Inspection rule editing method, electronic equipment, storage medium and program product

Abstract

The invention provides a check rule editing method, electronic equipment, a storage medium and a program product, relates to the technical field of computers, and is used for responding to an instruction to display an editing interface and editing a check rule through a control in the editing interface. The method comprises the following steps: displaying an inspection rule editing interface in response to a received inspection rule adding instruction; the check rule editing interface comprises a judgment condition editing area and a logic editing area and is used for editing check rules; the judgment condition editing area comprises a parameter selection control, a judgment condition selection control and a comparison result selection control, and the judgment condition editing area is used for setting judgment conditions; the parameter selection control is used for selecting a target parameter; the logic editing area is used for setting a logic relationship among a plurality of judgment conditions; in response to a received check rule determination instruction, determining a target check rule edited based on the check rule editing interface; the target checking rule is used for performing rule matching on the unit scheduling business.

Description

Technical Field

[0001] This application relates to the field of computer technology, and in particular to a method for editing inspection rules, electronic devices, storage media, and program products. Background Technology

[0002] Currently, flight crew scheduling in civil aviation mainly relies on manual operation or simple scheduling tools. However, this scheduling method cannot adapt to the frequent changes in civil aviation regulations and the personalized needs of different businesses. Moreover, manual intervention is prone to introducing loopholes and increasing operational risks.

[0003] This led to the introduction of a rules engine, which uses established rules to check scheduling processes and mitigate potential vulnerabilities. However, the introduction of a rules engine also brought new problems, such as the technical hurdle of maintaining the rules and the need for code-level modifications or even service restarts when business rules change. This meant that ordinary business personnel could only edit the rules with the help of technical staff, and could not directly participate in the editing and maintenance of the rules. Summary of the Invention

[0004] This application provides a method for editing inspection rules, an electronic device, a storage medium, and a program product to solve the problem that when using a rule engine, modifications to inspection rules need to be made at the code level, making it difficult for ordinary business personnel to directly participate in the editing and maintenance of inspection rules.

[0005] In a first aspect, this application provides a method for editing inspection rules, comprising: displaying an inspection rule editing interface in response to receiving an instruction to add an inspection rule; the inspection rule editing interface is used to edit inspection rules for inspecting unit scheduling operations; the inspection rule editing interface includes a judgment condition editing area and a logic editing area; the judgment condition editing area includes: a parameter selection control, a judgment condition selection control, and a comparison result selection control, the judgment condition editing area is used to set judgment conditions; the parameter selection control is used to select target parameters from parameters associated with unit scheduling operations; the logic editing area is used to set logical relationships between multiple judgment conditions; in response to receiving an inspection rule determination instruction, determining a target inspection rule edited based on the inspection rule editing interface; the target inspection rule is used to perform rule matching on unit scheduling operations.

[0006] The technical solution provided in this application offers at least the following benefits: By responding to a new instruction for an inspection rule, an inspection rule editing interface is displayed. This interface includes a condition editing area and a logic editing area, allowing business personnel to edit the logical relationships between multiple judgment conditions through the logic editing area. Specifically, the judgment condition editing area includes: parameter selection controls, judgment condition selection controls, and comparison result selection controls. Business personnel can also use these controls to set judgment conditions, select target parameters, and set comparison results, enabling them to directly participate in the editing and maintenance of inspection rules through the editable area of ​​the visual interface, thus improving the maintainability of the rule engine.

[0007] In one possible implementation, the method further includes: in response to receiving an inspection rule configuration instruction, determining the target application scenario of the target inspection rule; determining the target crew scheduling business corresponding to the target application scenario, and associating the target crew scheduling business with the target inspection rule; wherein the target inspection rule is specifically used to inspect the target crew scheduling business associated with it.

[0008] Based on the above implementation method, by responding to the inspection rule configuration command, the inspection rules are associated with the application scenario, and then the crew scheduling business is associated with the inspection rules through the application scenario. This allows the rule engine to directly call the associated inspection rules when the crew scheduling business needs to be inspected, thereby improving the inspection efficiency of the crew scheduling business.

[0009] In one possible implementation, the method further includes: in response to receiving an instruction to check the target unit scheduling business, loading target inspection rules; checking the target unit scheduling business based on the target inspection rules, and obtaining inspection results; the inspection results indicate whether the target unit scheduling business has passed the inspection.

[0010] Based on the above implementation method, by directly loading the target inspection rules to inspect the target unit's scheduling business after receiving the instruction to inspect the target unit's scheduling business, the target inspection rules used for inspection can be directly determined, thereby achieving efficient inspection of the unit's scheduling business.

[0011] In one possible implementation, loading the target check rule includes: if the target rule exists in the cache, then loading the target check rule from the cache; if the target check rule does not exist in the cache, then loading the target check rule from the rule base.

[0012] Based on the above implementation method, by prioritizing the loading of target inspection rules from the cache, the loading speed of inspection rules is improved, thereby increasing the inspection speed from the perspective of data reading.

[0013] In one possible implementation, the target unit scheduling business is checked based on the target inspection rules to obtain the inspection results, including: determining the target judgment conditions that the target parameters of the target unit scheduling business must meet according to the logical relationship of multiple judgment conditions in the target inspection rules; determining whether the target parameters of the target unit scheduling business meet the target judgment conditions; if they do, the target unit scheduling business passes the inspection.

[0014] Based on the above implementation method, the target judgment conditions are automatically determined by logical relationships, which improves the automation of rule checking. Moreover, the logical relationships can be modified according to needs, which also improves the scalability of the rules.

[0015] In one possible implementation, the logical relationships include logical AND and logical OR. Determining whether the target parameters of the target unit scheduling business meet the target judgment conditions includes: determining whether the target parameters of the target unit scheduling business meet each target judgment condition associated with logical AND, and determining whether the target parameters of the target unit scheduling business meet at least one target judgment condition associated with logical OR.

[0016] Based on the above implementation method, by using specific logic AND and OR to determine the target judgment conditions that the target unit scheduling business must at least meet, the target unit scheduling business can be judged quickly and accurately.

[0017] In one possible implementation, the method further includes: in response to an editing instruction for the target parameter, determining whether the edited target parameter meets the target judgment condition; if not, disabling the editing instruction for the target parameter.

[0018] Based on the above implementation method, when an editing instruction for the target parameter is obtained, it is first determined whether the edited target parameter meets the target judgment condition. If it does not meet the condition, the editing instruction is directly blocked to improve the security of the target parameter and the reliability of the unit scheduling business that has passed the inspection.

[0019] Secondly, embodiments of this application provide an inspection rule editing device, comprising: The acquisition module is used to acquire the first data input by the user; the first data includes the shift schedule information of each member in the target shift group in the first time period; The display module is used to display the inspection rule editing interface in response to a newly received instruction to add an inspection rule. The inspection rule editing interface is used to edit inspection rules for checking unit scheduling operations. The interface includes a judgment condition editing area and a logic editing area. The judgment condition editing area includes a parameter selection control, a judgment condition selection control, and a comparison result selection control; it is used to set judgment conditions. The parameter selection control is used to select the target parameter from parameters associated with unit scheduling operations. The logic editing area is used to set the logical relationships between multiple judgment conditions. The determination module is used to determine the target inspection rule based on the inspection rule editing interface in response to the received inspection rule determination instruction; the target inspection rule is used to perform rule matching on the unit scheduling business.

[0020] Thirdly, this application provides an electronic device, including: a processor and a memory, the processor being coupled to the memory; the memory being used to store computer instructions, which are loaded and executed by the processor to enable the computer device to implement the method described in the first aspect.

[0021] Fourthly, this application provides a computer-readable storage medium comprising: computer software instructions; which, when executed in an electronic device, cause the electronic device to implement the method described in the first aspect.

[0022] Fifthly, this application provides a computer program product comprising a computer program; when the computer program is run in an electronic device, it causes the electronic device to implement the method described in the first aspect.

[0023] The beneficial effects of the second to fifth aspects mentioned above are described in the corresponding description of the first aspect and will not be repeated here. Attached Figure Description

[0024] Figure 1 A schematic diagram of the structure of an inspection rule editing system provided in an embodiment of this application; Figure 2 A flowchart illustrating an inspection rule editing method provided in an embodiment of this application; Figure 3 A schematic diagram of an inspection rule editing interface provided in an embodiment of this application; Figure 4 A flowchart illustrating another method for editing inspection rules provided in this application embodiment; Figure 5 A schematic diagram of a crew scheduling business inspection process provided in this application embodiment; Figure 6 A schematic diagram of the composition of an inspection rule editing device provided in an embodiment of this application; Figure 7 This is a schematic diagram of the structure of an electronic device provided in an embodiment of this application. Detailed Implementation

[0025] In this article, the term "and / or" is merely a description of the relationship between related objects, indicating that there can be three relationships. For example, A and / or B can represent three situations: A exists alone, A and B exist simultaneously, and B exists alone.

[0026] The terms "first" and "second," etc., used in the specification and drawings of this application are used to distinguish different objects or to distinguish different treatments of the same object, rather than to describe a specific order of objects.

[0027] Furthermore, the terms "comprising" and "having," and any variations thereof, used in the description of this application are intended to cover non-exclusive inclusion. For example, a process, method, system, product, or apparatus that includes a series of steps or units is not limited to the steps or units listed, but may optionally include other steps or units not listed, or may optionally include other steps or units inherent to such process, method, product, or apparatus.

[0028] It should be noted that in the embodiments of this application, the words "exemplary" or "for example" are used to indicate examples, illustrations, or explanations. Any embodiment or design scheme described as "exemplary" or "for example" in the embodiments of this application should not be construed as being more preferred or advantageous than other embodiments or design schemes. Specifically, the use of the words "exemplary" or "for example" is intended to present the relevant concepts in a specific manner.

[0029] To facilitate a clear description of the technical solutions of the embodiments of this application, the terms "first" and "second" are used in the embodiments of this application to distinguish the same or similar items with essentially the same function and effect. Those skilled in the art can understand that the terms "first" and "second" are not intended to limit the quantity or execution order.

[0030] In the description of this application, unless otherwise stated, "a plurality of" means two or more.

[0031] Currently, flight crew scheduling in civil aviation mainly relies on manual operation or simple scheduling tools. However, this scheduling method cannot adapt to the frequent changes in civil aviation regulations and the personalized needs of different businesses. Moreover, manual intervention is prone to introducing loopholes and increasing operational risks.

[0032] Currently, crew scheduling can be checked using a fixed-rule scheduling system, but this method lacks flexibility in rule management and has low inspection efficiency. To address these issues, a rule engine has been introduced to manage and configure rules. However, the rule engine's management and configuration rely on code modifications, which presents a technical barrier for ordinary business personnel.

[0033] Therefore, there is a need for a rule management and configuration method to lower the barrier for ordinary business personnel to maintain rules, so that they can also participate in the editing and maintenance of rules.

[0034] To address the aforementioned issues, this invention proposes a method for editing inspection rules. Upon receiving a new rule addition instruction, this method displays an interface for editing inspection rules used to check crew scheduling operations. This interface includes a judgment condition editing area and a logic editing area. The judgment condition editing area includes parameter selection controls, judgment condition selection controls, and comparison result selection controls. The judgment condition editing area is used to set judgment conditions. The parameter selection controls are used to select target parameters from parameters associated with crew scheduling operations. The logic editing area is used to set logical relationships between multiple judgment conditions. Users can quickly locate target parameters for scheduling operations (such as duty period, personnel qualifications) using the parameter selection controls in the interface. They can then use the judgment condition selection controls and the logic editing area to set conditions hierarchically (such as "continuous duty ≤ 14 hours") and multiple condition combinations (such as "AND / OR"), allowing for the definition of complex rules without writing code. Furthermore, upon receiving an inspection rule confirmation instruction, the user-edited content is used as the target inspection rule for subsequent rule matching of crew scheduling operations.

[0035] As can be seen, rule configuration in related technologies requires manually writing logic code or filling out complex forms, which is time-consuming and error-prone. The method provided in this application directly generates target inspection rules through a visual editing interface. Users only need to select parameters, set conditions and logical relationships to automatically convert them into executable rules and apply them to subsequent scheduling checks. This not only improves the efficiency of rule configuration but also promotes the automation and intelligence of scheduling.

[0036] The embodiments provided in this application will now be described in detail with reference to the accompanying drawings.

[0037] The inspection rule editing method provided in this application can be applied to... Figure 1 The inspection rule editing system shown. For example... Figure 1 As shown in the figure, an inspection rule editing system 10 provided in this application embodiment may include a display device 11 and an inspection rule editing device 12.

[0038] The display device 11 may be a device with an interface display function, used to display the interactive interface provided by the user interface testing device 12. Optionally, the inspection rule editing system may also include an operating device (such as a keyboard, mouse, or touch screen), which is connected to the display device 11, allowing the user to perform various operations on the interface displayed by the display device 11.

[0039] The inspection rule editing method provided in this application embodiment can be executed by the user interface testing device 12. The display device 11 and the inspection rule editing device 12 can be an integrated device, such as a personal computer (PC), laptop computer, mobile device, tablet computer, or laptop computer. The display device 11 and the inspection rule editing device 12 can also be devices connected via communication, such as the display device 11 being a monitor. The inspection rule editing device 12 can be a single server or a server cluster consisting of multiple servers; in some implementations, the server cluster can be a distributed cluster server. This application embodiment does not impose any limitations on the specific implementation of the display device 11 and the inspection rule editing device 12.

[0040] Figure 2 This is a flowchart illustrating a method for editing inspection rules provided in an embodiment of this application. Figure 2 As shown, the inspection rule editing method provided in this application specifically includes S101~S102.

[0041] S101. In response to receiving a command to add a new inspection rule, the inspection rule editing interface is displayed.

[0042] When a user needs to edit an inspection rule, they must first initiate a command to add the new inspection rule. This application embodiment does not limit the manner in which the user initiates the command or the inspection rule editing device 12 receives it. For example, the user can initiate the command by operating an input device communicatively connected to the inspection rule editing device 12, such as a keyboard, mouse, or touchscreen, and clicking the "Add Rule" button in a specific operation interface. Alternatively, the inspection rule editing device 12 can use its built-in command receiving module to monitor and capture the command signals generated by the user's operation in real time, thereby completing the command reception.

[0043] Upon successfully receiving the instruction to add a new inspection rule, the inspection rule editing device 12 immediately initiates the rule editing process, that is, using the display capabilities of the display device to present the inspection rule editing interface to the user. For example, upon receiving this instruction, the electronic device can quickly respond and invoke the interface corresponding to the inspection rule editing interface. This interface, as a key channel for data interaction, can accurately load various types of data required by the inspection rule editing interface, covering interface layout information, operable element configuration data, and related business logic data. After a series of efficient data processing and rendering operations, the complete and fully functional inspection rule editing interface is clearly and accurately displayed on the display device, providing the user with an intuitive and convenient interactive platform for subsequent rule editing operations.

[0044] The inspection rule editing interface is used to edit inspection rules for crew scheduling operations. Crew scheduling operations specifically refer to the scheduling of crew members, such as arranging crew members to participate in designated flights. Inspection rules are used to check information such as crew member arrangements and flight schedules involved in crew scheduling operations to determine whether they comply with business requirements or relevant regulations.

[0045] Figure 3 This is a schematic diagram of an inspection rule editing interface provided in an embodiment of this application, as shown below. Figure 3 As shown, the rule editing interface 200 includes a judgment condition editing area 210 and a logic editing area 220; the judgment condition editing area 210 includes: a parameter selection control 211, a judgment condition selection control 212 and a comparison result selection control 213.

[0046] The judgment condition editing area 210 is a functional partition within the check rule editing interface 200 responsible for configuring individual atomic judgment conditions. It does not involve logical operations between multiple conditions. This area adopts a form-style layout, arranging controls in the logical order of parameter selection, condition setting, and result configuration. It supports users adding, copying, or deleting multiple sets of atomic judgment conditions to generate independently executable single judgment statements. A check rule can include multiple judgment conditions, which can be simple yes / no judgments or judgments on data content. For example, determining whether crew members have completed their medical examinations only requires a simple yes / no judgment, while determining whether crew members' flight time has reached the maximum flight time requires comparing the crew members' actual flight time with the prescribed maximum flight time.

[0047] The parameter selection control 211 is an interactive control in the judgment condition editing area 210 used to select the judgment target object. It is usually presented in the form of a drop-down box, search box or tree selector. Its core function is to load and display a preset parameter library, support parameter filtering methods such as grouping by business module and fuzzy search, and automatically bind the data type of the selected parameter to provide a data type validation basis for the selection of subsequent judgment conditions.

[0048] The judgment condition selection control 212 is an interactive control in the judgment condition editing area 210 used to set the operation or judgment relationship between parameters and comparison benchmarks. It is generally in the form of a drop-down list or a group of radio buttons. This control will dynamically match and display the corresponding judgment relationship options according to the data type bound to the parameter selection control 211. For example, it provides options such as size comparison and range matching for numeric parameters, and options such as inclusion and prefix matching for string parameters. It also supports user-defined special judgment conditions such as regular expressions.

[0049] The comparison result selection control 213 is an interactive control in the judgment condition editing area 210 used to set the comparison benchmark value of the judgment condition. Its presentation forms include input boxes, drop-down boxes, date pickers, etc. The specific form is determined by the parameter type and judgment condition selected in the previous step. This control supports multiple benchmark value input methods such as fixed values, system variables, and calculation formulas. It also has a data format verification function to ensure that the input comparison benchmark value meets the format requirements of the corresponding judgment condition.

[0050] Multiple judgment conditions can be associated using logical operators, each representing a corresponding logical relationship, such as logical AND, logical OR, and logical NOT. The logic editing area 220 is used to set the logical relationships between multiple judgment conditions. This area provides options for logical operators such as "AND," "OR," and "NOT," allowing users to combine multiple atomic judgment conditions configured in the judgment condition editing area 210 through visual drag-and-drop or click selection to form complete check rules with complex logic. For example, users can complete logic arrangement through visual operations such as dragging the condition block corresponding to the judgment condition to the logic canvas, clicking the operator button to connect adjacent conditions, and using parentheses to set nesting priorities.

[0051] As another example, in actual operation, after the logic editing area 220 is selected, a drop-down menu can be displayed, showing various logical operators. By selecting a logical operator, the logical relationship between multiple judgment conditions can be set. After completing the selection of logical operators, the number of branches under the logical operator can be further selected. Each branch represents a judgment condition, with a minimum of 2 branches. When the number of branches is 1, the judgment condition is automatically merged into the branch of the parent logical operator.

[0052] S102. In response to receiving the inspection rule determination instruction, determine the target inspection rule edited based on the inspection rule editing interface.

[0053] There are multiple ways to receive the rule determination instruction. For example, one implementation involves a confirmation control (such as "Confirm," "Save," or "Submit") in the rule editing interface. When the user clicks the confirmation control, the rule editing device captures mouse clicks, touch triggers, and other event signals, parsing them as valid instructions. Another implementation involves the rule editing device automatically triggering an instruction when no user operation is detected within a set time period after the rule configuration in the rule editing interface meets preset conditions (such as completing all required fields and no logical error messages), or when the user completes the last configuration item and switches the interface focus. This application does not limit this approach.

[0054] Upon receiving the instruction to determine the inspection rule, the target inspection rule needs to be determined based on the content configured by the user in the inspection rule editing interface. This application embodiment also does not limit the method for determining the target inspection rule.

[0055] As one implementation method, core data such as parameter selection results, judgment relationship configuration, and comparison benchmark values ​​in the judgment condition editing area are directly extracted, as well as logical configurations such as logical operator combination methods and nesting priority settings in the logic editing area. Syntax validity is checked on this data (including logical operator matching, parenthesis nesting integrity, parameter and condition type compatibility, etc.). After passing the check, it is encapsulated into standardized rule data structures such as rule expressions and JSON structured data. This structured data is the target inspection rule.

[0056] As one implementation method, if a user makes personalized adjustments based on a preset rule template when editing rules, the rule editing device will first extract the basic framework data of the preset rule template, and then simultaneously extract the personalized configuration information (such as specific parameters, custom judgment conditions, etc.) added by the user in the editing interface. The two will be merged and adapted to ensure the logical consistency between the template framework and the personalized configuration. After merging and passing the compliance verification, the target inspection rule will be generated.

[0057] As one implementation method, the latest configuration data of the rule in the current editing interface is extracted first, and the historical editing version data of the rule is retrieved for difference comparison. A detailed difference list is generated and displayed to the user. After the user confirms that the difference content is correct, the configuration data of the current editing version is standardized and encapsulated, and finally determined as the target inspection rule.

[0058] As one implementation method, if the editing interface supports the parallel editing of multiple sets of sub-rules, the inspection rule editing device will first extract the configuration data of each set of sub-rules and complete the legality verification one by one. Then, according to the overall logical combination relationship set in the logical editing area (such as the nested relationship of "AND" and "OR"), all the verified sub-rules will be integrated and arranged to form a logically coherent and structurally complete overall rule. After the final compliance verification, it will be determined as the target inspection rule.

[0059] As can be seen from S101-S102, the method for editing inspection rules provided in this application is time-consuming and error-prone compared to manually writing logic code or filling out complex forms. The method provided in this application directly generates target inspection rules through a visual editing interface. Users only need to select parameters, set conditions and logical relationships to automatically convert them into executable rules, which can then be applied to subsequent scheduling checks. This not only improves rule configuration efficiency but also promotes the automation and intelligence of scheduling.

[0060] In some embodiments, since the crew scheduling business itself involves a variety of sub-scenarios, corresponding inspection rules need to be configured for different scenarios.

[0061] In one possible implementation, after S102, the method provided in this application embodiment further includes S103-S104.

[0062] S103. In response to receiving the inspection rule configuration instruction, determine the target application scenario of the target inspection rule.

[0063] Because business needs, operational processes, and risk control points vary significantly across different scenarios, the specific requirements for inspection rules also differ. Therefore, after the content of the target inspection rules is determined, it is also necessary to simultaneously clarify the specific applicable scenarios for those rules to ensure that the rules accurately adapt to the business needs of the corresponding scenarios.

[0064] This application does not limit the way the device receives inspection rule configuration instructions. For example, meeting any of the following conditions is considered as receiving an inspection rule configuration instruction: First, it is triggered by interface interaction. When a user completes the rule configuration in the inspection rule editing interface and clicks an explicit button such as "Save Configuration," "Confirm Validation," or "Associate Scene," a mouse click or touch operation signal is captured, such as a front-end click event or a back-end interface request, indicating that the instruction has been received. Second, it is triggered automatically. When the rule configuration meets preset automatic submission conditions, such as completing all required fields and passing rule syntax validation, and no subsequent user operation is detected within a set time (e.g., 30 seconds), or when the user switches the interface focus after completing the last configuration (e.g., from the rule editing area to the scene selection area), the configuration instruction is automatically generated and received. Third, it is triggered by external system linkage. Associated business systems (such as a crew scheduling management system or a risk control platform) send a rule configuration trigger signal (carrying parameters such as rule ID and configuration operation type) through a preset interface. The back-end receives and parses the interface request, verifies the integrity of the parameters, and then determines that the instruction has been received.

[0065] This application does not restrict the method of determining the target application scenario. If the configuration instruction already carries scene identification information (such as interface request parameters containing "sceneId" and "sceneName"), this information is directly extracted, matched against a preset scene dictionary, and the scene validity is confirmed to determine it as the target application scenario.

[0066] Another example is that the device can analyze the core configuration of the target inspection rule (such as the parameters, triggering conditions, and business indicators of the rule verification) and compare it with the scene feature library that has been archived in the inspection rule editing device (such as the rule of "verifying the working hours of the crew" matching the "crew scheduling - personnel compliance verification scenario"), and output the scenario with the highest matching degree, which is determined as the target scenario after user confirmation.

[0067] Another example is that after receiving the configuration instruction, a scene selection pop-up window can be displayed, showing a list of available scenes. Users can manually select or enter scene information according to their business needs, and after confirmation, check the rule editing device records and determine the target scene.

[0068] Another example is that if the target inspection rule is created based on a certain type of business scenario template, the system directly associates it with the default scenario corresponding to that template. If there are multiple associated scenarios, the user needs to confirm them a second time to determine the correct scenario.

[0069] This application does not limit the specific implementation of the application scenario. Taking the crew scheduling business as an example, the scenarios included may include: initial scheduling plan execution, dynamic scheduling adjustment, crew personnel qualification and compliance check, etc.

[0070] S104. Determine the target unit scheduling business corresponding to the target application scenario, and associate the target unit scheduling business with the target inspection rules.

[0071] This application does not restrict the method for determining the target crew scheduling business corresponding to the target application scenario. For example, when the target application scenario is clearly defined, such as a personnel compliance verification scenario, the inspection rule editing device can directly query the crew scheduling business to which the scenario belongs based on a preset mapping table between application scenarios and crew scheduling businesses, thereby determining the corresponding target crew scheduling business.

[0072] Another example is that the inspection rule editing device can parse the semantic tags or metadata of the target application scenario, such as the scenario description field containing keywords such as "initial scheduling" and "shift change conflict detection". Combined with natural language processing or rule matching algorithms, it can classify them into the most relevant crew scheduling business and output a list of candidate businesses for the user to confirm and determine the target business.

[0073] As another example, if the target inspection rule itself carries business context information (such as the business template selected when the rule is created, or the data source type bound to the rule being "shift schedule table" or "team qualification library"), the inspection rule editing device can reverse-engineer the corresponding team shift schedule business based on this context information and automatically associate it.

[0074] Another example is in a complex system where multiple services coexist. An application scenario may be associated with multiple crew scheduling services. After the target application scenario is determined, the rule editing device can pop up a service association confirmation interface, displaying all potentially matching crew scheduling service options, which can be manually selected or supplemented by the user to finally determine one or more target crew scheduling services.

[0075] This application does not limit the specific implementation of the association operation. For example, the inspection rule editing device can establish an association between the target inspection rule and the target unit scheduling business in the database, and write the rule ID into the rule configuration list of the corresponding business to achieve logical binding.

[0076] Another example is that the inspection rule editing device can generate associated logs or configuration snapshots to record the binding relationship of the "rule-business-scenario" triple and synchronously update the rule dependency graph on the business side, which is convenient for subsequent auditing, backtracking or impact analysis.

[0077] As another example, if the target unit scheduling business supports version management, the associated operation can also specify the business version range in which the rule takes effect, ensuring that the rule is only enabled in a compatible business context, thereby improving the system's robustness and maintainability.

[0078] As can be seen from S103-S104, the solution provided in this embodiment supports multiple triggering methods and diverse scenario determination mechanisms, enabling flexible adaptation to different user habits, different levels of automation, and different integration environments. This avoids operational blockages or process interruptions caused by a single configuration entry point. Simultaneously, it accurately maps the determined application scenario to specific crew scheduling operations, ensuring that the inspection rules take effect in the correct business context. This effectively prevents rule misuse and improves the accuracy and business relevance of rule execution.

[0079] In some embodiments, the compliance, rationality, and risk points of the crew scheduling process need to be automatically verified during key stages such as execution, adjustment, or submission for review. In one possible implementation, the above method further includes S201-S202.

[0080] S201. In response to receiving an instruction to check the scheduling business of the target unit, load the target check rules.

[0081] Since different unit scheduling operations have been pre-associated with target inspection rules adapted to their scenario requirements, when an inspection of a specific unit scheduling operation is triggered, the inspection rule editing device needs to dynamically load the corresponding rules and perform verification to ensure that the inspection behavior is accurate and efficient.

[0082] This application does not limit the way the device receives inspection instructions or the rule loading mechanism. For example, any of the following conditions can be considered as receiving an instruction to inspect the scheduling business of the target crew: First, it is triggered by user operation, such as when a user clicks the "Perform compliance check on task string or schedule crew members" button on the scheduling management interface, the front end captures the interaction event and sends an inspection request to the back end; Second, it is triggered automatically by the process, such as when the flight time changes, the flight aircraft type changes, or the scheduled task of operation monitoring is started, the inspection rule editing device automatically calls the inspection service interface; Third, it is triggered by external system call, such as when the crew operation monitoring platform initiates a compliance verification request for a scheduling task through a standard application interface, carrying the scheduling task ID or business identification parameter.

[0083] Upon receiving an inspection instruction, the inspection rule editing device queries the associated target inspection rules based on the identifier of the target unit's scheduling business, such as the business ID or scheduling batch number. If multiple rules exist, they are loaded according to preset priority or execution order; if the rules support version management, the currently effective version of the rule is loaded. The loading process may include reading rule logic from the rule base, parsing rule expressions, and initializing the rule execution context.

[0084] S202. Based on the target inspection rules, inspect the target unit scheduling business and obtain the inspection results.

[0085] This application does not limit the specific technical path of the inspection execution or the form of the output results. For example, the inspection rule editing device takes relevant data from the target crew scheduling business, such as crew member lists, flight times, duty hours, and qualification certificate validity periods, as input and injects it into the execution environment of the loaded target inspection rules. The rule engine then evaluates each rule condition to determine if it is met. For each rule, it outputs an inspection status such as "passed," "warning," or "blocked," along with violation details, such as "Captain A's continuous duty hours exceeded 14 hours." Another example is that the inspection results can be fed back to the user interface in real time, such as highlighting conflicting scheduling items, writing to the business log, or serving as a basis for subsequent process decisions, such as allowing scheduling submission only when all rules pass. Simultaneously, the inspection rule editing device can generate a structured inspection report, recording the rule ID, inspection time, input data snapshot, and judgment basis, supporting subsequent auditing and backtracking.

[0086] As another example, if a rule is found to have a syntax error or missing dependency during the inspection process, such as a referenced field that does not exist in the current business, the rule editing device can mark the rule as "skipped" and record the exception to avoid the overall inspection being interrupted due to the failure of a single rule.

[0087] Based on the above implementation method, by responding to the inspection rule configuration command, the inspection rules are associated with the application scenario, and then the crew scheduling business is associated with the inspection rules through the application scenario. This allows the rule engine to directly call the associated inspection rules when the crew scheduling business needs to be inspected, thereby improving the inspection efficiency of the crew scheduling business.

[0088] When dealing with multiple judgment conditions involving multiple logical relationships, it is necessary to first filter the target judgment conditions required for the target crew scheduling business based on the logical relationships between the multiple judgment conditions. Specifically, S202 can be implemented through S2021-S2022: S2021. Based on the logical relationship of multiple judgment conditions in the target inspection rules, determine the target judgment conditions that the target parameters of the target unit scheduling business must meet.

[0089] Crew scheduling involves multiple parameters, including personnel, flights, time, and qualifications. Compliance verification often relies on complex check rules containing multiple judgment conditions. These conditions may have logical relationships such as AND, OR, and NOT, and may even have nested or priority structures. Directly executing the entire rule not only makes it difficult to pinpoint specific violations but may also lead to misjudgments or omissions due to inaccurate logical parsing. Therefore, when performing checks, it is necessary to first clarify the complete set of target judgment conditions that the target crew scheduling must meet based on the internal logical structure of the rule, and then verify the actual parameters item by item or in combination, thereby achieving accurate, interpretable, and highly reliable automated checks.

[0090] This application does not limit the specific method of determining the target judgment conditions. For example, the inspection rule editing device can parse the logical expression of the target inspection rule (such as a rule defined in the form of JSON, DSL or decision table), identify the atomic judgment conditions contained therein, such as "crew member continuous duty time ≤ 14 hours" and "captain qualification level ≥ flight requirement level", and their combination logic, such as "AND", "OR", "NOT" or nested structures, and then construct a complete composite judgment condition tree, and deduce the final target judgment conditions that the target crew scheduling business needs to meet.

[0091] As another example, if a target inspection rule consists of multiple sub-rules and there are priority or dependency relationships between the sub-rules, the inspection rule editing device can sort and merge the sub-rules according to a preset execution strategy to generate an ordered sequence of target judgment conditions, ensuring that the inspection process conforms to the business logic order.

[0092] Another example is that, in the scenario of rule version iteration, the inspection rule editing device can load the corresponding version of the judgment conditions based on the rule version associated with the target unit's scheduling business, so as to avoid the historical scheduling tasks being incorrectly verified due to rule updates and ensure the consistency and traceability of inspection results.

[0093] S2022. Determine whether the target parameters of the target unit scheduling business meet the target judgment conditions. If they do, the target unit scheduling business passes the inspection.

[0094] This application does not limit the specific implementation methods of parameter extraction, comparison, and result determination. For example, the inspection rule editing device extracts fields related to the target judgment conditions from the parameters associated with the target crew scheduling business as target parameters, such as personnel ID, flight number, duty start and end time, rest interval, license type, etc., and substitutes them into the constructed target judgment conditions for logical operations. If all conditions are met or the passing threshold is satisfied, the business is determined to have passed the inspection; otherwise, it is marked as "failed" or "requires manual review," and the specific unmet conditions and actual parameter values ​​are recorded.

[0095] Another example is that tolerance checks can be performed on numerical or time-based parameters, such as allowing a time deviation of ±5 minutes or interval matching, such as making the working time within [8,14] hours compliant, thereby improving the robustness of the rules in actual business.

[0096] As another example, if the target judgment condition involves cross-constraints of multiple crews or flights, such as "the same co-pilot shall not fly more than 3 flights with different captains within 24 hours", the inspection rule editing device can construct a correlation data graph, perform overall judgment after cross-record aggregation calculation, and ensure the effective execution of complex business rules.

[0097] Another example is that the inspection results can be output in a tiered manner: if all conditions are met, the output is "Pass"; if some non-critical conditions are not met, the output is "Warning"; if critical safety or compliance conditions are not met, the output is "Block". This will also be linked to subsequent processes, such as blocking the submission of scheduling for blocked results, and allowing the submission of warning results but requiring a note.

[0098] As can be seen from S2021-S2022, by first determining the target judgment conditions, the rule execution process becomes more transparent and controllable. Since the target judgment conditions originate from the target inspection rules already bound to the crew scheduling business, the entire verification process always revolves around the specific instance business requirements, effectively avoiding the risk of rule execution deviating from the scenario or misjudgment.

[0099] In some embodiments, the parameters of the crew scheduling operation may deviate from the established compliance requirements during the editing process due to human operation or changes in external data. In this case, it is necessary to check the parameters during the editing process.

[0100] Specifically, in one possible implementation, the above method also includes S301-S302: S301. In response to the editing instruction for the target parameter, determine whether the edited target parameter meets the target judgment condition.

[0101] Allowing parameter changes that do not meet the inspection rules to take effect directly could lead to scheduling schemes violating safety regulations, aviation laws, or company policies, thereby triggering operational risks or regulatory penalties. Therefore, when users attempt to modify key parameters, the inspection rule editing device must verify in real time whether the edited value still meets the established target judgment conditions, and proactively block the operation if it does not.

[0102] This application embodiment does not limit the triggering method and verification execution mechanism of editing commands. For example, when a user modifies target parameters such as crew member check-in time, replaces captain selection, or adjusts rest intervals in the crew scheduling business on the scheduling editing interface, the front end can capture input change events, such as focus loss, Enter confirmation, or drag completion, and send the edited parameter value along with the corresponding scheduling business identifier to the verification service. The check rule editing device then extracts the corresponding target judgment conditions based on the target check rules associated with the task, such as "continuous 24-hour duty does not exceed 14 hours" or "captain qualification level is not lower than the requirements of a certain aircraft type," and performs real-time logical evaluation of the new parameters.

[0103] Another example is that editing instructions can also come from automated processes, such as a scheduling optimization algorithm suggesting an adjustment to a person's shift, or an external scheduling system pushing a temporary change request. In this case, the rule editing device, upon receiving the instruction, must also perform a compliance pre-check before applying the change.

[0104] Another example is that, to improve the interactive experience, the rule editing device can dynamically simulate target parameters based on the current input fragment before the user submits a complete edit, and make a preliminary judgment on whether it may violate key rules, and give visual prompts in advance, such as red borders and warning icons, to guide the user to make corrections.

[0105] As another example, if the target judgment condition involves multiple interdependent parameters, such as modifying the start time and end time at the same time, the check rule editing device can use the entire set of parameters to be updated as a joint input for overall verification, avoiding logical inconsistencies caused by independent judgment of each field.

[0106] S302. If not satisfied, then disable editing commands for the target parameters.

[0107] This application does not limit the specific form of the blocking operation or the feedback mechanism. For example, when the verification result shows that the edited target parameter does not meet the target judgment condition, the check rule editing device may refuse to write the change into the business data model, keep the original parameter value unchanged, and return a clear blocking signal to the front end.

[0108] Another example is that the rule editing device can simultaneously display the reason for the block to the user, including a description of the specific rule violated, the expected value range, and the actual input value, such as "the current duty duration is 15 hours, which is greater than the maximum duty duration of 14 hours for a single group", to help the user quickly understand the problem.

[0109] Another example is for non-blocking but risky edits, such as those approaching a threshold but not exceeding it. The rule editing device can provide a "force save" option, but the user needs to confirm the action and provide a reason for the action. The relevant records will be included in the audit log for later traceability.

[0110] Another example is in a multi-user collaborative editing scenario. If a user attempts to submit parameters that violate the rules, the rule-checking editing device not only blocks the user's local operation but also notifies other collaborators that the change has been rejected through a message notification mechanism, preventing repeated invalid operations.

[0111] As shown in S301-S302, by checking and intercepting violations during the editing process, compliance control is shifted from post-editing to editing, effectively preventing non-compliant scheduling data from entering the core process of the check rule editing equipment. Since the verification basis originates from target judgment conditions already bound to the current business, this mechanism ensures both the accuracy of rule execution and maintains a good user experience and operational security, significantly reducing operational risks caused by human error or policy conflicts.

[0112] The following describes the method for editing inspection rules according to a specific embodiment of this application. Figure 4 A flowchart illustrating another method for editing inspection rules provided in this application embodiment is shown below. Figure 4 As shown, the method includes S401-S408.

[0113] S401, Receive target parameter editing instructions.

[0114] The target parameter editing command can be the target parameter editing command in S301 above.

[0115] S402. Do the edited target parameters meet the target judgment conditions?

[0116] If the condition is met, proceed to S403; otherwise, return to S401.

[0117] S403. Update the edited target parameters to the parameter library.

[0118] If successful, the target parameters are updated to the parameter library, which stores parameters for unit scheduling operations.

[0119] S404, Receive the instruction to edit the inspection rules.

[0120] The rule editing command can instruct the addition, modification, or deletion of inspection rules.

[0121] S405. Does the edited inspection rule meet the business requirements?

[0122] The business requirements here can be determined based on civil aviation regulations and actual business scenarios. For example, if civil aviation regulations stipulate that pilots cannot fly more than 100 hours per month, then the inspection rules cannot be set to exceed the inspection limit stipulated by civil aviation regulations. If the requirements are met, proceed to S406; otherwise, return to S404.

[0123] S406. Update the edited inspection rules to the rule base.

[0124] S407, Reference checking rules for constructing knowledge packages.

[0125] In practical applications, multiple inspection rules are often required to perform inspections together. A knowledge package is a collection of multiple inspection rules that can be set by the user or automatically set by the inspection rule editing device according to actual needs and application scenarios.

[0126] S408. In response to the crew scheduling business inspection instruction, conduct an inspection.

[0127] Specifically, Figure 5 The schematic diagram of a crew scheduling business inspection process provided in this application embodiment can be implemented by the following S501-S508.

[0128] S501, Obtain input parameters.

[0129] Input parameters are generally included in the crew scheduling business inspection instructions and may include knowledge package identifiers or inspection rule identifiers, crew personnel information, etc.

[0130] S502, Determine whether the input parameter contains complete data.

[0131] The input parameters must include at least a knowledge package identifier or an inspection rule identifier. If the input parameters also include crew information, the process proceeds to S503 if complete crew information is not provided, and to S504 if complete crew information is provided.

[0132] S503, Complete the input parameters.

[0133] Complete the incomplete crew information from the database and proceed to step S504.

[0134] S504. Determine the unit scheduling procedures and inspection rules to be inspected.

[0135] The inspection rules or knowledge packages used for inspection are determined based on the knowledge package identifier or inspection rule identifier, and the crew scheduling business to be inspected is determined based on the crew personnel information.

[0136] S505, are there any check rules in the cache?

[0137] Determine if a check rule exists in the cache. If not, proceed to S506. If it does exist, load the check rule from the cache and proceed to S507.

[0138] S506. Load the missing inspection rules from the rule base.

[0139] S507, Traverse all inspection rules.

[0140] Each inspection rule includes multiple judgment conditions, which are linked by logical operators. For judgment conditions under the logical OR, at least one condition needs to be met during the inspection. For judgment conditions under the logical AND, all conditions need to be met during the inspection. Finally, it is determined whether the crew scheduling business to be inspected meets the judgment conditions under each inspection rule.

[0141] S508, Output the inspection results.

[0142] The corresponding inspection result will be output regardless of whether the inspection passes or fails.

[0143] This application embodiment can divide the lower model training device into functional modules according to the above method example. For example, each function can be divided into a separate functional module, or two or more functions can be integrated into one processing module. The integrated module can be implemented in hardware or as a software functional module. Optionally, the module division in this application embodiment is illustrative and only represents one logical functional division; other division methods may be used in actual implementation.

[0144] In some embodiments, this application also provides an inspection rule editing apparatus. The inspection rule editing apparatus may include one or more functional modules for implementing the methods described in the above embodiments. For example, Figure 6 This is a schematic diagram illustrating the composition of an inspection rule editing device 600 provided in an embodiment of this application. Figure 6 As shown, the inspection rule editing device 600 includes: The display module 601 is used to display the inspection rule editing interface in response to a received instruction to add an inspection rule. The inspection rule editing interface is used to edit the inspection rules for inspecting the unit scheduling business. The inspection rule editing interface includes a judgment condition editing area and a logic editing area. The judgment condition editing area includes: a parameter selection control, a judgment condition selection control, and a comparison result selection control. The judgment condition editing area is used to set the judgment conditions. The parameter selection control is used to select the target parameter from the parameters associated with the unit scheduling business. The logic editing area is used to set the logical relationship between multiple judgment conditions. The determination module 602 is used to determine the target inspection rule edited based on the inspection rule editing interface in response to receiving the inspection rule determination instruction; the target inspection rule is used to perform rule matching on the unit scheduling business. In one possible implementation, the device further includes a loading module for loading target inspection rules in response to receiving an instruction to inspect the target unit's scheduling business. The inspection module is used to inspect the target unit scheduling business based on the target inspection rules and obtain the inspection results; the inspection results indicate whether the target unit scheduling business has passed the inspection.

[0145] In one possible implementation, the loading module is further configured to load the target check rule from the cache if the target rule exists in the cache, and load the target check rule from the rule base if the target check rule does not exist in the cache.

[0146] In one possible implementation, the inspection module is further used to determine the target judgment conditions that the target parameters of the target unit scheduling business must meet based on the logical relationship of multiple judgment conditions in the target inspection rules; and to determine whether the target parameters of the target unit scheduling business meet the target judgment conditions. If they do, the target unit scheduling business passes the inspection.

[0147] In one possible implementation, the determining module 602 is further configured to determine whether the target parameters of the target unit scheduling business satisfy each target judgment condition of the logic and association, and to determine whether the target parameters of the target unit scheduling business satisfy at least one target judgment condition of the logic or association.

[0148] In one possible implementation, the determining module 602 is further configured to, in response to an editing instruction for the target parameter, determine whether the edited target parameter meets the target judgment condition; if not, then the editing instruction for the target parameter is blocked.

[0149] When the methods of the above embodiments are implemented in hardware, this embodiment of the invention provides a possible structural schematic diagram of the electronic device involved in the above embodiments. For example... Figure 7 As shown, the electronic device 700 includes: a processor 702, a communication interface 703, a bus 704, and a display 705. Optionally, the electronic device 700 may also include a memory 701.

[0150] Processor 702 may implement or execute various exemplary logic blocks, modules, and circuits described in conjunction with the disclosure of this application. Processor 702 may be a central processing unit, a general-purpose processor, a digital signal processor, an application-specific integrated circuit (ASIC), a field-programmable gate array (FPGA), or other programmable logic devices, transistor logic devices, hardware components, or any combination thereof. It may implement or execute various exemplary logic blocks, modules, and circuits described in conjunction with the disclosure of this application. Processor 702 may also be a combination that implements computing functions, such as including one or more microprocessor combinations, a combination of a DSP and a microprocessor, etc.

[0151] The communication interface 703 is used to connect to other devices via a communication network. This communication network can be Ethernet, wireless access network, wireless local area network (WLAN), etc.

[0152] The memory 701 may be a read-only memory (ROM) or other type of static storage device capable of storing static information and instructions, random access memory (RAM) or other type of dynamic storage device capable of storing information and instructions, or electrically erasable programmable read-only memory (EEPROM), disk storage media or other magnetic storage devices, or any other medium capable of carrying or storing desired program code in the form of instructions or data structures and accessible by a computer, but is not limited thereto.

[0153] In one possible implementation, the memory 701 can exist independently of the processor 702. The memory 701 can be connected to the processor 702 via a bus 704 and is used to store instructions or program code. When the processor 702 calls and executes the instructions or program code stored in the memory 701, it can implement the method provided in the embodiments of the present invention.

[0154] In another possible implementation, the memory 701 can also be integrated with the processor 702.

[0155] The 704 bus can be an Extended Industry Standard Architecture (EISA) bus, etc. The 704 bus can be divided into address bus, data bus, control bus, etc. For ease of representation, Figure 7 The symbol is represented by only one line, but this does not mean that there is only one bus or one type of bus.

[0156] Display 705 is used to present information processed by an electronic device to a user in the form of images, text, video, or other visual formats. Display 705 may be a Liquid Crystal Display (LCD), an Organic Light-Emitting Diode (OLED), an E-Ink Display, a Micro-LED Display, a Plasma Display, or any other display technology device capable of displaying information visually.

[0157] In one possible implementation, the display 705 is connected to the processor 702 via a bus 704 (such as a Display Serial Interface (DSI), High Definition Multimedia Interface (HDMI), DisplayPort, or other dedicated graphics bus), receives image data generated or processed by the processor 702, and converts it into visual content for display. The processor 702 can control parameters such as the refresh rate, brightness, color mode, and resolution of the display 705 according to program instructions stored in the memory 701 to optimize the user experience or adapt to different application scenarios.

[0158] Through the above description of the embodiments, those skilled in the art can clearly understand that, for the sake of convenience and brevity, only the division of the above functional modules is used as an example. In actual applications, the above functions can be assigned to different functional modules as needed, that is, the internal structure of the above device can be divided into different functional modules to complete all or part of the functions described above.

[0159] This application also provides a computer-readable storage medium. All or part of the processes in the above method embodiments can be executed by computer instructions instructing related hardware. The program can be stored in the aforementioned computer-readable storage medium, and when executed, it can include the processes of the above method embodiments. The computer-readable storage medium can be any of the foregoing embodiments or memory. The aforementioned computer-readable storage medium can also be an external storage device of the aforementioned device, such as a plug-in hard drive, smart media card (SMC), secure digital (SD) card, flash card, etc., equipped on the aforementioned device. Further, the aforementioned computer-readable storage medium can include both internal storage units of the aforementioned device and external storage devices. The aforementioned computer-readable storage medium is used to store the aforementioned computer program and other programs and data required by the aforementioned device. The aforementioned computer-readable storage medium can also be used to temporarily store data that has been output or will be output.

[0160] This application also provides a computer program product comprising a computer program that, when run on a computer, causes the computer to perform the methods provided in the above embodiments.

[0161] The above are merely specific embodiments of this application, but the scope of protection of this application is not limited thereto. Any variations or substitutions within the technical scope disclosed in this application should be included within the scope of protection of this application. Therefore, the scope of protection of this application should be determined by the scope of the claims.

Claims

1. A method for editing inspection rules, characterized in that, The method includes: In response to receiving a command to add an inspection rule, the inspection rule editing interface is displayed; the inspection rule editing interface is used to edit inspection rules for inspecting the unit scheduling business. The inspection rule editing interface includes a judgment condition editing area and a logic editing area; the judgment condition editing area includes: a parameter selection control, a judgment condition selection control, and a comparison result selection control, and the judgment condition editing area is used to set judgment conditions; the parameter selection control is used to select target parameters from parameters associated with the crew scheduling business; the logic editing area is used to set the logical relationship between multiple judgment conditions; In response to receiving an inspection rule determination instruction, a target inspection rule edited based on the inspection rule editing interface is determined; the target inspection rule is used for rule matching of the unit scheduling business.

2. The method according to claim 1, characterized in that, The method further includes: In response to receiving an inspection rule configuration instruction, the target application scenario of the target inspection rule is determined; Identify the target crew scheduling business corresponding to the target application scenario, and associate the target crew scheduling business with the target inspection rule; wherein, the target inspection rule is specifically used to inspect the target crew scheduling business associated with it.

3. The method according to claim 2, characterized in that, The method further includes: In response to receiving an instruction to inspect the scheduling of the target unit, the target inspection rules are loaded; Based on the target inspection rules, the target unit scheduling business is inspected to obtain inspection results; the inspection results indicate whether the target unit scheduling business has passed the inspection.

4. The method according to claim 3, characterized in that, The loading of the target inspection rules includes: If the target inspection rule exists in the cache, then load the target inspection rule from the cache; If the target inspection rule does not exist in the cache, then the target inspection rule is loaded from the rule base.

5. The method according to claim 3, characterized in that, The process of inspecting the target crew scheduling operations based on the target inspection rules and obtaining inspection results includes: Based on the logical relationship of multiple judgment conditions in the target inspection rules, determine the target judgment conditions that the target parameters of the target unit scheduling business must meet; Determine whether the target parameters of the target unit scheduling business meet the target judgment conditions. If they do, the target unit scheduling business passes the inspection.

6. The method according to claim 5, characterized in that, The logical relationships include logical AND and logical OR, and the target judgment conditions for determining whether the target parameters of the target crew scheduling business are satisfied include: Determine whether the target parameters of the target unit scheduling business meet each logical and associated target judgment condition, and determine whether the target parameters of the target unit scheduling business meet at least one logical or associated target judgment condition.

7. The method according to claim 5, characterized in that, The method further includes: In response to the editing instruction for the target parameter, determine whether the edited target parameter satisfies the target judgment condition; If the conditions are not met, then the editing commands for the target parameters will be disabled.

8. An electronic device, characterized in that, It includes a processor and a memory, the processor being coupled to the memory; the memory is used to store computer instructions, which are loaded and executed by the processor to enable the computer device to perform the method as described in any one of claims 1 to 7.

9. A computer-readable storage medium, characterized in that, The computer-readable storage medium includes computer-executable instructions that, when executed on a computer, cause the computer to perform the method of any one of claims 1 to 7.

10. A computer program product, characterized in that, The computer program product includes a computer program that, when run on an electronic device, causes the electronic device to perform the method as described in any one of claims 1 to 7.

Images