks is obtained to improve the efficiency of the review work. The constructed evaluation knowledge base not only contains these common vocabulary and viewpoints, but may also include evaluation patterns, common problems and their solutions, and typical review paths for different types of design tasks. Such a knowledge base provides reviewers with a rich reference resource to help them quickly identify and solve problems in the design, thereby improving the efficiency and quality of the review work. Through the evaluation knowledge base, reviewers can conduct comparative analysis across multiple periods and task types, and gain insight into the changing trends of design quality and the evolution of review standards. This cross-period evaluation analysis helps to identify persistent design problems, evaluate the effects of different solutions, and discover best practices in the review process. In addition, the evaluation knowledge base can also support the training and learning of new reviewers, and accelerate the growth process of new members by providing historical cases and expert opinions.

[0084] This embodiment scores the updated railway design task information by using a preset review and evaluation form to obtain scores for multiple evaluation items, wherein the preset review and evaluation form includes multiple evaluation items, and the scores of the multiple evaluation items are summarized to obtain review and evaluation data, thereby achieving standardization and automation of design reviews, improving review efficiency, and reducing human bias.

[0085] This application also provides a task information review and evaluation device, please refer to Figure 4 , the device comprises:

[0086] The acquisition module 10 is used to acquire initial railway design task information.

[0087] The acquisition module 10 is also used to annotate the initial railway design task information and obtain approval opinions.

[0088] The association module 20 is used to associate the approval opinion with the initial railway design task information to obtain updated railway design task information.

[0089] The result module 30 is used to score the updated railway design task information through a preset review and evaluation table to obtain review and evaluation data.

[0090] The task information review and evaluation device provided by the present application adopts the task information review and evaluation method in the above embodiment, which can solve the technical problem of how to improve the review efficiency of railway design results. Compared with the prior art, the beneficial effects of the task information review and evaluation device provided by the present application are the same as the beneficial effects of the task information review and evaluation method provided by the above embodiment, and the other technical features in the task information review and evaluation device are the same as the features disclosed in the above embodiment method, which will not be repeated here.

[0091] In one embodiment, the acquisition module 10 is further used to graphically and textually annotate the initial railway design task information to obtain annotation content to identify specific areas or content in the initial railway design task information; and obtain approval opinions based on the annotation content.

[0092] In one embodiment, the association module 20 is also used to associate the approval opinion with the corresponding part of the initial railway design task information to obtain associated information; based on the initial approval task information, the associated information is stored in the form of metadata according to the division attributes to obtain updated railway design task information, wherein the division attributes include the time of submission, the content of the review opinion, the type of question and the location of the opinion.

[0093] In one embodiment, the result module 30 is also used to calibrate the evaluation standards of multiple evaluation dimensions, where the evaluation dimensions include compliance, accuracy, rationality and innovation; obtain specific inspection items based on the evaluation standards; assign scores to multiple specific inspection items based on the specific inspection items to obtain evaluation information; and establish a preset review evaluation table based on the evaluation information.

[0094] In one embodiment, the result module 30 is also used to score the updated railway design task information using a preset review evaluation table to obtain scores for multiple evaluation items, wherein the preset review evaluation table includes multiple evaluation items; and summarize the scores of multiple evaluation items to obtain review evaluation data.

[0095] In one embodiment, the result module 30 is also used to perform quantitative and qualitative analysis on the review and evaluation data to obtain analysis results; extract common evaluation vocabulary and viewpoints based on the analysis results to construct an evaluation knowledge base; and obtain evaluation conditions of multiple periods and multiple types of tasks through the evaluation knowledge base to improve the efficiency of the review work.

[0096] In one embodiment, the result module 30 is also used to send a task return reminder when the review evaluation data does not meet the preset requirements; after completing the modification of the review opinion, obtain new railway design task information for re-evaluation until the preset requirements are met.

[0097] The present application provides a task information review and evaluation device, which includes: at least one processor; and a memory communicatively connected to the at least one processor; wherein the memory stores instructions executable by the at least one processor, and the instructions are executed by the at least one processor so that the at least one processor can execute the task information review and evaluation method in the above-mentioned embodiment one.

[0098] Reference below Figure 5 , which shows a schematic diagram of the structure of a task information review and evaluation device suitable for implementing the embodiment of the present application. The task information review and evaluation device in the embodiment of the present application may include but is not limited to mobile terminals such as mobile phones, laptop computers, digital broadcast receivers, PDAs (Personal Digital Assistants), PADs (Portable Application Descriptions), PMPs (Portable Media Players), vehicle-mounted terminals (such as vehicle-mounted navigation terminals), etc., and fixed terminals such as digital TVs, desktop computers, etc. Figure 5 The task information review and evaluation device shown is only an example and should not bring any limitation to the functions and scope of use of the embodiments of the present application.

[0099] like Figure 5As shown, the task information review and evaluation device may include a processing device 1001 (e.g., a central processing unit, a graphics processor, etc.), which can perform various appropriate actions and processes according to a program stored in a read-only memory (ROM: Read Only Memory) 1002 or a program loaded from a storage device 1003 to a random access memory (RAM: Random Access Memory) 1004. In RAM1004, various programs and data required for the operation of the task information review and evaluation device are also stored. The processing device 1001, ROM1002, and RAM1004 are connected to each other through a bus 1005. An input / output (I / O) interface 1006 is also connected to the bus. Generally, the following systems can be connected to the I / O interface 1006: an input device 1007 including, for example, a touch screen, a touch pad, a keyboard, a mouse, an image sensor, a microphone, an accelerometer, a gyroscope, etc.; an output device 1008 including, for example, a liquid crystal display (LCD: Liquid Crystal Display), a speaker, a vibrator, etc.; a storage device 1003 including, for example, a magnetic tape, a hard disk, etc.; and a communication device 1009. The communication device 1009 can allow the task information review and evaluation device to communicate with other devices wirelessly or by wire to exchange data. Although the task information review and evaluation device with various systems is shown in the figure, it should be understood that it is not required to implement or have all the systems shown. More or fewer systems can be implemented or have alternatively.

[0100] In particular, according to the embodiments disclosed in the present application, the process described above with reference to the flowchart can be implemented as a computer software program. For example, the embodiments disclosed in the present application include a computer program product, which includes a computer program carried on a computer-readable medium, and the computer program includes a program code for executing the method shown in the flowchart. In such an embodiment, the computer program can be downloaded and installed from a network through a communication device, or installed from a storage device 1003, or installed from a ROM 1002. When the computer program is executed by the processing device 1001, the above-mentioned functions defined in the method of the embodiment disclosed in the present application are executed.

[0101] The task information review and evaluation device provided by the present application adopts the task information review and evaluation method in the above embodiment, which can solve the technical problem of how to improve the review efficiency of railway design results. Compared with the prior art, the beneficial effects of the task information review and evaluation device provided by the present application are the same as the beneficial effects of the task information review and evaluation method provided by the above embodiment, and the other technical features in the task information review and evaluation device are the same as the features disclosed in the method of the previous embodiment, which will not be repeated here.

[0102] It should be understood that the various parts disclosed in this application can be implemented by hardware, software, firmware or a combination thereof. In the description of the above embodiments, specific features, structures, materials or characteristics can be combined in any one or more embodiments or examples in a suitable manner.

[0103] The above is only a specific implementation of the present application, but the protection scope of the present application is not limited thereto. Any person skilled in the art who is familiar with the present technical field can easily think of changes or substitutions within the technical scope disclosed in the present application, which should be included in the protection scope of the present application. Therefore, the protection scope of the present application should be based on the protection scope of the claims.

[0104] The present application provides a computer-readable medium having computer-readable program instructions (ie, computer programs) stored thereon, wherein the computer-readable program instructions are used to execute the task information review and evaluation method in the above-mentioned embodiment.

[0105] The computer-readable medium provided in the present application may be, for example, a USB flash drive, but is not limited to electrical, magnetic, optical, electromagnetic, infrared, or semiconductor systems, systems or devices, or any combination of the above. More specific examples of computer-readable media may include, but are not limited to: an electrical connection with one or more wires, a portable computer disk, a hard disk, a random access memory (RAM), a read-only memory (ROM), an erasable programmable read-only memory (EPROM or flash memory), an optical fiber, a portable compact disk read-only memory (CD-ROM), an optical storage device, a magnetic storage device, or any suitable combination of the above. In this embodiment, the computer-readable medium may be any tangible medium containing or storing a program that can be used by or in combination with an instruction execution system, system or device. The program code contained on the computer-readable medium may be transmitted using any appropriate medium, including but not limited to: wires, optical cables, RF (Radio Frequency), etc., or any suitable combination of the above.

[0106] The computer-readable medium may be included in the task information review and evaluation device; or may exist independently without being assembled into the task information review and evaluation device.

[0107] The computer-readable medium carries one or more programs. When the one or more programs are executed by the task information review and evaluation device, the task information review and evaluation device can be written in one or more programming languages ​​or a combination thereof to perform computer program codes for the operation of the present application. The programming languages ​​include object-oriented programming languages, such as Java, Smalltalk, C++, and conventional procedural programming languages, such as "C" language or similar programming languages. The program code can be executed completely on the user's computer, partially on the user's computer, as an independent software package, partially on the user's computer and partially on a remote computer, or completely on a remote computer or server. In the case of a remote computer, the remote computer can be connected to the user's computer through any type of network, including a local area network (LAN) or a wide area network (WAN), or can be connected to an external computer (for example, using an Internet service provider to connect through the Internet).

[0108] The flow chart and block diagram in the accompanying drawings illustrate the possible architecture, function and operation of the system, method and computer program product according to various embodiments of the present application. In this regard, each square box in the flow chart or block diagram can represent a module, a program segment or a part of a code, and the module, the program segment or a part of the code contains one or more executable instructions for realizing the specified logical function. It should also be noted that in some alternative implementations, the functions marked in the square box can also occur in a sequence different from that marked in the accompanying drawings. For example, two square boxes represented in succession can actually be executed substantially in parallel, and they can sometimes be executed in the opposite order, depending on the functions involved. It should also be noted that each square box in the block diagram and / or flow chart, and the combination of the square boxes in the block diagram and / or flow chart can be implemented with a dedicated hardware-based system that performs a specified function or operation, or can be implemented with a combination of dedicated hardware and computer instructions.

[0109] The modules involved in the embodiments described in this application may be implemented by software or hardware, wherein the name of the module does not constitute a limitation on the unit itself in some cases.

[0110] The readable medium provided by the present application is a computer-readable medium, which stores computer-readable program instructions (i.e., computer programs) for executing the above-mentioned task information review and evaluation method, and can solve the technical problem of how to improve the review efficiency of railway design results. Compared with the prior art, the beneficial effects of the computer-readable medium provided by the present application are the same as the beneficial effects of the task information review and evaluation method provided by the above-mentioned embodiment, and will not be repeated here.

[0111] The present application also provides a computer program product, including a computer program, which implements the steps of the task information review and evaluation method as described above when executed by a processor.

[0112] The computer program product provided by this application can solve the technical problem of how to improve the review efficiency of railway design results. Compared with the prior art, the beneficial effects of the computer program product provided by this application are the same as the beneficial effects of the task information review and evaluation method provided by the above embodiment, which will not be repeated here.

[0113] The above descriptions are only some embodiments of the present application, and are not intended to limit the patent scope of the present application. All equivalent structural changes made using the contents of the present application specification and drawings under the technical concept of the present application, or direct / indirect applications in other related technical fields are included in the patent protection scope of the present application.

Claims

1. A task information review and evaluation method, characterized in that: The method comprises: Obtain initial railway design mission information; Annotate the initial railway design task information and obtain approval opinions; Associating the approval opinion with the initial railway design task information to obtain updated railway design task information; The updated railway design task information is scored using a preset review and evaluation table to obtain review and evaluation data.

2. The method according to claim 1, characterized in that The step of annotating the initial railway design task information to obtain approval opinions includes: Graphically and textually annotate the initial railway design task information to obtain annotation content to identify specific areas or content in the initial railway design task information; According to the content of the annotation, the approval opinion is obtained.

3. The method according to claim 1, characterized in that The step of associating the approval opinion with the initial railway design task information to obtain updated railway design task information includes: Associating the approval opinions with corresponding parts of the initial railway design task information to obtain associated information; Based on the initial approval task information, the associated information is stored in the form of metadata according to the division attributes to obtain updated railway design task information, wherein the division attributes include submission time, review opinion content, question type and opinion location.

4. The method according to claim 1, characterized in that Before the step of scoring the updated railway design task information through a preset review and evaluation table to obtain review and evaluation data, the step includes: Determining evaluation criteria for multiple evaluation dimensions, wherein the evaluation dimensions include compliance, accuracy, rationality, and innovation; According to the evaluation criteria, specific inspection items are obtained; assigning scores to a plurality of the specific inspection items based on the specific inspection items to obtain evaluation information; A preset review evaluation table is established based on the evaluation information.

5. The method according to claim 1, characterized in that The step of scoring the updated railway design task information through a preset review and evaluation table to obtain review and evaluation data includes: Scoring the updated railway design task information using a preset review evaluation form to obtain scores for multiple evaluation items, wherein the preset review evaluation form includes multiple evaluation items; The scores of the plurality of evaluation items are aggregated to obtain review evaluation data.

6. The method according to claim 1, characterized in that After the step of scoring the updated railway design task information through a preset review and evaluation table to obtain review and evaluation data, the method includes: Conducting quantitative and qualitative analysis on the review and evaluation data to obtain analysis results; Extracting common evaluation words and viewpoints based on the analysis results to build an evaluation knowledge base; Through the evaluation knowledge base, the evaluation conditions of tasks of multiple periods and types are obtained, so as to improve the efficiency of the review work.

7. The method according to claim 6, characterized in that After the step of scoring the updated railway design task information through a preset review and evaluation table to obtain review and evaluation data, the method further includes: When the review and evaluation data does not meet the preset requirements, a task return reminder is sent; After completing the modification of the review opinions, obtain new railway design task information and re-evaluate until the preset requirements are met.

8. A task information review and evaluation device, characterized in that: The device comprises: An acquisition module is used to obtain initial railway design task information; The acquisition module is also used to annotate the initial railway design task information to obtain approval opinions; An association module, used to associate the approval opinion with the initial railway design task information to obtain updated railway design task information; The result module is used to score the updated railway design task information through a preset review and evaluation table to obtain review and evaluation data.

9. A task information review and evaluation device, characterized in that: The device comprises: a memory, a processor, and a task information review and evaluation program stored in the memory and executable on the processor, wherein the task information review and evaluation program is configured to implement the steps of the task information review and evaluation method according to any one of claims 1 to 7.

10. A medium, characterized in that The medium stores a task information review and evaluation program, which, when executed by a processor, implements the steps of the task information review and evaluation method according to any one of claims 1 to 7.

Images