Electronic warranty full-process management and control method and system

Abstract

The invention discloses a full-process management and control method and system for an electronic warrant, and relates to the technical field of electronic warrants, and the main points of the technical scheme comprise the following steps: obtaining business data information of an electronic warrant business in the development process and basic information of the electronic warrant business; performing risk level assessment on the electronic warranty service according to the service data information to obtain a risk level assessment result, and dividing the electronic warranty service process according to the risk level assessment result to obtain a service process segmentation result set; checking the basic information of the electronic warranty service to obtain an information checking result, and performing node management and control execution on each segmented flow in the service flow segmentation result set according to the information checking result and the risk level evaluation result to obtain a node management and control execution result set; and selecting a key verification node set from each segmented process in the service process segmentation result set. The method has the effect of improving the compliance, high efficiency and stability of electronic warrant service operation.

Description

Technical Field

[0001] The present invention relates to the technical field of electronic letters of guarantee, and more specifically, to a method and system for full-process management and control of electronic letters of guarantee. Background Art

[0002] An electronic letter of guarantee is a financial instrument issued in the form of an electronic document that relies on digital technology to realize the online application, review, issuance, storage and verification of the entire process. It is used to replace traditional paper letters of guarantee and provide guarantees for the performance of all parties in economic activities. However, with the rapid development of the electronic letter of guarantee business, it faces challenges such as difficult process control, insufficient risk identification accuracy, and insufficient data utilization. Traditional management and control models rely heavily on manual experience and have weak capabilities for integrating and analyzing data from the entire business process. It is difficult to accurately identify potential risks in complex business scenarios, such as falsified applicant qualifications, abnormal cash flow, loopholes in letter of guarantee terms, etc. The existing management and control system does not fully cover the logical verification of process nodes and multi-dimensional effect evaluation. It is unable to form a complete closed loop from risk identification to management execution and effect verification, and it is difficult to support continuous business optimization. Summary of the Invention

[0003] In view of the shortcomings of the existing technology, the purpose of the present invention is to provide a method and system for full-process management of electronic letters of guarantee.

[0004] To achieve the above object, the present invention provides the following technical solutions: The full-process control method of electronic letter of guarantee includes the following steps: Obtain business data and basic information of electronic letter of guarantee business during its operation; Performing a risk level assessment on the electronic letter of guarantee business based on the business data information to obtain a risk level assessment result, and dividing the electronic letter of guarantee business process based on the risk level assessment result to obtain a business process segmentation result set; Review the basic information of the electronic letter of guarantee business to obtain information review results. Based on the information review results and risk level assessment results, perform node control and execution on each segmented process in the business process segmented result set to obtain a node control execution result set. Select a key verification node set from each segmented process in the business process segmentation result set, and extract a control detection data set from each segmented process in the business process segmentation result set; Based on the control detection data set and the node control execution result set, the control effect of each segmented process in the business process segmentation result set is evaluated to obtain the control evaluation result set to be verified; Set the control dimension set based on the key verification node set, and collect and verify data for each segmented process in the business process segmentation result set based on the key verification node set to obtain a collection data set; Processing and analyzing the control dimension set, collection data set, key verification node set, and business process segmentation result set to obtain a process control evaluation set; After a comprehensive evaluation of the control assessment result set to be verified and the process control assessment set, the full process control evaluation results of the electronic letter of guarantee business are obtained.

[0005] The electronic letter of guarantee full-process management and control system includes: Acquisition module: Acquisition of business data and basic information of electronic letter of guarantee business during its operation; Assessment and division module: This module conducts risk level assessment on the electronic letter of guarantee business based on business data information to obtain risk level assessment results, and divides the electronic letter of guarantee business process based on the risk level assessment results to obtain a business process segmentation result set; Processing module: This module reviews the basic information of the electronic letter of guarantee business to obtain information review results. Based on the information review results and risk level assessment results, it performs node control and execution on each segmented process in the business process segmented result set to obtain a node control execution result set. Selection module: selects a key verification node set from each segmented process in the business process segmentation result set, and extracts a control detection data set from each segmented process in the business process segmentation result set; Evaluation module: Based on the control detection data set and the node control execution result set, the control effect of each segmented process in the business process segmentation result set is evaluated to obtain the control evaluation result set to be verified; Collection and Verification Module: Sets the control dimension set based on the key verification node set, and collects and verifies data for each segmented process in the business process segmentation result set based on the key verification node set to obtain the collected data set; Processing and analysis module: processes and analyzes the control dimension set, collection data set, key verification node set, and business process segmentation result set to obtain the process control evaluation set; Control and evaluation module: After a comprehensive evaluation of the control and evaluation result set to be verified and the process control and evaluation set, the full-process control and evaluation results of the electronic letter of guarantee business are obtained.

[0006] An electronic device includes a memory, a processor, and a computer program stored in the memory and executable on the processor. When the processor executes the program, a method for controlling the entire process of an electronic letter of guarantee is implemented.

[0007] Compared with the prior art, the present invention has the following beneficial effects: The present invention constructs a refined management system covering the entire business cycle and multi-dimensional collaboration by combining the full-process control method of electronic letters of guarantee with a significant beneficial effect. From the perspective of risk prevention and control, by obtaining business data and basic information, using risk assessment models to accurately identify risk levels, risk stratification management is achieved, potential risk points are intercepted in advance, and the probability of risks such as default and fraud in electronic letter of guarantee business is reduced from the source. In the process control dimension, business processes are dynamically divided according to risk levels, node control rule parameters are adjusted, and key nodes are accurately controlled. This not only ensures that high-risk businesses have sufficient control resources invested, but also releases efficiency space for low-risk businesses, achieving a balance between risk prevention and control and business efficiency. The full-process control evaluation results generated by this method provide a clear direction for business optimization, helping enterprises to accurately locate process shortcomings (such as potential problems in qualification review, capital verification, etc.), and adjust control measures in a targeted manner to improve the compliance, efficiency and stability of electronic letter of guarantee business operations. BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS

[0008] Figure 1 This is a schematic diagram of the steps of the full-process control method for electronic letter of guarantee proposed by the present invention; Figure 2 This is a module diagram of the full-process management and control system for electronic letter of guarantee proposed by the present invention; Figure 3 It is a structural diagram of an electronic device provided by an embodiment of the present invention.

[0009] 610 , processor; 620 , communication interface; 630 , memory; 640 , communication bus. DETAILED DESCRIPTION

[0010] Reference Figures 1 to 3 .

[0011] Example 1 further illustrates the full-process control method and system for electronic letter of guarantee proposed in the present invention.

[0012] The full-process control method of electronic letter of guarantee includes the following steps: Obtain business data and basic information of electronic letter of guarantee business during its operation; Performing a risk level assessment on the electronic letter of guarantee business based on the business data information to obtain a risk level assessment result, and dividing the electronic letter of guarantee business process based on the risk level assessment result to obtain a business process segmentation result set; Review the basic information of the electronic letter of guarantee business to obtain information review results. Based on the information review results and risk level assessment results, perform node control and execution on each segmented process in the business process segmented result set to obtain a node control execution result set. Select a key verification node set from each segmented process in the business process segmentation result set, and extract a control detection data set from each segmented process in the business process segmentation result set; Based on the control detection data set and the node control execution result set, the control effect of each segmented process in the business process segmentation result set is evaluated to obtain the control evaluation result set to be verified; Set the control dimension set based on the key verification node set, and collect and verify data for each segmented process in the business process segmentation result set based on the key verification node set to obtain a collection data set; Processing and analyzing the control dimension set, collection data set, key verification node set, and business process segmentation result set to obtain a process control evaluation set; After a comprehensive evaluation of the control assessment result set to be verified and the process control assessment set, the full process control evaluation results of the electronic letter of guarantee business are obtained.

[0013] The development of electronic letter of guarantee business involves data from multiple links. Business data information reflects the dynamics of the process (such as application progress, fee payment records, etc.), and basic information is the prerequisite for business development (such as applicant qualifications, letter of guarantee subject, etc.). Both provide data for subsequent risk assessment and process control.

[0014] For example, when a construction company applies for an electronic bond for a project bid, the business data information includes the time the company submitted the application, the past record of using the bid bond (such as whether there was any breach of contract resulting in bond compensation); the basic information includes the company's business license, qualification certificate, basic information of the bidding project (project amount, construction period requirements), etc.

[0015] Based on business data information, risk assessment models (such as logistic regression, decision tree and other algorithms, or according to industry risk rules) are used to identify the potential risks of electronic letter of guarantee business and then divide the risk levels.

[0016] For example, decision trees break down complex risk issues into a series of simple "yes / no" judgment rules by applying "hierarchical decision-making" to business data. Data is segmented layer by layer in a tree structure, with each internal node corresponding to a business data feature (e.g., "Is the debt-to-asset ratio greater than 70%?"), and leaf nodes corresponding to risk levels. Based on data purity (e.g., GINI coefficient, information entropy), the optimal segmentation feature is selected to construct classification rules.

[0017] Select business data features that are strongly related to performance risk, such as enterprise qualification level F1 (level 1 / level 2 / level 3), project overdue rate in the past year F2 (>5% / ≤5%), ratio of letter of guarantee amount to net assets F3 (>40% / ≤40%), shareholder background F4 (state-owned enterprise / private enterprise / foreign capital), etc.

[0018] Use historical performance bond default data to train a decision tree to generate rules. For example: Root Node: Is F1 level 1? → Yes → Go to Node 2; No → Go to Node 3.

[0019] Node 2: Is F2 ≤ 5%? Yes → Low risk; No → Medium risk.

[0020] Node 3: Is F3 greater than 40%? If yes, high risk. If no, proceed to Node 4.

[0021] Node 4: Is F4 a state-owned enterprise? Yes, medium risk; No, high risk.

[0022] Risk level determination: The business data of an applicant company is "Second-level qualification (F1=Second-level), overdue rate 3% (F2≤5%), letter of guarantee amount / net assets = 35% (F3≤40%), private enterprise (F4=private enterprise)". Substitute it into the decision tree: F1=Level 2→To Node 3→F3=35%≤40%→To Node 4→F4=Private Enterprise→Judged as a high-risk level.

[0023] The business processes are then split according to risk levels. For high-risk businesses, the front-end process nodes are refined to strengthen management and control, while for low-risk businesses, the processes are simplified to improve efficiency.

[0024] Conduct compliance and authenticity review of basic information (such as applicant qualification documents and compliance of letter of guarantee terms), dynamically adjust the management and control rules of each segmented process node based on the risk level results (such as setting stricter review standards and adding review steps for high-risk business nodes), and after executing node control, record the execution status of each node (whether it passed, time consumption, etc.) to form a node control execution result set.

[0025] Nodes that play a key role in business compliance and risk prevention and control (such as the letter of guarantee amount confirmation node and the beneficiary confirmation node) are selected from the segmented processes to form a key verification node set; at the same time, data related to the control objectives in each segmented process (such as node execution time, involved amount, and participating personnel) are extracted to form a control detection data set.

[0026] Compare and analyze the control and inspection data set (reflecting the actual execution data of the process) with the node control and execution result set (reflecting the node control actions and results), and use statistical methods (such as deviation rate calculation and compliance rate statistics) to evaluate the control effect of each segmented process to determine whether the risk prevention and control and process compliance goals are achieved, and form a control and evaluation result set to be verified.

[0027] Different control dimensions are set based on the key verification node set (e.g., the fund control dimension focuses on the amount and flow direction; the compliance control dimension focuses on terms and process compliance) according to the node type. Based on these dimensions, multi-perspective data collection (e.g., collecting flow data of fund nodes and file archive data of compliance nodes) and verification (comparison with standard requirements) are performed on the segmented processes to form a collection data set covering all dimensions.

[0028] Perform correlation analysis on the control dimension set (defining the evaluation perspective), the collected data set (actual data), the key verification node set (core verification objects), and the business process segmentation result set (process framework). Evaluate the effectiveness of each segmented process control from multiple dimensions (such as whether high-risk nodes are effectively controlled from the risk prevention and control dimension, and whether the node time consumption is reasonable from the efficiency dimension), and output the process control evaluation set.

[0029] The set of control and management assessment results to be verified (preliminary effect assessment) and the process control and management assessment set (multi-dimensional in-depth assessment) are integrated to conduct a final evaluation of the control level of the entire electronic letter of guarantee process, clarifying the overall control effectiveness and improvement direction.

[0030] The control dimension set, collection data set, key verification node set, and business process segmentation result set are processed and analyzed to obtain the process control evaluation set. The specific steps include: A first logic verification data set is obtained by analyzing the node execution data of the segmented process node control execution result set under the first control dimension of the control dimension set and verifying the logical relationship between the key verification node sets; a second logic verification data set is obtained by analyzing the node execution data of the segmented process node control execution result set under the second control dimension of the control dimension set and verifying the logical relationship between the key verification node sets; a first segmented process internal data information set is obtained based on data collection of the third key verification node, and the logical relationship between each node in the first segmented process internal data information set is verified to obtain a third logic verification data set; The collected data sets include a first collection validation set, a second collection validation set, and a third collection validation set; Evaluate the control effects of each segmented process in the business process segmented result set based on the first collection and verification set and the first logic verification data set to obtain a first control and management evaluation result set; evaluate the control effects of each segmented process in the business process segmented result set based on the second collection and verification set and the second logic verification data set to obtain a second control and management evaluation result set; and evaluate the control effects of each segmented process in the business process segmented result set based on the third logic verification data set and the third collection and verification set to obtain a third control and management evaluation result set; The first control assessment result set, the second control assessment result set, and the third control assessment result set are combined into a process control assessment set.

[0031] In the full-process control system of electronic letters of guarantee, the process control evaluation set generation link first analyzes the node execution data of the segmented process (such as the review status, time consumption, and results of each link) based on the preset control dimensions (such as qualification compliance, capital risk control, full-process risk and other different observation perspectives), and at the same time verifies the logical relationship between key verification nodes (for example, "qualification review passed" should be before "deposit verification" to ensure that the process sequence is reasonable) to generate a logical verification data set of the corresponding dimension; then, relying on the verification data collected by dimension in the early stage (such as scanned copies of qualification certificates, deposit bank statements), the collected information is cross-compared with the logical verification results, and the control effect of the segmented process is judged from a single-dimensional perspective to form a hierarchical evaluation result (first control evaluation result set, second control evaluation result set and third control evaluation result set); finally, the multi-dimensional conclusions are integrated to output an evaluation set covering the full-process control perspective (process control evaluation set), providing accurate diagnosis for risk prevention and control and process optimization of electronic letter of guarantee business.

[0032] Take the application of an electronic bid bond by construction company A as an example: in the first control dimension (qualification compliance perspective), we first focus on the execution data of the "qualification review node" in the previous process (Company A's qualification validity period is 3 months, the review takes 2 hours, and it is conditionally passed). At the same time, we verify the logical order of the qualification review node and the subsequent bond verification node (the qualification review is executed first, in line with the "qualification review before the funds" rule). This generates the first logical verification data set (recording the qualification review compliance, process sequence, and time-consuming issues). Combined with the first collection and verification set (including scanned copies of qualification certificates, manual review opinions, etc.), we evaluate and conclude that "under the qualification control dimension, the segmented process has a medium control effect due to the risk of exceeding the qualification validity period and the time limit."

[0033] From the second control dimension (capital risk control perspective), the execution data of the "margin verification node" in the segmented process was determined (the 8 million margin arrived on time, the amount matched, and the review took 1 hour). The logical order of the margin verification node and the risk assessment node was verified (margin verification preceded risk assessment, complying with the pre-fund verification rule). This generated a second logical verification data set (demonstrating compliance with the execution of the fund node and smooth process). This was then linked to the second collection and verification set (covering margin bank statements and system verification logs) to evaluate the second control assessment result set, resulting in "under the fund control dimension, the segmented process is excellent due to data compliance and process deviation."

[0034] In the third control dimension (full-process risk perspective), relying on the third key verification node (risk assessment node), the internal data of the previous process (qualification validity period, deposit arrival information, and risk scoring basis) is collected, and the logical relationship between the risk assessment node and the qualification review and deposit verification nodes is verified (risk assessment is performed after the basic node, and the data association is reasonable) to generate the third logical verification data set (reflecting the matching between risk assessment and basic data); combined with the third collection and verification set (including risk assessment report and process node data summary), the third control assessment result set is evaluated and obtained: "Under the full-process risk dimension, the segmented process has sufficient risk assessment basis but needs to pay attention to qualification continuity, and the control effect is good."

[0035] Finally, the first control assessment result set, the second control assessment result set, and the third control assessment result set are integrated to form a process control assessment set, which outputs the multi-dimensional conclusion that "qualification control needs to optimize time consumption and validity period risks, capital control is efficient, and the full-process risk assessment is reasonable but there are potential hidden dangers."

[0036] The electronic letter of guarantee business process is divided according to the risk level assessment results to obtain a business process segmentation result set, which specifically includes the following steps: The risk level assessment results include first-level risk, second-level risk and third-level risk; among which, the risk level of first-level risk is greater than the risk level of second-level risk, and the risk level of second-level risk is greater than the risk level of third-level risk; Divide the electronic letter of guarantee business process into front-end business process and back-end business process; If the risk level assessment result is the first level risk, the number of nodes in the front-end business process is made greater than the number of nodes in the back-end business process to obtain the first business process segmentation result, and the difference between the number of nodes in the front-end business process and the number of nodes in the back-end business process is the first node number difference; If the risk level assessment result is a second-level risk, the number of nodes in the front-end business process is made greater than the number of nodes in the back-end business process to obtain a second business process segmentation result, and at this time, the difference between the number of nodes in the front-end business process and the number of nodes in the back-end business process is a second node number difference, and the second node number difference is less than the first node number difference; If the risk level assessment result is the third level risk, the number of nodes in the front-end business process is equal to the number of nodes in the back-end business process to obtain the third business process segmentation result; The first business process segmentation result, the second business process segmentation result, and the third business process segmentation result are combined into a business process segmentation result set.

[0037] In the electronic letter of guarantee business, the business processes are divided based on the risk level assessment results. Its core purpose is to achieve accurate matching of risks and management resources, and to ensure that business processes can be properly managed under different risk levels.

[0038] The risk assessment results are divided into Level 1, Level 2, and Level 3 risks, with the risk level decreasing in descending order. Different risk levels will determine the subsequent business process segmentation strategy.

[0039] The electronic letter of guarantee business process is divided into front-end and back-end processes. The front-end process typically involves key steps such as application review, risk assessment, and counter-guarantee implementation, and is the stage for identifying and initially controlling business risks. The back-end process, which primarily includes operations such as letter of guarantee issuance and final filing, carries relatively lower risks and focuses more on process execution and completion.

[0040] When the risk level assessment result is the first level risk, it means that the business faces a higher risk. At this time, in order to more effectively prevent and control risks, the number of nodes in the front-end business process will be greater than the number of nodes in the back-end business process to form the first business process segmentation result. For example, if construction company A has serious credit problems, such as multiple default records and deteriorating financial conditions, it will be assessed as a first-level risk. In the front-end business process, nodes such as background checks on senior management of the company, project feasibility assessments, and more related-party credit checks may be added, while the back-end business process will set up fewer nodes as usual, such as retaining only basic guarantee format review and electronic signature confirmation. The difference in the number of nodes between the front-end and back-end business processes is the first node number difference. This difference is relatively large, reflecting the strategy of investing more control resources in high-risk businesses in the early stages.

[0041] If the risk level assessment result is Level 2 risk, it indicates that the business risk is at a medium level. In this case, the number of nodes in the front-end business process will still be greater than the number of nodes in the back-end business process, resulting in the second business process segmentation result. However, unlike the first-level risk, the difference in the number of nodes in the second stage is smaller than the difference in the number of nodes in the first stage. Continuing with the example of construction company A, if it only has some minor risk factors, such as a record of delays in individual projects and some less-than-ideal financial indicators, it will be assessed as a Level 2 risk. The front-end business process may increase the close monitoring of the validity period of its qualifications and supplement the review of some project performance certification materials. The back-end business process will also be routine operations, but the difference in the number of nodes between the front and back stages will be smaller than that of the first-level risk, indicating that the intensity of early-stage management and control has been appropriately reduced when the risks are relatively controllable.

[0042] A Level 3 risk assessment indicates a low business risk. At this point, the number of nodes in the front-end business process equals the number of nodes in the back-end business process, forming the third-stage business process segmentation result. Suppose Construction Company A has good credit, successfully completed past projects, a sound financial position, and all indicators meet the requirements, resulting in a Level 3 risk assessment. Both the front-end and back-end business processes might simply include some basic review and operational nodes. For example, the front-end simply verifies the company's qualifications and the integrity of the bid documents, while the back-end generates and confirms the delivery of a letter of guarantee. This approach maintains consistent control over the front-end and back-end processes to ensure efficient business progress under a low-risk environment.

[0043] Ultimately, the results of the first, second, and third business process segments are combined into a business process segmentation result set. This result set encompasses business process segmentation strategies for different risk levels, providing an important basis for implementing node-level control based on specific risk situations and ensuring the secure and efficient operation of electronic letter of guarantee business. This approach enables refined management of the electronic letter of guarantee business process, allowing control measures to be flexibly adjusted based on risk levels, achieving a balance between risk prevention and control and business efficiency.

[0044] Based on the information review results and risk level assessment results, node control execution is performed on each segmented process in the business process segmentation result set to obtain a node control execution result set, which specifically includes the following steps: According to the information review results and risk level assessment results, the node control rule parameters of each segmented process in the business process segmentation result set are adjusted to obtain parameter adjustment results; Obtain the key node positions of each segmented process in the business process segmented result set, perform node control on each segmented process in the business process segmented result set based on the parameter adjustment results and the key node positions of each segmented process, and then output the segmented process node control execution result set; After evaluating the deviation between the node execution data and the standard execution data of the segmented process node control execution result set and the execution effect of the key nodes within each segmented process, the node control execution result set is output.

[0045] In the full-process management and control system of electronic letters of guarantee, "executing node control and generating result sets based on information review and risk levels" is a key link in achieving accurate risk prevention and control. Its operating logic can be summarized as a closed-loop management of "rule adaptation-precise execution-effect verification". Specifically, the process first uses the information review results (i.e., the compliance determination of the basic information of the electronic letter of guarantee business, such as whether the enterprise qualifications are valid and whether the counter-guarantee is compliant) and the risk level assessment results (such as the business risk is the second level), to dynamically adjust the node control rule parameters of each segmented process after the business process is segmented (such as review standards, operation permissions, time requirements, etc.), so that the control intensity adapts to the business risk and compliance status; then identifies the key nodes of each segmented process (the links that play a decisive role in risk prevention and control, and business compliance), implements targeted control operations on these key nodes according to the adjusted rule parameters, and records the execution process and data to form a segmented process node control execution result set; finally, compares the actual execution data of the node with the standard execution data to evaluate the deviation, and at the same time verifies the execution effect of the key nodes within each segmented process (whether it effectively prevents and controls risks and ensures business compliance), further improves and outputs the final node control execution result set, and provides accurate data support for the subsequent full-process control evaluation.

[0046] Take, for example, construction company A's application for a bid bond for an urban complex project. A risk assessment determined that Company A was at Level 2 risk due to the impending expiration of its qualifications and the presence of certain risks in its affiliated companies. An information review revealed that its qualification certificate required a "Qualification Renewal Commitment Letter," but its counter-guarantee (equity pledge + legal person joint and several guarantee) was compliant. Based on this information review result and the risk level, the control rules and parameters for both the front-end process (application review, including qualification review and deposit verification) and the back-end process (guarantee issuance) were adjusted. For example, the "Qualification Review" node in the front-end process originally required a single-person review, complete documentation, and formal compliance, with a one-hour processing time threshold. This adjustment was then replaced with a dual-person review (primary reviewer + senior reviewer), requiring the addition of a "Qualification Renewal Commitment Letter," and increasing the processing time threshold to two hours. This strengthened control over high-risk areas and resulted in parameter adjustments.

[0047] Key nodes identified in the front-end process were the "Qualification Review Node (focusing on the risk of the qualification validity period)" and the "Security Deposit Verification Node (focusing on the compatibility of the amount with the project budget)." Control operations were implemented on these key nodes based on the parameter adjustment results. The qualification review node was reviewed by two people. The auditor required Company A to provide a supplementary letter of commitment, recording the node as "Approved (conditional), took 1.5 hours, and attached a letter of commitment." The security deposit verification node, because the information review was normal (the 8 million yuan security deposit arrived on time and was in line with the project budget) and the risk level was medium, was reviewed by a single person using relatively simplified rules, recording "Approved, took 0.5 hours, and the amount matched the project requirements." This execution data was then integrated and output into the segmented process node control execution result set.

[0048] Finally, an execution effectiveness evaluation was conducted. First, deviations from the node execution data were compared with the standard execution data. The qualification review node took 1.5 hours, within the adjusted 2-hour threshold, and the audit result was "conditionally passed," meeting information review requirements and showing no significant deviations. The security deposit verification node took 0.5 hours, within the standard 1-hour threshold, and the result was consistent with the standard. Second, the execution effectiveness of key nodes was examined. The qualification review node, through the attached letter of commitment, locked in the risk of the qualification validity period (requiring Company A to renew its qualification by December 2023), effectively mitigating business risks. The security deposit verification node confirmed the amount matching, ensuring the logical compliance of the project funding. A comprehensive deviation and effectiveness evaluation refined the node control execution result set, noting conclusions such as "the qualification review node passed conditionally but risks are controllable, and the security deposit node executed efficiently and compliantly." This provides a detailed basis for subsequent process control evaluations (such as verifying the effectiveness of the qualification control dimension), completing a complete closed-loop process from risk identification to control execution and effectiveness verification, ensuring the efficient advancement of the electronic letter of guarantee business while maintaining controllable risks.

[0049] According to the key verification node set, data collection and verification are performed on each segmented process in the business process segmentation result set to obtain a collection data set, specifically including the following steps: According to the first key verification node, the second key verification node, and the third key verification node, a first control dimension, a second control dimension, and a third control dimension are set respectively; Based on the first control dimension, the forward key node data direction between each segmented process in the business process segmentation result set and the standard process of electronic letter of guarantee business is marked as the first data collection direction. Data is collected and verified for the corresponding segmented processes according to the first data collection direction to obtain the first collection and verification set; Based on the second control dimension, the reverse key node data direction between each segmented process in the business process segmentation result set and the standard process of electronic letter of guarantee business is marked as the second data collection direction. Data is collected and verified for the corresponding segmented processes according to the second data collection direction to obtain the second collection and verification set; Based on the third control dimension, the data direction of all-dimensional key nodes between each segmented process in the business process segmentation result set and the standard process of electronic letter of guarantee business is marked as the third data collection direction. Data is collected and verified for the corresponding segmented processes according to the third data collection direction to obtain the third collection and verification set; The first acquisition verification set, the second acquisition verification set and the third acquisition verification set are combined into an acquisition data set.

[0050] In this application's full-process control system for electronic letters of guarantee, "setting control dimensions based on key verification nodes, collecting and verifying data to generate collection data sets" is the core step in building the "factual basis" for process control assessment. Its operational logic can be summarized as "multi-dimensional perspective construction + differentiated data collection + full-process verification closed loop." This process first establishes a multi-perspective assessment framework by setting different control dimensions (forward, reverse, and full) based on key verification nodes (process nodes that play a decisive role in business compliance and risk prevention and control, such as qualification review, margin verification, and risk assessment nodes). Next, for each control dimension, the data collection direction (forward, reverse, and full) for key nodes between the business segmented process and the standard electronic letter of guarantee process is clearly defined. Data collection and verification work is then carried out for each segmented process according to this direction, generating collection verification sets for the corresponding dimensions. Finally, the verification sets for each dimension are integrated to form a collection data set covering the entire process and multiple perspectives, providing comprehensive and accurate data support for subsequent process control assessments.

[0051] Take the application of a bid bond for a city complex project by construction company A as an example: assuming that the key verification nodes are divided into the first key verification node (qualification review node), the second key verification node (deposit verification node), and the third key verification node (risk assessment node), the corresponding first control dimension (forward control, focusing on qualification compliance process), the second control dimension (reverse control, focusing on capital risk control backtracking), and the third control dimension (full-dimensional control, covering full-process risks) are set.

[0052] Based on the first control dimension (forward), the front-end processes (including nodes such as qualification review and security deposit verification) in the business process segmentation result set are compared with the standard process for electronic letter of guarantee business. In the standard process, qualification review requires "submission of materials, approval, and entry to the next stage." The data direction of key forward nodes is "forward flow from the process start to the end," marked as the first data collection direction. Data is collected and verified for the segmented process along this direction. Data such as the "material submission time (9:00 AM, June 3, 2023), approval time (10:30 AM, June 3), and review opinion (requires supplementary qualification renewal commitment letter)" are collected for the qualification review nodes. Compliance with the standard process requirements of "complete materials, documented review, and correct process sequence" is verified to form the first collection and verification set, recording "qualification review process forward data compliance (conditional approval, requiring supplementary commitment letter)."

[0053] Based on the second control dimension (reverse), the business segmented process and the standard process are also compared. In the standard process, security deposit verification requires "receipt confirmation before entering the risk assessment." The reverse key node data direction is "reverse verification from the end of the process to the beginning," marked as the second data collection direction. Following this direction, data such as "arrival time (June 3rd 14:00), amount (8 million yuan), and compatibility with the project budget (2%, meeting requirements)" are collected at the security deposit verification node. The data is then reversely verified to determine whether the security deposit receipt triggers the risk assessment and whether the amount affects subsequent processes. For example, the second collection and verification set is formed to determine whether the risk assessment node adjusts the risk score due to sufficient security deposits. This data records the compliance of the reversed security deposit verification process (amount matches, and the process triggers normally).

[0054] Based on the third control dimension (full dimension), all key nodes of the business segmented process are compared with the entire process of the standard process. The data direction of the full-dimensional key nodes includes all possible verification perspectives such as "forward flow, reverse tracing, and node association", which are marked as the third data collection direction. According to this direction, the "full process data chain" of nodes such as qualification review, deposit verification, and risk assessment is collected, such as "Qualification validity period (remaining 3 months) → Deposit received (full amount) → Risk score (6.25 points, medium risk)". Verify whether the data at each node is logically self-consistent and meets the standards in the entire process (for example, whether the risk score integrates qualification and funding data) to form the third collection verification set, recording "the relevance and compliance of the data at the key nodes of the entire process (sufficient risk assessment basis and logically reasonable)".

[0055] Finally, the first collection and verification set (forward qualification control), the second collection and verification set (reverse funds control), and the third collection and verification set (full-dimensional risk control) are combined into a collection data set, which comprehensively presents the data compliance and process logic of the electronic letter of guarantee business segmented process under different control dimensions, laying a solid data foundation for the generation of subsequent process control evaluation sets (such as verifying the control effects of each dimension), and realizing the implementation of control logic from key nodes to multi-dimensional collection, and from single verification to full-process closed loop.

[0056] The first logic verification data set is obtained by analyzing the node execution data of the segmented process node control execution result set under the first control dimension of the control dimension set and verifying the logical relationship between the key verification node sets; the second logic verification data set is obtained by analyzing the node execution data of the segmented process node control execution result set under the second control dimension of the control dimension set and verifying the logical relationship between the key verification node sets; the first segmented process internal data information set is obtained based on data collection of the third key verification node, and the logical relationship between each node in the first segmented process internal data information set is verified to obtain the third logic verification data set, specifically comprising the following steps: Counting the first dimension execution data set and the second dimension execution data set formed by the first control dimension and the second control dimension and the execution data of each node in the segmented process node control execution result set; Based on the first dimension execution data set, the deviation between the node execution data and the standard execution data of the segmented process node control execution result set and the execution effect of the key nodes within each segmented process are evaluated to obtain a first logic verification data set; According to the second dimension execution data set, the deviation between the node execution data and the standard execution data of the segmented process node control execution result set and the execution effect of the key nodes within each segmented process are evaluated to obtain the second logic verification data set.

[0057] In this application, the "generation of a logical verification dataset based on control dimensions and node execution data" within the full-process control system for electronic letters of guarantee is a key step in deeply verifying the effectiveness of process control. Its operational logic can be summarized as "multi-dimensional data association + dual verification of deviations and effects + closed-loop logical relationship verification." This process first links the control execution result sets of segmented process nodes (recording actual execution data at each node, such as review time and results) based on different control dimensions (the first and second control dimensions correspond to perspectives such as forward qualifications and reverse funding), statistically generating dimensional execution datasets (aggregated node execution data focused on specific control dimensions). These datasets are then used to compare deviations between node execution data and standard execution data (to determine whether actual operations deviate from preset rules), evaluate the execution effectiveness of key nodes within the segmented process (to verify whether control actions are effective in mitigating risks), and verify the logical relationships between key verification node sets (to ensure that node flows conform to business logic). Ultimately, logical verification datasets for each dimension are output, providing a basis for in-depth logical verification of process control evaluations.

[0058] Take the application of a bid bond for a city complex project by construction company A as an example: assuming that the first control dimension is forward qualification control (focusing on the qualification review node and related processes), and the second control dimension is reverse capital control (focusing on the deposit verification node and backtracking logic), the key verification node set includes qualification review, deposit verification, and risk assessment nodes.

[0059] The statistical dimension execution data set extracts execution data from the segmented process node control execution results set for the first control dimension (forward qualifications), including the "Qualification Review Node (1.5 hours, conditional approval, with an additional letter of commitment)" and the "Risk Assessment Node (3 hours, score 6.25)." This data is then linked to the forward qualification control dimension to form the first dimension execution data set, focusing on the execution details of qualification-related nodes. For the second control dimension (reverse funding), execution data such as the "Margin Verification Node (0.5 hours, approval, amount 8 million)" and the "Risk Assessment Node (risk score adjusted due to sufficient margin)" are extracted and linked to the reverse funding control dimension to form the second dimension execution data set, focusing on the execution and backtracking data of funding-related nodes.

[0060] The first logical verification dataset was generated. Based on the first dimension execution dataset, the node execution data was compared with the standard execution data. The standard time threshold for the qualification review node was 2 hours, but the actual time taken was 1.5 hours, which was within the limit. The standard review result should have been "Compliant Pass or Conditional Pass (Submission Required)," but the actual result was "Conditional Pass (Supplementary Letter of Commitment)," meeting the requirements. The execution effectiveness of key nodes within the segmented process was also evaluated. The qualification review node effectively locked in the qualification validity risk through the supplementary letter of commitment (requiring Company A to renew its qualification before December). The risk assessment node reasonably adjusted its risk score (6.25, indicating medium risk) based on the qualification data input. This was then used to verify the logical relationships of the key verification node set: the risk assessment node was initiated only after the qualification review node was completed (aligned with the "qualification review first, risk assessment second" logic). This combined deviation, effectiveness, and logical relationship verification formed the first logical verification dataset, documenting "company compliance, effective risk prevention and control, and smooth logical relationships within the forward qualification control dimension."

[0061] A second logical verification dataset was generated. Based on the second dimension execution dataset, deviation and effectiveness were assessed. The margin verification node's standard time threshold was 1 hour, and the actual time taken was 0.5 hours, within the limit. The standard review result should have been "passed if the amount matched," and it actually passed (8 million RMB matched 2% of the project budget of 400 million RMB). The margin verification node confirmed the arrival of funds, providing valid data for risk assessment (since the full amount was received, the risk score was not deducted due to insufficient funds). After the margin verification node was completed, the risk assessment node was initiated (in line with the "funds first, then risk assessment" logic). These findings were combined to form the second logical verification dataset, documenting "efficient node execution, compliant funding logic, and rational process relationships under the reverse funds control dimension."

[0062] Verifying the logical relationship between the nodes in the first segmented process internal data information set to obtain a third logic verification data set specifically includes the following steps: Count the execution data of each node in the third control dimension and the segmented process node control execution result set to form the third dimension execution data set; According to the third dimension execution data set, the deviation between the node execution data and the standard execution data in the internal data information set of the first segmented process and the execution effect of the key nodes within each segmented process are evaluated to obtain the third logic verification data set.

[0063] This application's "verification of the logical relationship between internal nodes of the first segmented process to generate a third logic verification data set based on the third control dimension" in the full-process control system of electronic letters of guarantee is a key link in deeply verifying the strictness of process control from a full-dimensional perspective. Its operating logic can be summarized as "full-dimensional data aggregation + in-depth verification of deviations and effects + internal logic closed-loop verification." Specifically, the process first relies on the third control dimension (covering a comprehensive perspective of the key nodes of the entire process, such as paying attention to the full-link logic of qualifications, funds, and risks at the same time), and associates the segmented process node control execution result set (recording the actual execution data of each node, such as the time consumed in qualification review, the status of deposit receipt, and the risk scoring results) to statistically form a third-dimensional execution data set (aggregating the execution data of the key nodes of the entire process); then, based on this data set, compares the deviation between the node execution data and the standard execution data in the internal data information set of the first segmented process (determines whether the operation of the entire process deviates from the preset rules), and evaluates the execution effect of the key nodes within the segmented process (testing whether the full-process control actions coordinate to prevent and control risks), and then verifies the logical relationship between the nodes within the first segmented process (ensuring that the node flow in the entire process complies with the business logic and risk prevention and control requirements), and finally outputs the third logic verification data set, providing a full-dimensional and in-depth logical verification basis for process control evaluation.

[0064] Take the application of a bid bond for a city complex project by construction company A as an example: Assuming that the third control dimension is the full-process risk control perspective (covering all key nodes such as qualification review, deposit verification, and risk assessment), the first segmented process is the front-end application review process (including the above-mentioned key nodes), and the key verification node set involves qualification, funding, and risk-related nodes.

[0065] First, we compiled the third-dimensional execution data set. We extracted execution data from the segmented process node control execution results for key nodes throughout the entire process, including the qualification review node (1.5 hours, conditional approval, with an additional letter of commitment), the margin verification node (0.5 hours, approval, RMB 8 million), and the risk assessment node (3 hours, score 6.25). This data was then linked to the third control dimension (full-process risk) to form the third-dimensional execution data set.

[0066] Based on the third-dimensional execution data set, the deviations between the execution data of nodes within the first sub-process (the front-end application review process) and the standard execution data were compared. The standard time threshold for the qualification review node was 2 hours, but the actual time was 1.5 hours, which was within the limit. The standard time threshold for the margin verification node was 1 hour, but the actual time was 0.5 hours, which was within the limit. The standard time threshold for the risk assessment node was 4 hours, but the actual time was 3 hours, which was within the limit. The standard review results showed conditional qualification approval (supplementary commitment letter), margin approval (amount matching), and a medium risk score (6.25 points), all of which met the pre-set rules. The execution performance of key nodes within the sub-process was also evaluated: the qualification review node, through the additional commitment letter, locked in the qualification validity risk (requiring Enterprise A to renew its qualification before December); the margin verification node confirmed sufficient funds, providing basic data for risk assessment (due to no funding gap, the risk score was not increased); and the risk assessment node, combining qualification and funding data, reasonably outputted a medium risk score (6.25 points). These three factors synergistically mitigated potential risks in the front-end process.

[0067] Finally, verify the logical relationship between internal nodes. Based on the deviation and effect evaluation results, verify the logical relationship between each node in the first segment process (the front-end application review process). After the qualification review node is executed, the margin verification node is started (in line with the business logic of "first verify qualifications, then verify funds"); after the margin verification node is executed, the risk assessment node is started (in line with the risk control logic of "first verify funds, then evaluate risks"); and the scoring data of the risk assessment node is strongly correlated with the execution results of the qualification and fund nodes (conditional qualification and sufficient funds jointly affect the risk score). The logic flow of each node is smooth and the data association is reasonable. The above deviation verification, effect evaluation and logical relationship verification are combined to form the third logic verification data set, recording "the compliance of the front-end application review process nodes under the third control dimension (full-process risk), the effective and coordinated risk control, and the strict and self-consistent internal logical relationship."

[0068] Through the above steps, the third logic verification data set deeply verifies the execution deviation, collaborative management effect and internal node logical relationship of the first segment process of the electronic letter of guarantee from a full-dimensional perspective.

[0069] After a comprehensive evaluation of the control assessment result set to be verified and the process control assessment set, the full process control evaluation results of the electronic letter of guarantee business are obtained, specifically: Counting the differences between the to-be-verified control and assessment result set and the first control and assessment result set to obtain a first verification difference result set; Counting the differences between the to-be-verified control and assessment result set and the second control and assessment result set to obtain a second verification difference result set; Counting the differences between the to-be-verified control and assessment result set and the third control and assessment result set to obtain a third verification difference result set; Performing control and assessment result adjustment processing on the control and assessment result set to be verified based on the first verification difference result set, the second verification difference result set, and the third verification difference result set to obtain a control and assessment adjustment result set; A comprehensive control evaluation is conducted on the control evaluation results of each segmented process in the control evaluation adjustment results to obtain the control evaluation results of the entire process of the electronic letter of guarantee business.

[0070] In the full-process control system of electronic letters of guarantee, "integrating the set of control assessment results to be verified and the process control assessment set to generate full-process control evaluation results" is a key link for the final diagnosis and calibration of the business control effect. This process first forms a verification difference result set (quantifying the differences between different evaluation perspectives) by statistically analyzing the differences between the set of control assessment results to be verified (a data set for preliminary evaluation of the segmented process control effect) and the evaluation result sets of each dimension in the process control assessment set (the first, second, and third control assessment result sets, corresponding to different control perspectives); then, based on these difference results, the set of control assessment results to be verified is calibrated and adjusted to output a more accurate control assessment adjustment result set; finally, a full-process comprehensive evaluation is carried out on the adjusted result set to output the full-process control evaluation results of the electronic letter of guarantee business.

[0071] Take the application of a bid bond for a city complex project by construction company A as an example: Assume that the preliminary assessment of the control effect of the front-end application review process in the control and assessment result set to be verified is "medium", the first control and assessment result set (forward qualification dimension) in the process control and assessment set is assessed as "medium", the second control and assessment result set (reverse funding dimension) is assessed as "excellent", and the third control and assessment result set (all-dimensional risk) is assessed as "good".

[0072] For the first control assessment result set (forward qualifications), a comparison of the differences between the pending control assessment result set and the first control assessment result set revealed that both assessed the front-end application review process as "medium," with minimal differences. This formed the first verification difference result set, recording "small differences in the assessment of the forward qualification dimension, low differences." For the second control assessment result set (reverse funding), the pending verification result was "medium," while the second control result was "excellent," with significant differences. This statistically generated the second verification difference result set, recording "large differences in the assessment of the reverse funding dimension, high differences." For the third control assessment result set (all-dimensional risk), the pending verification result was "medium," while the third control result was "good," with significant differences. This formed the third verification difference result set, recording "disagreements in the assessment of the all-dimensional risk dimension, medium differences."

[0073] Next, adjustments were made to the control assessment results. Based on the difference results from the first, second, and third verifications, the control assessment results set to be verified were calibrated: For small differences in the first dimension, the original assessment result (medium) was maintained. For large differences in the second dimension, the assessment basis was traced back (for example, to check whether the execution data for the reverse funding control dimension was omitted from the verification assessment). It was found that the verification assessment did not fully consider the positive impact of efficient execution of the margin verification node on the process, and the assessment result was adjusted to "good." For differences in the third dimension, the effectiveness of the coordinated prevention and control of various nodes under the full-dimensional risk control was supplemented, and the assessment result was adjusted to "good." After comprehensive adjustments, the control assessment adjustment result set was formed, recording "Control effectiveness of the previous application review process: medium in the qualification dimension, good in the funding dimension, and good in all dimensions."

[0074] Finally, a comprehensive evaluation of the entire process is conducted. The control and assessment results for each sub-process (e.g., the front-end application review process and the back-end letter of guarantee issuance process) within the control and assessment adjustment results set are integrated. Assuming the control and assessment result for the back-end letter of guarantee issuance process is "Excellent" (efficient node execution and no risk deviation), combined with the front-end process's "medium qualifications, good funding, and good overall performance," a comprehensive evaluation from a full-process perspective reveals that the front-end process requires optimization due to qualification risks, but funding and overall management are effective; the back-end process is efficient and compliant. The final output is the control and assessment results for the entire electronic letter of guarantee business process, such as "Excellent overall process control; attention needs to be paid to continuity risks in the front-end qualification process; overall risks are controllable; and process collaboration is effective."

[0075] The evaluation results of the full-process management and control of electronic letters of guarantee (ELGs) were analyzed from multiple perspectives. Through assessment, calibration, and full-process integration, an accurate diagnosis of business management effectiveness was achieved. Taking the scenario of Construction Company A as an example, the evaluation results not only identified potential optimization points in the front-end qualification process, but also affirmed the synergistic effectiveness of full-process management and control. This provided clear decision-making direction for the continued optimization of the ELG business (such as targeted strengthening of qualification control) and risk prevention and control (such as monitoring qualification renewal). This closed-loop management, from segmented assessment to full-process evaluation, ensured that the business operated in a compliant, efficient, and risk-controlled manner.

[0076] Example 2 adds the following technical features based on Example 1: The electronic letter of guarantee full-process management and control system includes: Acquisition module: Acquisition of business data and basic information of electronic letter of guarantee business during its operation; Assessment and division module: This module conducts risk level assessment on the electronic letter of guarantee business based on business data information to obtain risk level assessment results, and divides the electronic letter of guarantee business process based on the risk level assessment results to obtain a business process segmentation result set; Processing module: This module reviews the basic information of the electronic letter of guarantee business to obtain information review results. Based on the information review results and risk level assessment results, it performs node control and execution on each segmented process in the business process segmented result set to obtain a node control execution result set. Selection module: selects a key verification node set from each segmented process in the business process segmentation result set, and extracts a control detection data set from each segmented process in the business process segmentation result set; Evaluation module: Based on the control detection data set and the node control execution result set, the control effect of each segmented process in the business process segmentation result set is evaluated to obtain the control evaluation result set to be verified; Collection and Verification Module: Sets the control dimension set based on the key verification node set, and collects and verifies data for each segmented process in the business process segmentation result set based on the key verification node set to obtain the collected data set; Processing and analysis module: processes and analyzes the control dimension set, collection data set, key verification node set, and business process segmentation result set to obtain the process control evaluation set; Control and evaluation module: After a comprehensive evaluation of the control and evaluation result set to be verified and the process control and evaluation set, the full-process control and evaluation results of the electronic letter of guarantee business are obtained.

[0077] An electronic device includes a memory, a processor, and a computer program stored in the memory and executable on the processor. When the processor executes the program, a method for controlling the entire process of an electronic letter of guarantee is implemented.

[0078] like Figure 3 As shown, the electronic device may include: a processor (processor) 610, a communication interface (communications interface) 620, a memory (memory) 630 and a communication bus 640, wherein the processor 610, the communication interface 620, and the memory 630 communicate with each other via the communication bus 640. The processor 610 may call the logic instructions in the memory 630 to execute the full-process management and control method of the electronic letter of guarantee.

[0079] Finally, it should be noted that the above embodiments are only used to illustrate the technical solutions of the present invention, rather than to limit it. Although the present invention has been described in detail with reference to the aforementioned embodiments, those skilled in the art should understand that they can still modify the technical solutions described in the aforementioned embodiments, or make equivalent replacements for some of the technical features therein. However, these modifications or replacements do not deviate the essence of the corresponding technical solutions from the spirit and scope of the technical solutions of the various embodiments of the present invention.

Claims

1. The full-process control method for electronic letter of guarantee is characterized by: The method comprises the following steps: Obtain business data and basic information of electronic letter of guarantee business during its operation; Performing a risk level assessment on the electronic letter of guarantee business based on the business data information to obtain a risk level assessment result, and dividing the electronic letter of guarantee business process based on the risk level assessment result to obtain a business process segmentation result set; Review the basic information of the electronic letter of guarantee business to obtain information review results. Based on the information review results and risk level assessment results, perform node control and execution on each segmented process in the business process segmented result set to obtain a node control execution result set. Select a key verification node set from each segmented process in the business process segmentation result set, and extract a control detection data set from each segmented process in the business process segmentation result set; Based on the control detection data set and the node control execution result set, the control effect of each segmented process in the business process segmentation result set is evaluated to obtain the control evaluation result set to be verified; Set the control dimension set based on the key verification node set, and collect and verify data for each segmented process in the business process segmentation result set based on the key verification node set to obtain a collection data set; Processing and analyzing the control dimension set, collection data set, key verification node set, and business process segmentation result set to obtain a process control evaluation set; After a comprehensive evaluation of the control assessment result set to be verified and the process control assessment set, the full process control evaluation results of the electronic letter of guarantee business are obtained.

2. The electronic letter of guarantee full-process management and control method according to claim 1, characterized in that: The control dimension set, collection data set, key verification node set, and business process segmentation result set are processed and analyzed to obtain the process control evaluation set. The specific steps include: A first logic verification data set is obtained by analyzing the node execution data of the segmented process node control execution result set under the first control dimension of the control dimension set and verifying the logical relationship between the key verification node sets; a second logic verification data set is obtained by analyzing the node execution data of the segmented process node control execution result set under the second control dimension of the control dimension set and verifying the logical relationship between the key verification node sets; a first segmented process internal data information set is obtained based on data collection of the third key verification node, and the logical relationship between each node in the first segmented process internal data information set is verified to obtain a third logic verification data set; The acquisition data set includes a first acquisition verification set, a second acquisition verification set and a third acquisition verification set; Evaluate the control effects of each segmented process in the business process segmented result set based on the first collection and verification set and the first logic verification data set to obtain a first control and management evaluation result set; evaluate the control effects of each segmented process in the business process segmented result set based on the second collection and verification set and the second logic verification data set to obtain a second control and management evaluation result set; and evaluate the control effects of each segmented process in the business process segmented result set based on the third logic verification data set and the third collection and verification set to obtain a third control and management evaluation result set; The first control and assessment result set, the second control and assessment result set, and the third control and assessment result set are combined into a process control and assessment set.

3. The electronic letter of guarantee full-process management and control method according to claim 2 is characterized in that: The electronic letter of guarantee business process is divided according to the risk level assessment results to obtain a business process segmentation result set, which specifically includes the following steps: The risk level assessment results include first-level risk, second-level risk, and third-level risk; wherein the risk level of the first-level risk is greater than the risk level of the second-level risk, and the risk level of the second-level risk is greater than the risk level of the third-level risk; Divide the electronic letter of guarantee business process into front-end business process and back-end business process; If the risk level assessment result is the first level risk, the number of nodes in the front-end business process is made greater than the number of nodes in the back-end business process to obtain the first business process segmentation result, and the difference between the number of nodes in the front-end business process and the number of nodes in the back-end business process is the first node number difference; If the risk level assessment result is a second-level risk, the number of nodes in the front-end business process is made greater than the number of nodes in the back-end business process to obtain a second business process segmentation result, and at this time, the difference between the number of nodes in the front-end business process and the number of nodes in the back-end business process is a second node number difference, and the second node number difference is less than the first node number difference; If the risk level assessment result is the third level risk, the number of nodes in the front-end business process is equal to the number of nodes in the back-end business process to obtain the third business process segmentation result; The first business process segmentation result, the second business process segmentation result and the third business process segmentation result are combined into a business process segmentation result set.

4. The electronic letter of guarantee full-process management and control method according to claim 3 is characterized in that: Based on the information review results and risk level assessment results, node control execution is performed on each segmented process in the business process segmentation result set to obtain a node control execution result set, which specifically includes the following steps: According to the information review results and risk level assessment results, the node control rule parameters of each segmented process in the business process segmentation result set are adjusted to obtain parameter adjustment results; Obtain the key node positions of each segmented process in the business process segmented result set, perform node control on each segmented process in the business process segmented result set based on the parameter adjustment results and the key node positions of each segmented process, and then output the segmented process node control execution result set; After evaluating the deviation between the node execution data and the standard execution data of the segmented process node control execution result set and the execution effect of the key nodes within each segmented process, the node control execution result set is output.

5. The electronic letter of guarantee full-process management and control method according to claim 4 is characterized in that: According to the key verification node set, data collection and verification are performed on each segmented process in the business process segmentation result set to obtain a collection data set, specifically including the following steps: According to the first key verification node, the second key verification node, and the third key verification node, a first control dimension, a second control dimension, and a third control dimension are set respectively; Based on the first control dimension, the forward key node data direction between each segmented process in the business process segmentation result set and the standard process of electronic letter of guarantee business is marked as the first data collection direction. Data is collected and verified for the corresponding segmented processes according to the first data collection direction to obtain the first collection and verification set; Based on the second control dimension, the reverse key node data direction between each segmented process in the business process segmentation result set and the standard process of electronic letter of guarantee business is marked as the second data collection direction. Data is collected and verified for the corresponding segmented processes according to the second data collection direction to obtain the second collection and verification set; Based on the third control dimension, the data direction of all-dimensional key nodes between each segmented process in the business process segmentation result set and the standard process of the electronic letter of guarantee business is marked as a third data collection direction, and data is collected and verified for the corresponding segmented processes according to the third data collection direction to obtain a third collection and verification set; The first acquisition verification set, the second acquisition verification set and the third acquisition verification set are combined into an acquisition data set.

6. The electronic letter of guarantee full-process management and control method according to claim 5 is characterized in that: A first logic verification data set is obtained by analyzing the node execution data of the segmented process node control execution result set under the first control dimension of the control dimension set and verifying the logical relationship between the key verification node sets; A second logic verification data set is obtained by analyzing the node execution data of the segmented process node control execution result set under the second control dimension of the control dimension set and verifying the logical relationship between the key verification node sets; The method includes the following steps: obtaining a first segmented process internal data information set based on data collected from the third key verification node; and verifying the logical relationship between the nodes in the first segmented process internal data information set to obtain a third logic verification data set. Counting the first dimension execution data set and the second dimension execution data set formed by the first control dimension and the second control dimension and the execution data of each node in the segmented process node control execution result set; Based on the first dimension execution data set, the deviation between the node execution data and the standard execution data of the segmented process node control execution result set and the execution effect of the key nodes within each segmented process are evaluated to obtain a first logic verification data set; According to the second dimension execution data set, the deviation between the node execution data and the standard execution data of the segmented process node control execution result set and the execution effect of the key nodes within each segmented process are evaluated to obtain the second logic verification data set.

7. The electronic letter of guarantee full-process management and control method according to claim 6 is characterized in that: Verifying the logical relationship between the nodes in the first segmented process internal data information set to obtain a third logic verification data set specifically includes the following steps: Count the execution data of each node in the third control dimension and the segmented process node control execution result set to form the third dimension execution data set; According to the third dimension execution data set, the deviation between the node execution data and the standard execution data in the internal data information set of the first segmented process and the execution effect of the key nodes within each segmented process are evaluated to obtain the third logic verification data set.

8. The electronic letter of guarantee full-process management and control method according to claim 7 is characterized in that: After a comprehensive evaluation of the control assessment result set to be verified and the process control assessment set, the full process control evaluation results of the electronic letter of guarantee business are obtained, specifically: Counting the differences between the to-be-verified control and assessment result set and the first control and assessment result set to obtain a first verification difference result set; Counting the differences between the to-be-verified control and assessment result set and the second control and assessment result set to obtain a second verification difference result set; Counting the differences between the to-be-verified control and assessment result set and the third control and assessment result set to obtain a third verification difference result set; Performing control and assessment result adjustment processing on the control and assessment result set to be verified based on the first verification difference result set, the second verification difference result set, and the third verification difference result set to obtain a control and assessment adjustment result set; A comprehensive control evaluation is conducted on the control evaluation results of each segmented process in the control evaluation adjustment results to obtain the control evaluation results of the entire process of the electronic letter of guarantee business.

9. The electronic letter of guarantee full-process management and control system is applied to the electronic letter of guarantee full-process management and control method according to claims 1 to 8, characterized in that: include: Acquisition module: Acquisition of business data and basic information of electronic letter of guarantee business during its operation; Assessment and division module: This module conducts risk level assessment on the electronic letter of guarantee business based on business data information to obtain risk level assessment results, and divides the electronic letter of guarantee business process based on the risk level assessment results to obtain a business process segmentation result set; Processing module: This module reviews the basic information of the electronic letter of guarantee business to obtain information review results. Based on the information review results and risk level assessment results, it performs node control and execution on each segmented process in the business process segmented result set to obtain a node control execution result set. Selection module: selects a key verification node set from each segmented process in the business process segmentation result set, and extracts a control detection data set from each segmented process in the business process segmentation result set; Evaluation module: Based on the control detection data set and the node control execution result set, the control effect of each segmented process in the business process segmentation result set is evaluated to obtain the control evaluation result set to be verified; Collection and Verification Module: Sets the control dimension set based on the key verification node set, and collects and verifies data for each segmented process in the business process segmentation result set based on the key verification node set to obtain the collected data set; Processing and analysis module: processes and analyzes the control dimension set, collection data set, key verification node set, and business process segmentation result set to obtain the process control evaluation set; Control and evaluation module: After a comprehensive evaluation of the control and evaluation result set to be verified and the process control and evaluation set, the full-process control and evaluation results of the electronic letter of guarantee business are obtained.

10. An electronic device comprising a memory, a processor, and a computer program stored in the memory and executable on the processor, wherein: When the processor executes the program, the electronic letter of guarantee full-process management method as described in any one of claims 1 to 8 is implemented.

Images