Transaction approval method, device, equipment, medium and product
By calculating the weights of reference factors and evaluation data in the approval process, comprehensive evaluation data is determined, which solves the problem of inaccurate approval results caused by multiple human factors and achieves more reliable approval results.
Patent Information
- Authority / Receiving Office
- CN · China
- Patent Type
- Applications(China)
- Current Assignee / Owner
- Filing Date
- 2025-11-28
- Publication Date
- 2026-04-07
AI Technical Summary
In existing technologies, the approval process for business transactions is subject to many subjective human factors, which leads to poor reliability of the approval results.
By obtaining the first weight of the reference factors and the first evaluation data of the approver, the comprehensive evaluation data is calculated, and the approval result is determined based on the comprehensive evaluation data and the preset threshold. The rationality and reliability of the evaluation are improved by taking into account the influence of multiple reference factors and the conflict between the approvers.
It improves the reliability of approval results, reduces the influence of subjective human factors, and enhances the rationality of the approval process.
Smart Images
Figure CN121810201A_ABST
Abstract
Description
Technical Field
[0001] This application relates to the field of data processing technology, and in particular to a transaction approval method, apparatus, device, medium, and product. Background Technology
[0002] Currently, in transaction approval scenarios, transactions are often approved manually, resulting in either approval or disapproval. This entirely manual approach introduces significant human subjectivity and a limited range of considerations, leading to unreliable approval outcomes. Summary of the Invention
[0003] Therefore, it is necessary to provide a transaction approval method, apparatus, equipment, medium, and product that can improve the reliability of approval results in response to the above-mentioned technical problems.
[0004] Firstly, this application provides a transaction approval method, including:
[0005] Upon receiving a transaction approval request, obtain the first weight corresponding to at least one reference factor, whereby the first weight is used to characterize the importance of the corresponding reference factor.
[0006] Obtain the first evaluation data of at least one approver for the approval task corresponding to the transaction approval request under each reference factor;
[0007] Based on the primary weights and primary evaluation data, the comprehensive evaluation data for the approval task is determined.
[0008] The approval result of the approval task is determined based on the relationship between the comprehensive evaluation data and the preset threshold.
[0009] In one embodiment, determining the comprehensive evaluation data of the approval task based on each first weight and each first evaluation data includes: for each reference factor, determining the second evaluation data corresponding to the reference factor based on the first evaluation data of each approver under the reference factor; and determining the comprehensive evaluation data based on the second evaluation data corresponding to each reference factor and the corresponding first weight.
[0010] In one embodiment, determining the second evaluation data corresponding to the reference factor based on the first evaluation data of each approver under the reference factor includes: determining the average evaluation data corresponding to the reference factor based on the first evaluation data of each approver under the reference factor; determining the conflict data of the corresponding approver for the reference factor based on the first evaluation data and the average evaluation data of each approver under the reference factor; determining the second weight of the corresponding approver for the reference factor based on the conflict data of each approver for the reference factor; wherein the second weight is negatively correlated with the conflict data; and determining the second evaluation data corresponding to the reference factor based on the first evaluation data of each approver under the reference factor and the corresponding second weight.
[0011] In one embodiment, determining the conflict data of the corresponding approver regarding the reference factor based on the first evaluation data and average evaluation data of each approver under the reference factor includes: taking the absolute value of the first difference between the first evaluation data and the average evaluation data of each approver under the reference factor as the conflict data of the corresponding approver regarding the reference factor.
[0012] In one embodiment, determining the second weight of the reference factor for each approver based on the conflict data of each approver for the reference factor includes: summing the conflict data of each approver for the reference factor to obtain total conflict data; subtracting the preset conflict value from the conflict data of each approver for the reference factor to obtain the second difference value of the corresponding approver under the reference factor; and using the ratio between the second difference value of each approver under the reference factor and the total conflict data corresponding to the reference factor as the second weight of the corresponding approver for the reference factor.
[0013] In one embodiment, obtaining the first weight corresponding to at least one reference factor includes: for each reference factor, obtaining the importance evaluation data of each approver for the reference factor; and determining the first weight of the reference factor based on the importance evaluation data corresponding to each reference factor.
[0014] Secondly, this application also provides a transaction approval device, comprising:
[0015] The first acquisition module is used to acquire, upon receiving a transaction approval request, the first weight corresponding to at least one reference factor, wherein the first weight is used to characterize the importance of the corresponding reference factor.
[0016] The second acquisition module is used to acquire first evaluation data of at least one approver for the approval task corresponding to the transaction approval request under each reference factor.
[0017] The first determination module is used to determine the comprehensive evaluation data of the approval task based on each first weight and each first evaluation data.
[0018] The second determining module is used to determine the approval result of the approval task based on the relationship between the comprehensive evaluation data and the preset threshold.
[0019] Thirdly, this application also provides a computer device, including a memory and a processor, wherein the memory stores a computer program, and the processor executes the computer program to implement the method provided in the first aspect.
[0020] Fourthly, this application also provides a computer-readable storage medium having a computer program stored thereon, which, when executed by a processor, implements the method provided in the first aspect.
[0021] Fifthly, this application also provides a computer program product, including a computer program that, when executed by a processor, implements the method provided in the first aspect.
[0022] The aforementioned transaction approval method, apparatus, equipment, medium, and product, upon receiving a transaction approval request, acquires at least one first weight corresponding to each reference factor, and acquires first evaluation data from at least one approver for the approval task corresponding to the transaction approval request under each reference factor. The first weights and first evaluation data are then processed to obtain comprehensive evaluation data reflecting the overall evaluation of the approval task by each approver. The approval result of the approval task is then determined based on the relationship between the comprehensive evaluation data and a preset threshold. Although the acquired first evaluation factors may introduce subjective factors, the above process considers not only at least one reference factor but also the first weights set due to the different impacts of different reference factors on the approval task, thus improving the rationality of the comprehensive evaluation data. Therefore, compared to the prior art where transaction approval is entirely manual, this embodiment can improve the reliability of the approval result. Attached Figure Description
[0023] To more clearly illustrate the technical solutions in the embodiments of this application or related technologies, the drawings used in the description of the embodiments of this application or related technologies will be briefly introduced below. Obviously, the drawings described below are only some embodiments of this application. For those skilled in the art, other related drawings can be obtained based on these drawings without creative effort.
[0024] Figure 1 This is a flowchart illustrating a transaction approval method in one embodiment;
[0025] Figure 2 This is a flowchart illustrating the steps for determining comprehensive evaluation data in one embodiment;
[0026] Figure 3This is a flowchart illustrating the second evaluation data determination step in one embodiment;
[0027] Figure 4 This is a flowchart illustrating the first weight acquisition step in one embodiment;
[0028] Figure 5 This is a structural block diagram of a transaction approval device in one embodiment;
[0029] Figure 6 This is an internal structural diagram of a computer device in one embodiment. Detailed Implementation
[0030] To make the objectives, technical solutions, and advantages of this application clearer, the following detailed description is provided in conjunction with the accompanying drawings and embodiments. It should be understood that the specific embodiments described herein are merely illustrative and not intended to limit the scope of this application.
[0031] In one exemplary embodiment, a transaction approval method is provided, see [link to example]. Figure 1 The method includes:
[0032] S110, upon receiving a transaction approval request, obtain the first weight corresponding to at least one reference factor, the first weight being used to characterize the importance of the corresponding reference factor.
[0033] This embodiment can be executed by any computer device with computing capabilities.
[0034] In this context, a transaction approval request can be understood as a request to approve or process an approval task.
[0035] The reference factors are the dimensions that need to be considered during the approval process. Different approval tasks require different reference factors.
[0036] For example, the factors considered in approving resource applications include at least one of the following: the applicant's financial condition, asset status, credit status, personal capabilities, and industry prospects. Financial condition refers to the applicant's business operations, reflected in value terms, typically through a balance sheet, profit and loss statement, and related schedules. It is a financial representation of the results of the company's production and operations and a crucial indicator of its repayment ability. Asset status includes at least one of current assets, fixed assets, long-term assets, intangible assets, biological assets, and other assets, which can be used as collateral and are important indicators for risk mitigation. Credit status is primarily based on credit reports, examining whether the applicant has any overdue payments and assessing their creditworthiness. Personal capabilities refer to the applicant's innovation capabilities and / or social relationships, representing a soft indicator. Industry prospects refer to whether the applicant's industry is a sunset or sunrise industry, an important indicator of future development.
[0037] Each reference factor has a corresponding first weight, which represents the importance of the reference factor. The higher the importance, the greater the first weight.
[0038] Understandably, different reference factors have varying degrees of influence during the approval process. Therefore, different primary weights are assigned to different reference factors to participate in subsequent steps. This approach ensures the reasonableness of the approval results by reflecting the different impacts of various reference factors while considering multiple factors.
[0039] S120, obtain the first evaluation data of at least one approver for the approval task corresponding to the transaction approval request under each reference factor.
[0040] That is, the approval task is evaluated by at least one approver based on each reference factor, for example, by scoring, with the scoring range being [0,10], and the score is used as the first evaluation data.
[0041] For example, there are 10 approvers and 5 reference factors. Each approver evaluates the approval task based on each reference factor, for example, by scoring, and the scoring range is [0,10]. The scores are used as the first evaluation data, resulting in a total of 50 first evaluation data. The computer device can obtain these 50 first evaluation data.
[0042] S130, Based on each primary weight and each primary evaluation data, determine the comprehensive evaluation data for the approval task.
[0043] For example, 50 primary evaluation data points and 5 primary weights are processed to obtain a comprehensive evaluation data point, which is used to reflect the comprehensive evaluation of the approval task by each approval party.
[0044] S140, based on the relationship between the comprehensive evaluation data and the preset threshold, determine the approval result of the approval task.
[0045] Specifically, if the comprehensive evaluation data exceeds a preset threshold, the approval result is determined as approved. If the comprehensive evaluation data is less than or equal to the preset threshold, the approval result is determined as rejected.
[0046] The aforementioned transaction approval method, upon receiving a transaction approval request, obtains the first weight corresponding to at least one reference factor, and the first evaluation data of at least one approver for the approval task corresponding to the transaction approval request under each reference factor. The first weights and first evaluation data are then processed to obtain comprehensive evaluation data reflecting the overall evaluation of the approval task by each approver. The approval result of the task is then determined based on the relationship between the comprehensive evaluation data and a preset threshold. Although the obtained first evaluation factors may introduce subjective factors, the above process considers not only at least one reference factor but also the first weights set due to the different impacts of different reference factors on the approval task, thus improving the rationality of the comprehensive evaluation data. Therefore, compared to the existing technology where transaction approval is entirely manual, this embodiment can improve the reliability of the approval result.
[0047] Based on the technical solutions provided in the above embodiments, an optional embodiment is provided, in which the comprehensive evaluation data determination step in S130 is refined.
[0048] See Figure 2 The steps for determining comprehensive evaluation data include:
[0049] S210, for each reference factor, determine the second evaluation data corresponding to the reference factor based on the first evaluation data of each approver under the reference factor.
[0050] S220. Based on the second evaluation data and the corresponding first weight of each reference factor, determine the comprehensive evaluation data.
[0051] For example, for the first of the five reference factors, the ten first evaluation data points of the ten approvers under the first reference factor are processed to obtain a second evaluation data point. This second evaluation data point is the evaluation data under the first reference factor and is therefore called the second evaluation data point corresponding to the first reference factor. After obtaining the five second evaluation data points corresponding to the five reference factors, these five second evaluation data points and the five first weights are processed to obtain the comprehensive evaluation data.
[0052] In this embodiment, firstly, for each reference factor, based on the first evaluation data of each approver under the reference factor, the second evaluation data corresponding to the reference factor can be accurately determined. Based on the second evaluation data corresponding to each reference factor and each first weight, the comprehensive evaluation data can be accurately calculated. It can be seen that this embodiment decomposes the calculation process of the comprehensive evaluation data based on the reference factors to ensure the rationality of the calculation process and thus ensure the reliability of the comprehensive evaluation data.
[0053] Based on the technical solutions provided in the above embodiments, an optional embodiment is provided, in which the second evaluation data determination step in S210 is refined.
[0054] See Figure 3 The second evaluation data determination step includes:
[0055] S310, based on the first evaluation data of each approver under the reference factor, determine the average evaluation data corresponding to the reference factor.
[0056] For example, for the first reference factor, the average of the 10 first evaluation data points for the 10 approvers under the first reference factor is calculated as the average evaluation data corresponding to the first reference factor. Specifically, this can be expressed using the following expression:
[0057]
[0058] In the formula, This represents the average evaluation data corresponding to the j-th reference factor. Let be the first evaluation data of the i-th approver under the j-th reference factor, and n be the number of approvers.
[0059] S320, based on the first evaluation data and average evaluation data of each approver under the reference factors, determine the conflict data of the corresponding approver for the reference factors.
[0060] Among them, conflict data can be understood as the degree to which the first evaluation data deviates from the average evaluation data.
[0061] In one alternative implementation, the conflict data determination step may include: taking the absolute value of the first difference between the first evaluation data and the average evaluation data of each approver under the reference factor as the conflict data of the corresponding approver for the reference factor.
[0062] For example, conflict data can be represented as:
[0063]
[0064] In the formula, This represents the conflict data between the i-th approver and the j-th reference factor.
[0065] The above implementation method can quickly calculate the conflict data of each approval party for each reference factor.
[0066] Of course, other methods can be used to calculate conflicting data, which are not limited here.
[0067] S330, based on conflict data regarding reference factors from each approver, determines the second weight of the reference factor for the respective approver.
[0068] Among them, the second weight is negatively correlated with conflict data.
[0069] In an optional implementation, the second weight determination step in S330 includes:
[0070] S1 sums the conflict data of each approver regarding the reference factors to obtain the total conflict data.
[0071] S2, subtract the preset conflict value from the conflict data of each approver for the reference factor to obtain the second difference value of the corresponding approver under the reference factor.
[0072] S3, the ratio between the second difference of each approver under the reference factor and the total conflict data corresponding to the reference factor is used as the second weight of the corresponding approver for the reference factor.
[0073] The preset conflict value can be set as needed. For example, you can select the maximum value among the conflicting data. Of course, other values are also possible and are not limited here.
[0074] For example, the second weight can be calculated using the following formula:
[0075]
[0076] In the formula, This represents the second weight of the i-th approver for the j-th reference factor. 10 is a preset conflict value, but it is not limited to 10.
[0077] Of course, the second weight can also be normalized:
[0078]
[0079] In the formula, This represents the second weight of the i-th approver for the j-th reference factor after normalization.
[0080] The above implementation method can quickly calculate the second weight that reflects the approval party's conflict with the reference factors.
[0081] S340, based on the first evaluation data and corresponding second weight of each approver under the reference factor, determine the second evaluation data corresponding to the reference factor.
[0082] For example, the second evaluation data can be calculated using the following formula:
[0083]
[0084] In the formula, This is the second evaluation data corresponding to the j-th reference factor.
[0085] In this embodiment, for each reference factor, based on the first evaluation data and average evaluation data of each approver under that reference factor, the conflict data of the corresponding approver regarding the reference factor can be determined. Therefore, based on the conflict data of each approver regarding the reference factor, the second weight of the corresponding approver regarding the reference factor can be determined. The second weight reflects the conflict situation of the approvers regarding the reference factor. Finally, based on the first evaluation data of each approver under the reference factor and the corresponding second weight, the second evaluation data corresponding to the reference factor can be determined. It can be seen that, compared to directly summing the first evaluation data of each approver under the reference factor to obtain the second evaluation data corresponding to that reference factor, this embodiment considers the conflict situation of the approvers regarding the reference factor during the determination of the second evaluation data, thus improving the rationality of the second evaluation data.
[0086] Based on the technical solutions provided in the above embodiments, an optional embodiment is provided, in which the first weight acquisition step in S110 is refined.
[0087] See Figure 4 The steps for obtaining the first weight include:
[0088] S410: For each reference factor, obtain the assessment data of the importance of the reference factor by each approver.
[0089] S420, determine the first weight of the reference factor based on the evaluation data of each importance level corresponding to the reference factor.
[0090] For example, 10 approvers evaluate the importance of 5 reference factors, resulting in 50 importance evaluation data. For each reference factor, the corresponding 10 importance evaluation data are averaged to obtain the first weight of that reference factor.
[0091] The first weight can be calculated using the following formula:
[0092]
[0093] In the formula, This is the data for evaluating the importance of the j-th reference factor by the i-th approver. Let be the first weight of the j-th reference factor. Of course, the first weight can also be normalized.
[0094]
[0095] In the formula, is the first weight of the j-th reference factor after normalization, and m is the number of reference factors.
[0096] In a real-world scenario, in S220 above, based on the normalized first weight, the comprehensive evaluation data can be calculated using the following formula:
[0097]
[0098] In the formula, S represents the comprehensive evaluation data.
[0099] In this embodiment, for each reference factor, the importance evaluation data of each approver for the reference factor is obtained. Based on the importance evaluation data corresponding to each reference factor, the first weight that can reflect the importance of the reference factor can be accurately calculated.
[0100] It should be understood that although the steps in the flowcharts of the above embodiments are shown sequentially according to the arrows, these steps are not necessarily executed in the order indicated by the arrows. Unless explicitly stated herein, there is no strict order restriction on the execution of these steps, and they can be executed in other orders. Moreover, at least some steps in the flowcharts of the above embodiments may include multiple steps or multiple stages. These steps or stages are not necessarily completed at the same time, but can be executed at different times. The execution order of these steps or stages is not necessarily sequential, but can be performed alternately or in turn with other steps or at least some of the steps or stages of other steps.
[0101] Based on the same inventive concept, this application also provides a transaction approval device for implementing the transaction approval method described above. The solution provided by this device is similar to the implementation described in the above method; therefore, the specific limitations in one or more transaction approval device embodiments provided below can be found in the limitations of the transaction approval method described above, and will not be repeated here.
[0102] In one exemplary embodiment, a transaction approval apparatus is provided, see [link to example]. Figure 5 The device includes:
[0103] The first acquisition module 510 is used to acquire, upon receiving a transaction approval request, a first weight corresponding to at least one reference factor, wherein the first weight is used to characterize the importance of the corresponding reference factor.
[0104] The second acquisition module 520 is used to acquire first evaluation data of at least one approver for the approval task corresponding to the transaction approval request under each reference factor.
[0105] The first determination module 530 is used to determine the comprehensive evaluation data of the approval task based on each first weight and each first evaluation data;
[0106] The second determining module 540 is used to determine the approval result of the approval task based on the relationship between the comprehensive evaluation data and the preset threshold.
[0107] In one embodiment, the first determining module includes:
[0108] The first determining unit is used to determine the second evaluation data corresponding to each reference factor based on the first evaluation data of each approver under the reference factor.
[0109] The second determining unit is used to determine the comprehensive evaluation data based on the second evaluation data corresponding to each reference factor and the corresponding first weight.
[0110] In one embodiment, the first determining unit includes:
[0111] The first determining subunit is used to determine the average evaluation data corresponding to the reference factor based on the first evaluation data of each approver under the reference factor;
[0112] The second determining subunit is used to determine the conflict data of the corresponding approver for the reference factors based on the first evaluation data and average evaluation data of each approver under the reference factors.
[0113] The third determining subunit is used to determine the second weight of the reference factor for each approver based on the conflict data of each approver for the reference factor; wherein the second weight is negatively correlated with the conflict data;
[0114] The fourth determination sub-unit is used to determine the second evaluation data corresponding to the reference factor based on the first evaluation data and the corresponding second weight of each approver under the reference factor.
[0115] In one embodiment, the second determining subunit is specifically used to: take the absolute value of the first difference between the first evaluation data and the average evaluation data of each approver under the reference factor as the conflict data of the corresponding approver regarding the reference factor.
[0116] In one embodiment, the third determining subunit is specifically used to: sum the conflict data of each approver for the reference factor to obtain the total conflict data; subtract the preset conflict value from the conflict data of each approver for the reference factor to obtain the second difference value of the corresponding approver under the reference factor; and take the ratio between the second difference value of each approver under the reference factor and the total conflict data corresponding to the reference factor as the second weight of the corresponding approver for the reference factor.
[0117] In one embodiment, the first acquisition module is specifically used to: acquire the importance evaluation data of each approver for each reference factor; and determine the first weight of the reference factor based on the importance evaluation data corresponding to each reference factor.
[0118] Each module in the aforementioned transaction approval device can be implemented entirely or partially through software, hardware, or a combination thereof. These modules can be embedded in the processor of a computer device in hardware form or independent of it, or stored in the memory of the computer device in software form, so that the processor can call and execute the operations corresponding to each module.
[0119] In one exemplary embodiment, a computer device is provided, the internal structure of which can be as shown in the figure. Figure 6 As shown, this computer device includes a processor, memory, input / output interfaces (I / O), and a communication interface. The processor, memory, and I / O interfaces are connected via a system bus, and the communication interface is also connected to the system bus via the I / O interfaces. The processor provides computational and control capabilities. The memory includes non-volatile storage media and internal memory. The non-volatile storage media stores the operating system, computer programs, and a database. The internal memory provides the environment for the operation of the operating system and computer programs stored in the non-volatile storage media. The database stores relevant data. The I / O interfaces are used for exchanging information between the processor and external devices. The communication interface is used for communicating with external terminals via a network connection. When executed by the processor, the computer program implements a transaction approval method.
[0120] Those skilled in the art will understand that Figure 6 The structure shown is merely a block diagram of a portion of the structure related to the present application and does not constitute a limitation on the computer device to which the present application is applied. Specific computer devices may include more or fewer components than those shown in the figure, or combine certain components, or have different component arrangements.
[0121] In one exemplary embodiment, a computer device is provided, including a memory and a processor, wherein the memory stores a computer program, and the processor executes the computer program to implement the transaction approval methods provided in the above embodiments.
[0122] In one embodiment, a computer-readable storage medium is provided having a computer program stored thereon, which, when executed by a processor, implements the transaction approval methods provided in the above embodiments.
[0123] In one embodiment, a computer program product is provided, including a computer program that, when executed by a processor, implements the transaction approval methods provided in the above embodiments.
[0124] It should be noted that the user information (including but not limited to user device information, user personal information, etc.) and data (including but not limited to data used for analysis, data stored, data displayed, etc.) involved in this application are all information and data authorized by the user or fully authorized by all parties, and the collection, use and processing of the relevant data must comply with relevant regulations.
[0125] Those skilled in the art will understand that all or part of the processes in the methods of the above embodiments can be implemented by a computer program instructing related hardware. The computer program can be stored in a non-volatile computer-readable storage medium. When executed, the computer program can include the processes of the embodiments of the above methods. Any references to memory, databases, or other media used in the embodiments provided in this application can include at least one of non-volatile memory and volatile memory. Non-volatile memory can include read-only memory (ROM), magnetic tape, floppy disk, flash memory, optical memory, high-density embedded non-volatile memory, resistive random access memory (ReRAM), magnetic random access memory (MRAM), ferroelectric random access memory (FRAM), phase change memory (PCM), graphene memory, etc. Volatile memory can include random access memory (RAM) or external cache memory, etc. By way of illustration and not limitation, RAM can take many forms, such as Static Random Access Memory (SRAM) or Dynamic Random Access Memory (DRAM). The databases involved in the embodiments provided in this application may include at least one type of relational database and non-relational database. Non-relational databases may include, but are not limited to, blockchain-based distributed databases. The processors involved in the embodiments provided in this application may be general-purpose processors, central processing units, graphics processing units, digital signal processors, programmable logic devices, quantum computing-based data processing logic devices, artificial intelligence (AI) processors, etc., and are not limited to these.
[0126] The technical features of the above embodiments can be combined in any way. For the sake of brevity, not all possible combinations of the technical features in the above embodiments are described. However, as long as there is no contradiction in the combination of these technical features, they should be considered to be within the scope of this application.
[0127] The above embodiments are merely illustrative of several implementation methods of this application, and their descriptions are relatively specific and detailed. However, they should not be construed as limiting the scope of this application. It should be noted that those skilled in the art can make various modifications and improvements without departing from the concept of this application, and these all fall within the protection scope of this application. Therefore, the protection scope of this application should be determined by the appended claims.
Claims
1. A transaction approval method, characterized in that, include: Upon receiving a transaction approval request, obtain the first weight corresponding to at least one reference factor, whereby the first weight is used to characterize the importance of the corresponding reference factor. Obtain first evaluation data from at least one approver for the approval task corresponding to the transaction approval request under each of the aforementioned reference factors; Based on each of the first weights and each of the first evaluation data, the comprehensive evaluation data of the approval task is determined; The approval result of the approval task is determined based on the relationship between the comprehensive evaluation data and the preset threshold.
2. The method according to claim 1, characterized in that, The step of determining the comprehensive evaluation data of the approval task based on each of the first weights and each of the first evaluation data includes: For each reference factor, a second evaluation data corresponding to the reference factor is determined based on the first evaluation data of each of the aforementioned approvers under the reference factor; The comprehensive evaluation data is determined based on the second evaluation data and the corresponding first weight for each of the aforementioned reference factors.
3. The method according to claim 2, characterized in that, The step of determining the second evaluation data corresponding to the reference factor based on the first evaluation data of each of the approval parties under the reference factor includes: Based on the first evaluation data of each of the aforementioned approvers under the aforementioned reference factors, the average evaluation data corresponding to the reference factors is determined; Based on the first evaluation data and the average evaluation data of each of the aforementioned approvers under the aforementioned reference factors, the conflict data of the respective approvers regarding the reference factors are determined; Based on the conflict data of each approver regarding the reference factor, a second weight for the reference factor is determined for each approver; wherein the second weight is negatively correlated with the conflict data; Based on the first evaluation data and corresponding second weight of each of the aforementioned approvers under the reference factors, the second evaluation data corresponding to the reference factors is determined.
4. The method according to claim 3, characterized in that, The step of determining the conflict data of the corresponding approver regarding the reference factor based on the first evaluation data and the average evaluation data of each approver under the reference factor includes: The absolute value of the first difference between the first evaluation data and the average evaluation data of each of the aforementioned approvers under the reference factor is taken as the conflict data of the corresponding approver regarding the reference factor.
5. The method according to claim 3, characterized in that, The step of determining the second weight of each approver for the reference factor based on the conflict data of each approver regarding the reference factor includes: The total conflict data is obtained by summing the conflict data of each of the aforementioned approval parties regarding the aforementioned reference factors; The preset conflict value is subtracted from the conflict data of each of the aforementioned approvers for the reference factor to obtain the second difference value of the corresponding approver under the reference factor; The ratio between the second difference of each approver under the reference factor and the total conflict data corresponding to the reference factor is used as the second weight of the respective approver for the reference factor.
6. The method according to any one of claims 1 to 5, characterized in that, The step of obtaining the first weight corresponding to at least one reference factor includes: For each reference factor, obtain the importance evaluation data of each of the aforementioned approvers for that reference factor; and Based on the importance evaluation data corresponding to each of the reference factors, the first weight of the reference factors is determined.
7. A transaction approval device, characterized in that, include: The first acquisition module is used to acquire, upon receiving a transaction approval request, a first weight corresponding to at least one reference factor, wherein the first weight is used to characterize the importance of the corresponding reference factor. The second acquisition module is used to acquire first evaluation data of at least one approver for the approval task corresponding to the transaction approval request under each of the reference factors; The first determining module is used to determine the comprehensive evaluation data of the approval task based on each of the first weights and each of the first evaluation data; The second determining module is used to determine the approval result of the approval task based on the relationship between the comprehensive evaluation data and the preset threshold.
8. A computer device comprising a memory and a processor, wherein the memory stores a computer program, characterized in that, When the processor executes the computer program, it implements the steps of the method according to any one of claims 1 to 6.
9. A computer-readable storage medium having a computer program stored thereon, characterized in that, When the computer program is executed by a processor, it implements the steps of the method according to any one of claims 1 to 6.
10. A computer program product, comprising a computer program, characterized in that, When the computer program is executed by a processor, it implements the steps of the method according to any one of claims 1 to 6.