Vehicle model technical parameter auditing method, system, device and storage medium

Abstract

The application discloses a vehicle model technical parameter auditing method, system, device and storage medium. The method comprises the following steps: obtaining multi-source vehicle model technical parameter data with source identification, mapping different source parameter fields to standard parameter identification, and performing standardization processing according to parameter types; determining a target rule version and a rule set according to auditing task data, determining a consistency reference parameter according to a source priority, and performing source consistency verification; generating a to-be-verified or conflict result for a parameter that cannot be uniquely determined by the source priority or that has a conflict after verification, and prohibiting the related parameter from participating in parameter association calculation; performing logical consistency verification between the power battery energy, the energy consumption per 100 kilometers and the cruising range by using the representative standardized parameter value after consistency verification, and generating an auditing conclusion in combination with a rule compliance verification result. The application can avoid interference of source conflict parameters on cross-parameter engineering calculation, and realize distinguishing identification and tracing of source conflicts and logical abnormalities.

Description

Technical Field

[0001] This application relates to the field of vehicle technology, and in particular to a method, system, device and storage medium for reviewing vehicle model technical parameters. Background Technology

[0002] Vehicle model technical parameter review is a crucial step in vehicle product application, vehicle access review, vehicle model promotion management, production consistency verification, and random inspection. During the review process, it is typically necessary to verify the technical parameters, application information, and relevant supporting documents of the vehicle model to be reviewed, based on policy documents, technical standards, review specifications, or vehicle model catalog documents.

[0003] Vehicle technical parameters may originate from at least two of the following sources: enterprise declaration data, inspection reports, test reports, technical specifications, configuration tables, production consistency data, technical change data, supervision and spot check data, and vehicle operation monitoring data. Technical parameters from different sources may differ in data format, field names, field locations, units of measurement, and parameter expression. Some parameters are recorded in structured fields, while others are found in the text, tables, or images of inspection reports, test reports, technical specifications, or configuration tables, requiring methods such as document parsing, text recognition, and field extraction to obtain them.

[0004] For example, the same power battery energy parameter may be represented by different field names such as "battery capacity," "power battery energy," or "battery system energy" in different sources, and may also be expressed using different units of measurement such as kWh and Wh. The same driving range parameter, energy consumption parameter, or test conclusion may also differ due to differences in data source, recording accuracy, or parameter expression format. If the review is conducted directly according to the original field name, original unit of measurement, or original expression format, it is difficult to determine whether parameters from different sources correspond to the same technical parameter, and it is also difficult to accurately compare parameters from different sources.

[0005] Existing vehicle review systems can perform automated reviews of enterprise qualifications, application data, sample vehicle information, testing agency qualifications, and policy compliance, but they typically do not establish unified standard parameter identifiers for technical parameters of vehicles from different sources, nor do they adequately address differences in units, expressions of conclusions, and source priority among parameters from different sources.

[0006] Existing methods for verifying the quality of new energy vehicle data can evaluate data quality based on indicators such as completeness, correctness, consistency, uniqueness, timeliness, and authenticity. However, data quality evaluation is not the same as vehicle model technical parameter review. Vehicle model technical parameter review also requires determining the applicable rule version based on the review task conditions, uniformly processing and verifying the consistency of similar parameters from different sources, and further performing vehicle model applicability verification, rule compliance verification, and engineering logic verification between different technical parameters.

[0007] In addition, compliance detection technology based on dynamic rule base can match rules according to business conditions and output compliance detection results. However, the rule objects and detection targets in different business areas are different, and it cannot directly solve the problems of multi-source field mapping, parameter standardization, source conflict isolation and cross-parameter engineering calculation of vehicle technical parameters.

[0008] On the other hand, the policy documents, technical standards, and review specifications used for vehicle model review may vary depending on the vehicle type, vehicle purpose, applicable time, application batch, or review target. Different rule versions may correspond to different applicable vehicle conditions, parameter comparison relationships, parameter thresholds, source priority, or rejection conditions. If a matching target rule version cannot be determined based on the review task data, the adopted review rules may be incompatible with the vehicle model to be reviewed.

[0009] Therefore, existing technologies still have room for improvement in areas such as unified identification and standardized processing of technical parameters of vehicles from multiple sources, matching of audit tasks with rule versions, verification of consistency of source parameters, exclusion of conflicting source parameters, parameter correlation calculation, and traceability of audit conclusion basis. Summary of the Invention

[0010] This application provides a method, system, device, and storage medium for reviewing vehicle technical parameters. The method acquires at least two types of vehicle technical parameter data with source identifiers, maps parameter fields from different sources to corresponding standard parameter identifiers, and performs path-based standardization processing on numerical parameters and conclusion-based parameters according to parameter type and unit conversion relationships.

[0011] The method determines the target rule version and loads the target rule set based on the audit task data. When the same standard parameter identifier corresponds to at least two source parameters and the source priority can uniquely determine a highest priority source parameter, the highest priority source parameter is determined as the consistency benchmark parameter; when the source priority cannot uniquely determine a highest priority source parameter, a verification result is generated, and source consistency verification is not performed on the standard parameter identifier, nor is the corresponding source parameter used for parameter association calculation.

[0012] For source parameters with established consistency benchmark parameters, source consistency pass results or source parameter conflict results are generated based on absolute difference, deviation rate, or conclusion equivalence. Source parameters that meet the difference conditions are assigned to consistent parameter groups, while parameter values ​​with source conflicts are excluded from parameter association calculations. Engineering logic verification between different technical parameters is performed based on the representative standardized parameter values ​​of the valid parameters. Based on the rule compliance verification results, source parameter conflict results, and the anomaly handling and rejection conditions corresponding to the logic anomaly results, an audit conclusion is generated. The audit conclusion is then associated with the parameter source, target rule version, and rule basis for storage and output.

[0013] Firstly, this application provides a method for reviewing the technical parameters of a vehicle model, including: Obtain the review task data of the vehicle model to be reviewed and the vehicle technical parameter data from at least two sources corresponding to the review task data, wherein the vehicle technical parameter data from different sources have corresponding source identifiers; The vehicle technical parameter data is subjected to parameter field identification to obtain at least one of parameter name, parameter value, parameter unit, and parameter conclusion; Based on the preset parameter mapping relationship, parameter fields from different sources are mapped to the corresponding standard parameter identifiers; Based on the parameter type and unit conversion relationship corresponding to the standard parameter identifier, parameter fields from different sources mapped to the same standard parameter identifier are standardized to obtain standardized vehicle technical parameter data. Based on at least one of the vehicle type, vehicle purpose, applicable time, application batch, and audit object in the audit task data, determine the target rule version corresponding to the audit task data, and load the target rule set corresponding to the target rule version; Based on the target rule set, the standardized vehicle technical parameter data is subjected to applicable vehicle condition verification, rule compliance verification, and consistency verification between parameters from different sources to obtain parameter verification results. Based on the parameter verification results, the source identifier, and the rule basis corresponding to the target rule set, an audit conclusion for the vehicle model to be audited is generated.

[0014] In some examples, the parameter associations include standard parameter identifiers corresponding to the power battery energy parameters that can be used to estimate the driving range, standard parameter identifiers corresponding to the energy consumption parameters per 100 kilometers, and standard parameter identifiers corresponding to the driving range parameters. From the standardized vehicle technical parameter data, the representative standardized parameter values ​​corresponding to the power battery energy parameters and the representative standardized parameter values ​​corresponding to the energy consumption parameters per 100 kilometers are read respectively. The representative standardized parameter value corresponding to the power battery energy parameters is the standardized parameter value of the consistency benchmark parameter when the number of source parameters corresponding to the power battery energy parameters is at least two and the consistency benchmark parameter corresponding to the power battery energy parameters has been determined, or when the source parameters corresponding to the power battery energy parameters include only one numerical source parameter. The representative standardized parameter value corresponding to the energy consumption parameters per 100 kilometers is the standardized parameter value of the consistency benchmark parameter corresponding to the energy consumption parameters per 100 kilometers when the number of source parameters corresponding to the energy consumption parameters per 100 kilometers is at least two and the consistency benchmark parameter corresponding to the energy consumption parameters per 100 kilometers has been determined, or when the source parameters corresponding to the energy consumption parameters per 100 kilometers include only one numerical source parameter. It is then confirmed that the representative standardized parameter values ​​corresponding to the power battery energy parameters and the representative standardized parameter values ​​corresponding to the energy consumption parameters per 100 kilometers pass the corresponding standard unit of measurement conditions. When the representative standardized parameter value corresponding to the energy consumption parameter per 100 kilometers is not zero, the estimated driving range is calculated according to the following parameter calculation relationship; when the representative standardized parameter value corresponding to the energy consumption parameter per 100 kilometers is zero, a parameter correlation calculation result to be verified is generated and the driving range calculation is stopped: Estimated driving range = Standardized parameter value of power battery energy ÷ Standardized parameter value of energy consumption per 100 kilometers × 100; The standardized parameter values ​​are read from the standardized vehicle technical parameter data. These values ​​must be source parameters with the corresponding standard parameter identifiers and not marked as having source conflicts. If standardized parameter values ​​cannot be read from source parameters with the corresponding standard parameter identifiers and not marked as having source conflicts, a parameter association calculation result corresponding to the range parameter is generated for verification, and the logical consistency check for the range parameter is stopped. If the standardized parameter values ​​of the source parameters can be read, the calculated range value is compared with the standardized parameter values ​​of the source parameters. When the parameter correlation relationship is verified using absolute difference and the absolute difference between the estimated driving range and the standardized parameter value of the source parameter corresponding to the driving range parameter exceeds the estimation deviation corresponding to the parameter correlation relationship, or when the parameter correlation relationship is verified using deviation rate and the deviation rate between the two exceeds the estimation deviation rate corresponding to the parameter correlation relationship, a logical abnormal result for the driving range parameter is generated, and the standard parameter identifier, the representative standardized parameter value, and the source identifier of the consistency benchmark parameter corresponding to the power battery energy parameter and the energy consumption per 100 kilometers are recorded, and the standard parameter identifier, standardized parameter value, and source identifier corresponding to the driving range parameter are also recorded.

[0015] In some examples, determining the target rule version corresponding to the audit task data includes: Extract at least one matching condition from the audit task data: vehicle type, vehicle purpose, applicable time, application batch, and audit target. Retrieve candidate rule versions from the rule base that match the matching conditions; The target rule version is determined based on at least one of the following: the effective time, the expiration time, the rule version number, and the applicable conditions of the candidate rule version.

[0016] In some examples, the target rule set includes at least one of the following: rule identifier, rule version, applicable vehicle type conditions, target standard parameter identifier, parameter comparison relationship, parameter threshold, parameter unit, rule effective time, rule expiration time, veto condition, and rule basis; The rule compliance check includes: Based on the applicable vehicle model conditions in the target rule set, determine the target verification rules applicable to the vehicle model to be audited; Based on the target standard parameter identifier, parameter comparison relationship, parameter threshold and parameter unit in the target verification rule, perform parameter threshold verification on the standardized vehicle technical parameter data; Based on the result of the parameter threshold verification and the rejection condition in the target verification rule, a rule compliance verification result is generated.

[0017] In some examples, the method for constructing the rule base includes: Obtain at least one of the following: policy documents, technical standard documents, review specification documents, and vehicle model catalog documents; The acquired files are converted to the correct format, and a document structure tree is built based on the chapter and clause levels in the files. Extract at least one of the following from the document structure tree: applicable vehicle model conditions, source priority corresponding to different sources, standard parameter identifier, difference representation method, absolute difference allowable value, deviation rate allowable value, parameter association relationship, parameter operation relationship, standard unit of measurement of parameters involved in the operation, estimated deviation, estimated deviation rate, parameter threshold, parameter comparison relationship, effective time, expiration time, standard clause, veto conditions, and rule version; The extracted results are used to generate structured rule objects, which are then organized according to applicable vehicle models, rule effective time, and rule version to obtain the rule library.

[0018] In some examples, the generation of audit conclusions includes: The results of the rule compliance verification, the results of the source consistency verification, the results of the source parameter conflict, the results of the logical anomaly, the results of the parameter correlation calculation to be verified, the results of the missing parameters, and the results to be verified are summarized. If the preset key parameters do not meet the corresponding target verification rules, or if the source parameter conflict result corresponding to the preset key parameters meets the rejection conditions in the target rule set, a review failure conclusion is generated. When the logical anomaly result corresponding to the preset key parameter satisfies the rejection condition in the target rule set, a review failure conclusion is generated; If no review failure conclusion is generated, and there are results of source parameter conflict, logical anomaly, parameter correlation calculation pending verification, missing parameter, or pending verification, a supplementary material status or a pending review status is generated according to the anomaly handling conditions in the target rule set. If no review failure conclusion is generated, and there are no rule compliance verification failure results, source parameter conflict results, logical anomaly results, parameter association calculation results to be verified results, parameter missing results, or results to be verified results, a review pass conclusion will be generated. The audit conclusion is associated with and stored along with the corresponding parameter verification results, source identifier, target rule version, and rule basis, and then output.

[0019] In some examples, the preset key parameters include at least one of the following: power battery safety parameters, driving range parameters, energy consumption parameters, collision safety parameters, braking performance parameters, fire resistance performance parameters, and production consistency parameters. When the detection conclusion corresponding to the preset key parameter is unqualified, the parameter value does not meet the corresponding target verification rule, the source parameter conflict result corresponding to the preset key parameter meets the rejection condition in the target rule set, or the logical anomaly result corresponding to the preset key parameter meets the rejection condition in the target rule set, an audit failure conclusion is generated.

[0020] In some examples, the review task is a review task for vehicle model applications; The audit task data includes the application batch identifier, and the source of the vehicle technical parameter data includes at least two of the following: data filled in by the enterprise itself, test report data, experimental report data, technical specification data, configuration table data, and technical change description data. The rule base includes rule objects constructed based on at least one of the following: the catalog of new energy vehicle promotion models, the catalog of vehicle access, and policy documents related to the review of promotion models.

[0021] In some examples, it also includes: Obtain the historical technical parameter data of the vehicle model to be reviewed; Based on the audit conclusions and the historical vehicle technical parameter data, a horizontal analysis is performed on different vehicle models within the same audit task scope, and a vertical analysis is performed on the vehicle technical parameter data of the same company or the same vehicle model at different times. The risk level is determined based on the results of horizontal and vertical analysis. Based on the risk level, generate at least one review action instruction from the following categories: normal review, manual review, supplementary materials, special investigation, and suspension of review.

[0022] In some examples, it also includes: After the vehicle model to be audited has been audited, at least one of the following is obtained: production consistency data, supervision and spot check data, vehicle operation monitoring data and technology change data corresponding to the vehicle model to be audited. The acquired data is standardized based on the preset parameter mapping relationship, the parameter type, and the unit conversion relationship. The standardized data is compared with the standardized vehicle technical parameter data generated when the review is approved and the target rule set. When the comparison results meet the preset warning conditions, regulatory warning information for the vehicle model to be reviewed is generated.

[0023] Secondly, this application provides a vehicle technical parameter verification system, including: The data acquisition module is used to acquire the audit task data of the vehicle to be audited and the vehicle technical parameter data from at least two sources corresponding to the audit task data, wherein the vehicle technical parameter data from different sources have corresponding source identifiers; The parameter recognition module is used to identify parameter fields in the vehicle technical parameter data and obtain at least one of parameter name, parameter value, parameter unit and parameter conclusion. The parameter mapping and standardization module is used to map parameter fields from different sources to corresponding standard parameter identifiers according to preset parameter mapping relationships, and to standardize parameter fields from different sources mapped to the same standard parameter identifier according to the parameter type and unit conversion relationship corresponding to the standard parameter identifier, so as to obtain standardized vehicle technical parameter data. The rule determination module is used to determine the target rule version corresponding to the audit task data based on at least one of the vehicle type, vehicle purpose, applicable time, application batch and audit object in the audit task data, and load the target rule set corresponding to the target rule version; The parameter verification module is used to determine the number of corresponding source parameters for each standard parameter identifier. When there are at least two source parameters corresponding to the same standard parameter identifier and the source priority in the target rule set can uniquely determine a highest priority source parameter, the highest priority source parameter is determined as the consistency benchmark parameter according to the source priority in the target rule set. When there are at least two source parameters corresponding to the same standard parameter identifier and the source priority in the target rule set cannot uniquely determine a highest priority source parameter, a verification result corresponding to the standard parameter identifier is generated, source consistency verification is no longer performed for the standard parameter identifier, and the standard parameter identifier is not... The corresponding source parameters are used for parameter correlation calculation; when the source parameters corresponding to the same standard parameter identifier include only one source parameter and the parameter type corresponding to the standard parameter identifier is numerical, the source parameter is determined as the consistency benchmark parameter, and the standardized parameter value of the source parameter is determined as the representative standardized parameter value of the corresponding standard parameter identifier; when the source parameters corresponding to the same standard parameter identifier include only one source parameter and the parameter type corresponding to the standard parameter identifier is conclusion-type, the standardized parameter conclusion of the source parameter is determined as the standardized parameter conclusion of the corresponding standard parameter identifier; when the source parameter corresponding to the same standard parameter identifier is empty, a result to be verified corresponding to the standard parameter identifier is generated; The parameter review module is further configured to, for numerical standard parameter identifiers with at least two source parameters and a determined consistency benchmark parameter, calculate the absolute difference or deviation rate between the standardized parameter values ​​of other source parameters (excluding the consistency benchmark parameter) and the standardized parameter value of the consistency benchmark parameter, according to the difference representation method in the target rule set; and generate a source consistency pass result or a source parameter conflict result for the other source parameters based on the comparison result of the absolute difference with the allowable absolute difference value in the target rule set or the comparison result of the deviation rate with the allowable deviation rate value in the target rule set; classify the consistency benchmark parameter and other source parameters that meet the corresponding difference conditions into the same consistency parameter group; mark the standardized parameter values ​​of the consistency benchmark parameter and other source parameters classified into the consistency parameter group as valid parameter values ​​that can be used for parameter association inference; determine the standardized parameter value of the consistency benchmark parameter as the representative standardized parameter value of the corresponding standard parameter identifier; and mark the standardized parameter values ​​of other source parameters not classified into the consistency parameter group as parameter values ​​with source conflicts. The parameter review module is also used to determine, for conclusion-type standard parameter identifiers with at least two source parameters and a determined consistency benchmark parameter, whether the standardized parameter conclusions of other source parameters besides the consistency benchmark parameter are the same as or satisfy the conclusion equivalence relation in the target rule set, and generate source consistency pass results or source parameter conflict results for the other source parameters based on the judgment result. The parameter verification module is further configured to: read the representative standardized parameter values ​​corresponding to each of the at least two associated parameters from the standardized vehicle technical parameter data according to the parameter association relationship in the target rule set; confirm that the representative standardized parameter values ​​corresponding to each of the at least two associated parameters meet the corresponding standard unit of measurement conditions; generate a parameter association calculation pending verification result and stop the corresponding parameter association calculation when the representative standardized parameter values ​​corresponding to each of the at least two associated parameters cannot be read, or the read representative standardized parameter values ​​do not meet the corresponding standard unit of measurement conditions; calculate the calculated value of the parameter to be calculated according to the representative standardized parameter values ​​corresponding to each of the at least two associated parameters and the parameter operation relationship in the parameter association relationship; compare the calculated value with the standardized parameter value of the source parameter corresponding to the parameter to be calculated that is not marked as having a source conflict; and generate a logical consistency pass result or a logical anomaly result according to the calculation deviation or calculation deviation rate in the parameter association relationship. The parameter review module is also used to exclude parameter values ​​marked as having source conflicts when performing parameter association calculation, and to perform applicable vehicle model condition verification and rule compliance verification based on the target rule set. The conclusion generation module is used to generate an audit conclusion based on the rule compliance verification result, the source parameter conflict result, the logic anomaly result, the parameter association calculation result to be verified, the parameter missing result and the result to be verified, as well as the anomaly handling conditions and rejection conditions in the target rule set. The audit conclusion is then associated with and stored and output with the corresponding parameter verification result, standard parameter identifier, standardized parameter value or standardized parameter conclusion, source identifier, target rule version and rule basis.

[0024] Thirdly, this application provides a computer device, including a memory, a processor, and a computer program stored in the memory and capable of running on the processor. When the processor executes the computer program, it implements the above-mentioned method for reviewing vehicle technical parameters.

[0025] Fourthly, this application provides a computer-readable storage medium having a computer program stored thereon, wherein when the computer program is executed by a processor, it implements the above-mentioned method for reviewing vehicle technical parameters.

[0026] Compared with the prior art, this application has at least the following beneficial effects: This application solves the problem of difficulty in corresponding and comparing parameters from different sources when there are differences in field names, field positions, units of measurement, and forms of expression. By identifying the fields of vehicle technical parameters from at least two sources and mapping the parameter fields from different sources to a unified standard parameter identifier according to a preset parameter mapping relationship, this application can solve the problem of difficulty in corresponding and comparing parameters from different sources when there are differences in field names, field positions, units of measurement, and forms of expression.

[0027] This application does not treat source consistency verification and parameter correlation calculation as independent audit steps. Instead, it determines the source priority, source consistency verification threshold, parameter correlation, and calculation deviation of different data sources based on the target rule version matching the audit task data. Then, according to the source priority, it determines the consistency benchmark parameter from different source parameters with the same standard parameter identifier. The system identifies source parameter conflicts based on the absolute difference, deviation rate, or conclusion equivalence relationship between other source parameters and the consistency benchmark parameter, and classifies numerical source parameters that meet the difference conditions into a consistency parameter group. The standardized parameter values ​​in the consistency parameter group are marked as valid parameter values ​​that can be used for parameter correlation calculation, and the standardized parameter values ​​of the consistency benchmark parameter are determined as representative standardized parameter values. Parameter values ​​with source conflicts are excluded when performing parameter correlation calculation. Therefore, the source consistency verification result can directly control the input data for cross-parameter engineering calculation, reduce the interference of abnormal source parameters on the driving range calculation result, and can separately identify, record, and handle source parameter conflicts under the same standard parameter identifier and engineering logic anomalies between different standard parameter identifiers.

[0028] In addition, this application links the audit conclusions with the parameter verification results, source identifiers, target rule versions, and rule bases, which is beneficial for verifying and tracing the formation process of the audit conclusions. Attached Figure Description

[0029] To more clearly illustrate the technical solutions in the embodiments of this application, the accompanying drawings used in the description of the embodiments are briefly described below. It should be understood that the following drawings only show some embodiments of this application and do not constitute a limitation on the scope of protection of this application.

[0030] Figure 1 A flowchart illustrating the method for reviewing vehicle technical parameters provided in this application embodiment; Figure 2 An implementation architecture diagram of the vehicle technical parameter review method provided in this application embodiment; Figure 3 A structural block diagram of the vehicle technical parameter verification system provided in this application embodiment; Figure 4 This is a structural block diagram of a computer device provided in an embodiment of this application. Detailed Implementation

[0031] The present application will now be described in further detail with reference to the embodiments and accompanying drawings. It should be understood that the following embodiments are for illustrative purposes only and are not intended to limit the scope of protection of the present application. Only the parts relevant to the present application are shown in the accompanying drawings.

[0032] Where there is no conflict, the embodiments and technical features in the embodiments of this application can be combined with each other.

[0033] A method for reviewing vehicle technical parameters includes: acquiring review task data for the vehicle to be reviewed and vehicle technical parameter data from at least two sources corresponding to the review task data, wherein the vehicle technical parameter data from different sources have corresponding source identifiers; identifying parameter fields in the vehicle technical parameter data to obtain at least one of parameter name, parameter value, parameter unit, and parameter conclusion; mapping parameter fields from different sources to corresponding standard parameter identifiers according to a preset parameter mapping relationship, wherein the standard parameter identifier is used to associate parameter fields representing the same vehicle technical parameter from different sources, and associate parameter type, standard unit of measurement, and unit conversion relationship; and determining the parameter type corresponding to the standard parameter identifier. Based on unit conversion relationships, path-based standardization is performed on parameter fields from different sources mapped to the same standard parameter identifier to form standardized vehicle technical parameter data. This standardized vehicle technical parameter data includes at least a standard parameter identifier, parameter type, standardized parameter value or standardized parameter conclusion, standard unit of measurement, and source identifier. When the parameter type is numerical, parameter values ​​from different sources are converted to standardized parameter values ​​under the standard unit of measurement according to the unit conversion relationships. When the parameter type is conclusion-based, parameter conclusions from different sources are converted to standardized parameter conclusions according to preset conclusion equivalence relationships. Based on the vehicle type, vehicle purpose, applicable time, application batch, and review data in the audit task data... At least one of the objects, a target rule version is determined from the rule base, and a target rule set corresponding to the target rule version is loaded. The target rule set includes at least the source priority corresponding to different sources, the difference representation method corresponding to the standard parameter identifier, the absolute difference allowable value, the deviation rate allowable value, the parameter correlation relationship between the power battery energy parameter, the energy consumption parameter per 100 kilometers, and the driving range parameter, the calculated deviation corresponding to the parameter correlation relationship, the calculated deviation rate, the parameter verification rule corresponding to the standard parameter identifier, the anomaly handling conditions corresponding to the source parameter conflict result, the anomaly handling conditions corresponding to the logical anomaly result, and the rejection condition. After completing the path-specific standardization process, for each standard... The parameter identifier is used to determine the number of corresponding source parameters. When the source parameters corresponding to the same standard parameter identifier include only one source parameter and the parameter type corresponding to the standard parameter identifier is numerical, the source parameter is determined as the consistency benchmark parameter, and the standardized parameter value of the source parameter is determined as the representative standardized parameter value of the corresponding standard parameter identifier. When the source parameters corresponding to the same standard parameter identifier include only one source parameter and the parameter type corresponding to the standard parameter identifier is conclusion-type, the standardized parameter conclusion of the source parameter is determined as the standardized parameter conclusion of the corresponding standard parameter identifier. When the source parameters corresponding to the same standard parameter identifier are empty, a verification result corresponding to the standard parameter identifier is generated.When there are at least two source parameters corresponding to the same standard parameter identifier and the source priority in the target rule set can uniquely determine a highest priority source parameter, the highest priority source parameter is determined as the consistency benchmark parameter according to the source priority in the target rule set. When there are at least two source parameters corresponding to the same standard parameter identifier and the source priority in the target rule set cannot uniquely determine a highest priority source parameter, a verification result corresponding to the standard parameter identifier is generated, source consistency verification is no longer performed on the standard parameter identifier, and the source parameter corresponding to the standard parameter identifier is not used for parameter association calculation. For standard parameter identifiers with at least two corresponding source parameters and a determined consistency benchmark parameter of numerical type, the absolute difference or deviation rate between the standardized parameter values ​​of other source parameters besides the consistency benchmark parameter and the standardized parameter value of the consistency benchmark parameter is calculated, and a source consistency pass result or source parameter conflict result is generated according to the absolute difference allowable value or deviation rate allowable value in the target rule set. For standard parameter identifiers with at least two corresponding source parameters and a determined consistency benchmark parameter of numerical type, the absolute difference or deviation rate between other source parameters besides the consistency benchmark parameter and the standardized parameter value of the consistency benchmark parameter is determined. The system determines whether the standardized parameter conclusions of other source parameters besides the quasi-parameters are the same as or satisfy a preset equivalence relation with the standardized parameter conclusions of the consistency benchmark parameter, and generates a source consistency pass result or a source parameter conflict result based on the judgment result. Based on the source consistency pass result and the source parameter conflict result, for each standard parameter identifier with at least two corresponding source parameters, a determined consistency benchmark parameter, and a numerical parameter type, if the target rule set specifies that absolute difference is used for verification and the absolute difference does not exceed the allowable absolute difference value in the target rule set, or if the target rule set specifies that deviation rate is used for verification and the deviation rate does not exceed the allowable deviation rate value in the target rule set, the consistency benchmark parameter and the corresponding other source parameters are grouped into the same consistency parameter group. The standardized parameter values ​​in the consistency parameter group are marked as valid parameter values ​​that can be used for parameter association calculation, and the standardized parameter values ​​of the consistency benchmark parameter are determined as representative standardized parameter values ​​of the corresponding standard parameter identifier. The standardized parameter values ​​of other source parameters not grouped into the consistency parameter group are marked as parameter values ​​with source conflicts, and these parameter values ​​with source conflicts are excluded when performing parameter association calculation.The parameter relationships between the power battery energy parameter, the energy consumption parameter per 100 kilometers, and the driving range parameter are determined from the target rule set. The power battery energy parameter, the energy consumption parameter per 100 kilometers, and the driving range parameter each correspond to different standard parameter identifiers. The parameter relationships include the standard units of measurement, parameter calculation relationships, calculation deviations, calculation deviation rates, and anomaly handling conditions for the power battery energy parameter and the energy consumption parameter per 100 kilometers. Representative standardized parameter values ​​corresponding to the power battery energy parameter and the energy consumption parameter per 100 kilometers are read from the standardized vehicle technical parameter data corresponding to the vehicle model to be audited and the audit task data. The representative standardized parameter value corresponding to the power battery energy parameter is the standardized parameter value of the consistency benchmark parameter corresponding to the power battery energy parameter when the number of source parameters corresponding to the power battery energy parameter is at least two and the consistency benchmark parameter corresponding to the power battery energy parameter has been determined, or when the source parameters corresponding to the power battery energy parameter include only one numerical source parameter; the representative standardized parameter value corresponding to the energy consumption parameter per 100 kilometers is the standardized parameter value of the consistency benchmark parameter corresponding to the energy consumption parameter per 100 kilometers when the number of source parameters corresponding to the energy consumption parameter per 100 kilometers is at least two and the consistency benchmark parameter corresponding to the energy consumption parameter per 100 kilometers has been determined, or when the source parameters corresponding to the energy consumption parameter per 100 kilometers include only one numerical source parameter. The standardized parameter values ​​of the corresponding consistency benchmark parameters are determined; and it is confirmed that the representative standardized parameter values ​​corresponding to the power battery energy parameters and the representative standardized parameter values ​​corresponding to the energy consumption parameters per 100 kilometers respectively meet the standard units of measurement for the power battery energy parameters and the energy consumption parameters per 100 kilometers; if the representative standardized parameter values ​​corresponding to the power battery energy parameters or the energy consumption parameters per 100 kilometers cannot be read, or if the read representative standardized parameter values ​​do not meet the corresponding standard units of measurement, a parameter correlation calculation pending verification result is generated and the driving range calculation is stopped; if the representative standardized parameter values ​​corresponding to the energy consumption parameters per 100 kilometers can be read and meet the corresponding standard units of measurement, the calculation is stopped. When the representative standardized parameter value corresponding to the power battery energy parameter and the representative standardized parameter value corresponding to the energy consumption parameter per 100 kilometers are not zero, the driving range estimation is performed; when the representative standardized parameter value corresponding to the energy consumption parameter per 100 kilometers is zero, a parameter association estimation result to be verified is generated and the driving range estimation is stopped; the driving range estimation value is calculated according to the following parameter operation relationship: driving range estimation value = representative standardized parameter value of power battery energy ÷ representative standardized parameter value of energy consumption per 100 kilometers × 100; the standardized parameter value corresponding to the standard parameter identifier corresponding to the driving range parameter and not marked as having a source conflict is read from the standardized vehicle technical parameter data;When a standardized parameter value corresponding to the standard parameter identifier of the driving range parameter cannot be read and is not marked as having a source conflict, a parameter association estimation result to be verified corresponding to the driving range parameter is generated, and the logical consistency verification for the driving range parameter is stopped; when the standardized parameter value of one or more source parameters can be read, the estimated driving range value is compared with the standardized parameter value of one or more source parameters respectively, and a logical consistency pass result or a logical anomaly result is generated according to the estimation deviation or the estimation deviation rate; based on the target rule set, the applicable vehicle condition verification and rule compliance verification are performed on the standardized vehicle technical parameter data, and an audit conclusion is generated according to the anomaly handling conditions and rejection conditions corresponding to the rule compliance verification result, the source parameter conflict result, and the logical anomaly result respectively; the audit conclusion is associated with and stored and output with the corresponding source parameter conflict result, logical anomaly result, standard parameter identifier, standardized parameter value or standardized parameter conclusion, source identifier, target rule version, and rule basis.

[0034] Figure 1 This is a flowchart of the vehicle technical parameter review method provided in the embodiments of this application. Figure 2 This is an implementation architecture diagram of the vehicle technical parameter review method provided in this application embodiment. Figure 1 and Figure 2 As shown in the embodiments of this application, the method for reviewing vehicle technical parameters includes the following steps.

[0035] S101: Obtain audit task data and technical parameter data of vehicle models from multiple sources.

[0036] Obtain the audit task data of the vehicle model to be audited and the vehicle technical parameter data from at least two sources corresponding to the audit task data, wherein the vehicle technical parameter data from different sources have corresponding source identifiers.

[0037] The audit task data may include at least one of the following: vehicle model identification, vehicle model category, vehicle purpose, applicable time, application batch, and audit target.

[0038] The sources of the vehicle model technical parameter data may include at least two of the following: enterprise declaration data, test report data, experimental data, technical specification data, configuration table data, production consistency data, technical change data, supervision and spot check data, and vehicle operation monitoring data.

[0039] In the scenario of applying for and reviewing vehicle models, the review task data may include the application batch identifier, and the vehicle model technical parameter data may include at least two of the following: data filled in by the enterprise, test report data, experimental report data, technical specification data, configuration table data, and technical change description data.

[0040] The data filled in by the enterprise may include at least one of the following: basic vehicle parameters, configuration table, technical specifications, sales area information, and vehicle usage information. The test report data and experimental report data may include at least one of the following: test items, test items, test parameters, test values, testing unit, and test conclusions. The technical change data may include at least one of the following: change items, parameters before the change, parameters after the change, and the effective date of the change.

[0041] Source identifiers are set for vehicle technical parameter data from different sources, and the vehicle technical parameter data is associated with at least one of the following: vehicle identifier, review task identifier, application batch identifier, document identifier, data formation time, and data validity time.

[0042] For structured vehicle technical parameter data, the parameter fields can be read directly; for data in inspection reports, test reports, technical specifications, configuration tables, or other document formats, document structure parsing and parameter field recognition can be performed in subsequent steps.

[0043] By acquiring vehicle technical parameter data from at least two sources, a data foundation can be provided for field correspondence, unified processing, and consistency verification between parameters from different sources.

[0044] S102: Recognize parameter fields in vehicle technical parameter data.

[0045] The vehicle model's technical parameter data is analyzed to identify parameter fields, obtaining at least one of the following: parameter name, parameter value, parameter unit, and parameter conclusion.

[0046] For structured vehicle technical parameter data, the corresponding parameter fields are read according to the preset field configuration to obtain at least one of the following: parameter name, parameter value, parameter unit, and parameter conclusion.

[0047] For vehicle technical parameter data in document formats such as inspection reports, test reports, technical specifications, configuration tables, or other documents, perform structural analysis on the documents to obtain at least one of the following: text content, table content, and image content.

[0048] Perform character recognition and field extraction on at least one of the text content, the table content, and the image content to obtain at least one of the following: parameter name, parameter value, parameter unit, parameter conclusion, detection agency information, and data validity period.

[0049] For example, the document structure of a PDF test report can be parsed to extract the main text, table data, and image content. Then, through text recognition and field extraction, at least one field from the test report can be extracted, including power battery energy parameters, power battery system energy density parameters, driving range parameters, energy consumption per 100 kilometers, test items, and test conclusions.

[0050] For data submitted by enterprises themselves, the system can read the parameter names, values, units, and conclusions. For test reports or experimental reports, the system can extract parameter fields and test conclusions from the corresponding test items, experimental items, or conclusion columns.

[0051] The extracted parameter name, parameter value, parameter unit, parameter conclusion, testing institution information, and data validity period are associated with at least one of the following and stored with the corresponding source identifier.

[0052] For fields that cannot be identified, have incomplete identification results, or whose parameter meaning cannot be determined, record the identification failure status or the status pending verification for subsequent parameter mapping, standardization processing, and parameter integrity judgment.

[0053] S103: Map parameter fields from different sources to standard parameter identifiers.

[0054] Based on the preset parameter mapping relationship, parameter fields from different sources are mapped to the corresponding standard parameter identifiers.

[0055] The preset parameter mapping relationship may include at least one of the following: source field name, field alias, field position, standard parameter identifier, standard parameter name, parameter type, and unit conversion relationship.

[0056] Based on at least one of the source field name, the field alias, and the field position, determine the correspondence between different source parameter fields, and associate different source parameter fields with corresponding relationships to the same standard parameter identifier.

[0057] For example, the same power battery energy parameter can be represented by original field names such as "battery capacity," "power battery energy," or "battery system energy" from different sources. Based on a preset parameter mapping relationship, these original field names are mapped to the standard parameter identifier corresponding to the same power battery energy parameter. According to the preset parameter mapping relationship, it can be determined that the aforementioned fields from different sources correspond to the same standard parameter identifier.

[0058] The same driving range or energy consumption parameter may be represented by different field names, field locations, or parameter definitions depending on the data source. The system can determine the correspondence between fields from different sources based on at least one of the following: field name, field alias, field location, parameter description, and data source.

[0059] For the same testing item, different sources can use expressions such as "qualified," "passed," or other expressions with the same or similar meanings. Based on a pre-defined conclusion mapping relationship, conclusion fields from different sources can be associated with conclusion-type parameters corresponding to the same standard parameter identifier.

[0060] When a parameter field cannot determine the corresponding standard parameter identifier based on the existing parameter mapping relationship, record the mapping failure status or the pending verification status, and transfer the corresponding parameter field to the manual review or parameter mapping relationship update process.

[0061] S104: Standardize the mapped parameter fields.

[0062] Based on the parameter type and unit conversion relationship corresponding to the standard parameter identifier, the parameter fields from different sources mapped to the same standard parameter identifier are standardized to obtain standardized vehicle technical parameter data.

[0063] The standardization process includes at least one of parameter name standardization, parameter unit normalization, and parameter expression standardization.

[0064] Specifically, based on the standard parameter name corresponding to the standard parameter identifier, parameter names from different sources are converted into unified parameter names; based on the unit conversion relationship corresponding to the standard parameter identifier, parameter values ​​from different sources are converted into unified parameter units; and based on the parameter type corresponding to the standard parameter identifier, parameter values ​​or parameter conclusions are standardized in format and validated in validity.

[0065] For example, for power battery energy parameters expressed in kilowatt-hours and watt-hours respectively, parameter values ​​from different sources are converted into a unified energy unit kWh according to a preset unit conversion relationship.

[0066] For conclusion-type parameters represented by "qualified" and "passed" respectively, the parameter conclusions from different sources are converted into the corresponding standard parameter conclusions according to the preset conclusion equivalence relation.

[0067] For numerical parameters, at least one of the following can be standardized: numerical format, number of digits retained, decimal point expression method, and numerical precision. For conclusion-type parameters, the expression of conclusions such as qualified, unqualified, passed, failed, and pending verification can be standardized.

[0068] The standardized vehicle technical parameter data is formed by associating and storing at least one of the following: the standardized parameter value, parameter unit, parameter conclusion, source identifier, and data validity period.

[0069] When performing standardization, the original parameter names, values, units, conclusions, and source information can be retained to facilitate verification and traceability of the standardization results.

[0070] For parameter fields that fail to complete the standardization process, record the standardization failure status or the status pending verification, so that the missing parameter results or the results pending verification can be determined later in conjunction with the target rule set.

[0071] S105: Determine the target rule version and load the target rule set.

[0072] Based on at least one of the vehicle type, vehicle purpose, applicable time, application batch, and audit object in the audit task data, determine the target rule version corresponding to the audit task data, and load the target rule set corresponding to the target rule version.

[0073] Specifically, at least one matching condition is extracted from the audit task data, including vehicle type, vehicle purpose, applicable time, application batch, and audit target; candidate rule versions that match the matching conditions are retrieved from the rule base; and the target rule version is determined based on at least one of the candidate rule version's effective time, expiration time, rule version number, and applicable conditions.

[0074] The target rule set may include at least one of the following: rule identifier, rule version, applicable vehicle model conditions, source priority corresponding to different sources, target standard parameter identifier, difference representation method, absolute difference allowable value, deviation rate allowable value, parameter association relationship, parameter operation relationship, standard unit of measurement of parameters involved in the operation, estimated deviation, estimated deviation rate, parameter comparison relationship, parameter threshold, parameter unit, abnormal handling conditions corresponding to source parameter conflict results, abnormal handling conditions corresponding to logical abnormal results, rule effective time, rule expiration time, veto conditions, and rule basis.

[0075] The source priority is used to determine the consistency benchmark parameter from different source parameters corresponding to the same standard parameter identifier. For parameters of type numeric, when the source priority can uniquely determine the highest priority source parameter, that source parameter is determined as the consistency benchmark parameter, and its standardized parameter value is determined as the representative standardized parameter value of the corresponding standard parameter identifier. For parameters of type conclusion, the standardized parameter conclusion of that source parameter is used as the benchmark standardized parameter conclusion of the corresponding standard parameter identifier. When the source priority cannot uniquely determine the highest priority source parameter, a result to be verified is generated, and the source consistency verification of the corresponding standard parameter identifier is not performed, nor is the corresponding source parameter used for parameter association calculation.

[0076] The target rule set provides at least one of the following for source consistency verification: source priority, difference representation method, absolute difference allowable value, deviation rate allowable value, and conclusion equivalence relation; provides at least one of the following for parameter association calculation: parameter association relation, parameter operation relation, standard unit of measurement of the parameters involved in the operation, calculation deviation, and calculation deviation rate; and provides at least one of the following for audit conclusion generation: abnormal handling conditions corresponding to source parameter conflict results, abnormal handling conditions corresponding to logical abnormal results, and rejection conditions.

[0077] The rule base can be pre-built before the audit task is executed. When policy documents, technical standard documents, audit specification documents, or vehicle model catalog documents change, the rule base can be updated and new rule versions can be generated.

[0078] When constructing the rule base, at least one of policy documents, technical standard documents, review specification documents, and vehicle model catalog documents is obtained. The obtained documents are converted into formats, and a document structure tree is established according to the chapter level and clause level in the documents.

[0079] Extract at least one of the following from the document structure tree: applicable vehicle model conditions, source priority corresponding to different sources, standard parameter identifier, difference representation method, absolute difference allowable value, deviation rate allowable value, parameter association relationship, parameter operation relationship, standard unit of measurement of parameters involved in the operation, estimated deviation, estimated deviation rate, parameter threshold, parameter comparison relationship, effective time, expiration time, standard clause, veto conditions, and rule version.

[0080] The applicable vehicle conditions may include at least one of the following: vehicle type, energy type, drive mode, vehicle purpose, and operational nature. The standard parameter identifiers may correspond to at least one of the following: driving range parameter, power battery system energy density parameter, energy consumption per 100 kilometers parameter, battery safety parameter, braking performance parameter, and fire resistance performance parameter.

[0081] The extracted results are used to generate structured rule objects, which are then organized according to applicable vehicle models, rule effective time, and rule version to obtain the rule library.

[0082] Each rule update generates a new rule version and records a rule change summary to support matching the corresponding rule version according to the application batch or other review task conditions, and to support the retrospective of historical review processes.

[0083] S106: Perform parameter validation based on the target rule set.

[0084] Based on the target rule set, the standardized vehicle technical parameter data is subjected to applicable vehicle condition verification, rule compliance verification, and consistency verification between parameters from different sources to obtain parameter verification results.

[0085] 1. Applicable vehicle model condition verification Based on at least one of the vehicle type, vehicle purpose, energy type, drive method, and operating nature of the vehicle to be reviewed, determine whether the rules in the target rule set are applicable to the vehicle to be reviewed.

[0086] For rules applicable to the vehicle model to be audited, determine the corresponding target verification rule; for rules not applicable to the vehicle model to be audited, do not use them as the basis for rule compliance verification of the current vehicle model to be audited.

[0087] 2. Rule compliance verification Based on the applicable vehicle model conditions in the target rule set, the target verification rules applicable to the vehicle model to be audited are determined.

[0088] Based on the target standard parameter identifier, parameter comparison relationship, parameter threshold, and parameter unit in the target verification rules, parameter threshold verification is performed on the standardized vehicle technical parameter data.

[0089] Based on the parameter threshold verification results and the rejection conditions in the target verification rules, a rule compliance verification result is generated.

[0090] In the scenario of applying for and reviewing vehicle models, the rule compliance verification may include standard compliance verification performed in accordance with national or industry standards, and access condition compliance verification performed in accordance with vehicle model catalog documents, vehicle model access catalog documents, or review specifications.

[0091] 3. Consistency verification between parameters from different sources For each standard parameter identifier, determine whether there are at least two different source parameters corresponding to the standard parameter identifier. If there are at least two different source parameters corresponding to the standard parameter identifier and the source priority in the target rule set can uniquely determine a highest priority source parameter, determine the highest priority source parameter as the consistency benchmark parameter according to the source priority in the target rule set. If there are at least two different source parameters corresponding to the standard parameter identifier and the source priority in the target rule set cannot uniquely determine a highest priority source parameter, generate a verification result corresponding to the standard parameter identifier, no longer perform source consistency verification for the standard parameter identifier, and do not use the source parameter corresponding to the standard parameter identifier for parameter association calculation.

[0092] For standard parameter identifiers with numerical parameter types, the parameter difference between the standardized parameter values ​​of other source parameters (excluding the consistency benchmark parameter) and the standardized parameter value of the consistency benchmark parameter is calculated according to the difference representation method in the target rule set. The difference representation method includes either absolute difference or deviation rate. When the difference representation method is absolute difference, the parameter difference is the absolute difference between the standardized parameter values ​​of the other source parameters and the standardized parameter value of the consistency benchmark parameter; when the difference representation method is deviation rate, the parameter difference is the deviation rate determined according to the deviation rate calculation method specified in the target rule set.

[0093] The deviation rate is determined according to the deviation rate calculation method specified in the target rule set. When the target rule set does not specify other deviation rate calculation methods, the deviation rate is the ratio of the absolute difference between the standardized parameter value of the other source parameter and the standardized parameter value of the consistency benchmark parameter, divided by the absolute value of the standardized parameter value of the consistency benchmark parameter. Furthermore, the allowable deviation rate value uses the same numerical expression as the deviation rate. When the standardized parameter value of the consistency benchmark parameter is zero, the deviation rate is not used for verification; instead, the absolute difference is used for verification according to the target rule set, or a verification result corresponding to the standard parameter identifier is generated.

[0094] When the difference is represented as an absolute difference and the parameter difference does not exceed the allowable absolute difference value in the target rule set, or when the difference is represented as a deviation rate and the parameter difference does not exceed the allowable deviation rate value in the target rule set, a source consistency pass result is generated for the other source parameters, and the consistency benchmark parameter and the other source parameters are grouped into the same consistency parameter group; when the difference is represented as an absolute difference and the parameter difference exceeds the allowable absolute difference value in the target rule set, or when the difference is represented as a deviation rate and the parameter difference exceeds the allowable deviation rate value in the target rule set, a source parameter conflict result is generated for the other source parameters, and the other source parameters are marked as parameter values ​​with source conflicts.

[0095] The standardized parameter values ​​in the consensus parameter group are marked as valid parameter values ​​that can be used for parameter association calculation. The standardized parameter values ​​of the consensus benchmark parameters are determined as the representative standardized parameter values ​​of the corresponding standard parameter identifiers. Parameter values ​​marked as having source conflicts are excluded when performing parameter association calculation.

[0096] For standard parameter identifiers with a conclusion type, the standardized parameter conclusions of other source parameters besides the consensus benchmark parameter are compared with the standardized parameter conclusions of the consensus benchmark parameter to determine whether the standardized parameter conclusions of the other source parameters are the same as or satisfy the conclusion equivalence relation in the target rule set.

[0097] When the standardized parameter conclusion of the other source parameter is the same as or satisfies the conclusion equivalence relation of the standardization parameter of the consistency benchmark parameter, a source consistency pass result is generated for the other source parameter; when the standardized parameter conclusion of the other source parameter is different from or does not satisfy the conclusion equivalence relation of the standardization parameter of the consistency benchmark parameter, a source parameter conflict result is generated for the other source parameter.

[0098] For the information submitted by enterprises and the content extracted from supporting documents, source consistency verification is performed on numerical parameters or conclusion-type parameters with the same standard parameter identifier in the manner described above. For numerical parameters, at least one of the following is recorded: the standard parameter identifier, standardized parameter value, parameter difference, source identifier, difference representation method, and target rule version corresponding to the source consistency pass result or the source parameter conflict result. For conclusion-type parameters, at least one of the following is recorded: the standard parameter identifier, standardized parameter conclusion, source identifier, conclusion equivalence relation, and target rule version corresponding to the source consistency pass result or the source parameter conflict result.

[0099] When there are fewer than two different source parameters corresponding to the same standard parameter identifier, cross-source consistency comparison for the standard parameter identifier is not performed; when there is one source parameter among the different source parameters and the parameter type corresponding to the standard parameter identifier is numerical, the source parameter is determined as the consistency benchmark parameter, and the standardized parameter value of the source parameter is determined as the representative standardized parameter value of the corresponding standard parameter identifier; when there is one source parameter among the different source parameters and the parameter type corresponding to the standard parameter identifier is conclusion-type, the standardized parameter conclusion of the source parameter is determined as the standardized parameter conclusion of the corresponding standard parameter identifier; when there is no source parameter among the different source parameters corresponding to the same standard parameter identifier, a verification result corresponding to the standard parameter identifier is generated, and the standard parameter identifier and the corresponding source identifier are recorded.

[0100] After completing the source consistency verification, the source consistency pass result, the source parameter conflict result, the valid parameter value, the parameter value with source conflict, the representative standardized parameter value, the standard parameter identifier, the source identifier, the parameter difference, and the target rule version are associated and stored to form a parameter verification result for subsequent parameter association calculation and audit conclusion generation.

[0101] 4. Completeness check of required parameters Based on the audit necessity corresponding to the standard parameter identifier, the required parameters for the vehicle model to be audited are determined.

[0102] When the required parameters are not identified, not mapped, or not standardized, a result indicating missing parameters or a result pending verification is generated.

[0103] Based on the missing parameter result or the result to be verified, generate a supplementary material instruction or a manual review task.

[0104] For descriptive technical parameters that cannot be identified or verified automatically, they can be marked as pending verification and transferred to the manual review process.

[0105] 5. Parameter correlation calculation and logical consistency verification After completing the standardization processing, source consistency verification, and parameter validity marking of parameters from different sources, the parameters to be calculated and at least two associated parameters used to calculate the parameters to be calculated are determined based on the parameter association relationships in the target rule set.

[0106] When performing parameter correlation calculation, representative standardized parameter values ​​that have been determined as consistency benchmark parameters and meet the corresponding standard unit of measurement conditions are read from the standardized vehicle technical parameter data according to the standard parameter identifiers corresponding to the at least two correlation parameters. If a representative standardized parameter value corresponding to any correlation parameter cannot be read, or if the read representative standardized parameter value does not meet the corresponding standard unit of measurement conditions, a parameter correlation calculation pending verification result is generated and the corresponding parameter correlation calculation is stopped.

[0107] When the representative standardized parameter values ​​corresponding to each of the at least two associated parameters meet the corresponding standard unit of measurement conditions, and the representative standardized parameter value corresponding to the divisor in the parameter operation relationship is not zero, the estimated value of the parameter to be estimated is calculated according to the parameter operation relationship in the parameter association relationship, and the standardized parameter value of the source parameter corresponding to the parameter to be estimated and not marked as having a source conflict is read from the standardized vehicle technical parameter data; when the representative standardized parameter value corresponding to the divisor in the parameter operation relationship is zero, the parameter association estimation verification result is generated and the corresponding parameter association estimation is stopped.

[0108] When the standardized parameter value of the source parameter corresponding to the parameter to be estimated cannot be read, a parameter association estimation result to be verified corresponding to the parameter to be estimated is generated, and the logical consistency verification for the parameter to be estimated is stopped; when it can be read, the estimated value is compared with the standardized parameter value of the source parameter, and a logical consistency pass result or a logical anomaly result is generated based on the estimation deviation or estimation deviation rate.

[0109] In one specific implementation, the parameter correlation includes the engineering correlation between the power battery energy parameter, the energy consumption parameter per 100 kilometers, and the driving range parameter. The standard unit of measurement for the power battery energy parameter is kWh, and the standard unit of measurement for the energy consumption parameter per 100 kilometers is kWh / 100km. The system reads the representative standardized parameter values ​​corresponding to the power battery energy parameter and the representative standardized parameter values ​​corresponding to the energy consumption parameter per 100 kilometers, respectively. The representative standardized parameter value corresponding to the power battery energy parameter is the standardized parameter value of the consistency benchmark parameter when the number of source parameters corresponding to the power battery energy parameter is at least two and the consistency benchmark parameter corresponding to the power battery energy parameter has been determined, or when the source parameters corresponding to the power battery energy parameter include only one numerical source parameter. The representative standardized parameter value corresponding to the energy consumption parameter per 100 kilometers is the standardized parameter value of the consistency benchmark parameter when the number of source parameters corresponding to the energy consumption parameter per 100 kilometers is at least two and the consistency benchmark parameter corresponding to the energy consumption parameter has been determined, or when the source parameters corresponding to the energy consumption parameter per 100 kilometers include only one numerical source parameter. The system confirms that the representative standardized parameter values ​​corresponding to the power battery energy parameters and the representative standardized parameter values ​​corresponding to the energy consumption parameters per 100 kilometers respectively meet the corresponding standard measurement unit conditions; when the representative standardized parameter value corresponding to the energy consumption parameters per 100 kilometers is not zero, the estimated driving range is calculated according to the following formula; when the representative standardized parameter value corresponding to the energy consumption parameters per 100 kilometers is zero, a parameter correlation estimation result to be verified is generated and the driving range estimation is stopped: Estimated driving range = Standardized parameter value of power battery energy ÷ Standardized parameter value of energy consumption per 100 kilometers × 100.

[0110] The system reads standardized parameter values ​​corresponding to the driving range parameter from standardized vehicle technical parameter data that are not marked as having source conflicts. If standardized parameter values ​​corresponding to the driving range parameter that are not marked as having source conflicts cannot be read, a parameter association estimation result for the driving range parameter is generated and the logical consistency check for the driving range parameter is stopped. If the standardized parameter values ​​of the source parameter can be read, the estimated driving range value is compared with the standardized parameter value of the source parameter, and the absolute difference or deviation rate between the two is calculated. When the parameter association specifies that absolute difference is used for verification and the absolute difference exceeds the estimation deviation corresponding to the parameter association, or when the parameter association specifies that deviation rate is used for verification and the deviation rate exceeds the estimation deviation rate corresponding to the parameter association, a logical anomaly result for the driving range parameter is generated.

[0111] The deviation rate between the estimated driving range and the standardized parameter value of the corresponding source parameter that is not marked as having a source conflict is determined according to the deviation rate calculation method specified in the parameter association relationship. When the parameter association relationship does not specify other deviation rate calculation methods, the deviation rate is the ratio of the absolute difference between the estimated driving range and the standardized parameter value of the source parameter, divided by the absolute value of the standardized parameter value of the source parameter. The calculated deviation rate uses the same numerical expression as the estimated deviation rate specified in the parameter association relationship. When the standardized parameter value of the source parameter is zero, the deviation rate is not used for verification; instead, the absolute difference is used for verification according to the parameter association relationship. When the parameter association relationship does not specify that the absolute difference can be used for verification, a parameter association estimation result to be verified corresponding to the driving range parameter is generated.

[0112] The estimated driving range is used to verify the consistency of engineering logic between technical parameters of different vehicle models, and does not replace the driving range test results obtained based on the corresponding test methods or experimental methods.

[0113] Source parameter conflict results indicate that there are differences between different source parameters corresponding to the same standard parameter identifier that exceed the allowable absolute difference or deviation rate value specified in the target rule set, or that there are conclusion differences that do not meet the conclusion equivalence relationship specified in the target rule set. Logical anomaly results indicate that the absolute difference between the estimated value calculated by the representative standardized parameter value corresponding to different standard parameter identifiers according to the parameter operation relationship specified in the target rule set and the standardized parameter value of the source parameter corresponding to the parameter to be estimated exceeds the estimation deviation, or the deviation rate exceeds the estimation deviation rate. The system records the standard parameter identifier, standardized parameter value, representative standardized parameter value, source identifier, and deviation value corresponding to the two types of results respectively, and generates a review failure conclusion, a pending review status, or a supplementary material status based on the anomaly handling conditions and rejection conditions in the target rule set.

[0114] S107: Generate audit conclusions based on parameter verification results.

[0115] The results of the rule compliance verification, the results of the source consistency verification, the results of the source parameter conflict, the results of the logical anomaly, the results of the parameter association calculation to be verified, the results of the missing parameters, and the results to be verified are summarized.

[0116] When the parameter verification results show that the preset key parameter does not conform to the corresponding target verification rule, or when the source parameter conflict result corresponding to the preset key parameter meets the rejection condition in the target rule set, a review failure conclusion is generated.

[0117] When the logical anomaly result corresponding to the preset key parameters satisfies the rejection conditions in the target rule set, a conclusion of audit failure is generated.

[0118] If no review failure conclusion is generated, and there are source parameter conflict results, logical anomaly results, parameter association calculation results to be verified, parameter missing results, or results to be verified, a supplementary material status or a pending review status is generated based on the anomaly handling conditions in the target rule set and the corresponding source parameter conflict results, logical anomaly results, parameter association calculation results to be verified, parameter missing results, or results to be verified.

[0119] If no review failure conclusion is generated, and there are no rule compliance verification failure results, source parameter conflict results, logical anomaly results, parameter association calculation results to be verified results, parameter missing results, or results to be verified results, a review approval conclusion will be generated.

[0120] The audit conclusion is then associated with and output with the corresponding parameter verification results, source identifier, target rule version, and rule basis.

[0121] The output of the audit conclusion may include at least one of the following: vehicle model identifier, audit task identifier, audit conclusion type, abnormal parameters, abnormal source, target rule version, rule basis, and pending items.

[0122] S108: Determine the risk level based on the audit conclusions and historical data.

[0123] In some embodiments, at least one of the following is obtained: historical vehicle technical parameter data corresponding to the vehicle model to be reviewed and historical review data. The historical data includes at least one of the following: historical vehicle technical parameter data of other vehicles within the same review task scope, historical vehicle technical parameter data of the same enterprise, historical vehicle technical parameter data of the same vehicle model generated at different times, and historical review results.

[0124] Based on audit conclusions and historical data, a horizontal analysis is performed on different vehicle models within the same audit task scope, and a vertical analysis is performed on the technical parameter data of the same vehicle model from the same company at different times. A horizontal risk score is determined based on the horizontal analysis results, a vertical risk score is determined based on the vertical analysis results, and a comprehensive risk score is calculated according to the set weights. Overall risk score = horizontal risk score × weight α + vertical risk score × weight β.

[0125] Here, weights α and β are configurable parameters, and satisfy α + β = 1. The risk level is determined based on the comprehensive risk score and a preset risk level range, and at least one review action instruction is generated based on the risk level, including normal review, manual review, supplementary materials, special verification, and suspension of review. The risk level is used to control the subsequent flow and handling of the review conclusion, and does not replace the review conclusion generated in S107 based on the parameter verification results.

[0126] S109: Dynamic monitoring of vehicle models after the review is completed.

[0127] In some embodiments, after the vehicle model to be audited has been audited, at least one of the following is obtained: production consistency data, supervision and spot check data, vehicle operation monitoring data and technology change data corresponding to the vehicle model to be audited. Then, according to the preset parameter mapping relationship, the parameter type and the unit conversion relationship, the obtained data is subjected to parameter field identification, parameter mapping and standardization processing.

[0128] The standardized data is compared with the standardized vehicle model technical parameter data generated when the audit was approved, as well as the target rule set. If the difference between the subsequently acquired parameters and the corresponding parameters at the time of approval exceeds the allowable deviation, the subsequently acquired parameters do not conform to the target rule set, there are abnormal differences between the actual production vehicle and the approved vehicle model, or technical changes cause changes in the vehicle model technical parameters on which the audit conclusion is based, the comparison result is determined to meet the preset warning conditions, and regulatory warning information for the vehicle model to be audited is generated.

[0129] The regulatory warning information is associated with at least one of the following: vehicle model identifier, standard parameter identifier, parameter value, source identifier, parameter difference, target rule version, and rule basis.

[0130] The vehicle technical parameter review method provided in this application can acquire vehicle technical parameter data with different source identifiers, perform field identification, parameter mapping, and standardization processing on parameters from different sources, and determine the target rule version and target rule set according to the review task conditions. Based on this, by verifying applicable vehicle conditions, rule compliance, and consistency between parameters from different sources, it can reduce review deviations caused by differences in field names, field positions, parameter units, and parameter expression forms. Furthermore, it links the review conclusions with the parameter source, rule version, and rule basis for output, thereby improving the consistency and traceability of vehicle technical parameter review.

[0131] By judging the completeness of required parameters, supplementary material instructions or manual review tasks can be generated when parameters are missing, parameter mapping fails, or parameter standardization fails; by inferring parameters through correlation, logical anomalies between different parameters can be identified; and by using key parameter veto conditions, major anomalies that affect the vehicle model review conclusion can be handled.

[0132] Through horizontal and vertical analysis, common and individual anomaly risks in the vehicle model review process can be identified, and corresponding review and handling instructions can be generated based on the risk level. By continuously processing production consistency data, supervision and spot check data, vehicle operation monitoring data, and technical change data after the review is completed, regulatory warning information can be generated when subsequent data meets preset warning conditions.

[0133] System Implementation Examples Figure 3 This is a structural block diagram of the vehicle technical parameter verification system provided in an embodiment of this application. Figure 3 As shown, the vehicle technical parameter review system provided in this application includes: a data acquisition module 310, a parameter identification module 320, a parameter mapping and standardization module 330, a rule determination module 340, a parameter review module 350, and a conclusion generation module 360.

[0134] The data acquisition module 310 is used to acquire the audit task data of the vehicle model to be audited and the vehicle technical parameter data from at least two sources corresponding to the audit task data, wherein the vehicle technical parameter data from different sources have corresponding source identifiers.

[0135] The parameter recognition module 320 is used to identify parameter fields in the vehicle technical parameter data and obtain at least one of parameter name, parameter value, parameter unit and parameter conclusion.

[0136] The parameter mapping and standardization module 330 is used to map parameter fields from different sources to corresponding standard parameter identifiers according to a preset parameter mapping relationship, and to standardize parameter fields from different sources mapped to the same standard parameter identifier according to the parameter type and unit conversion relationship corresponding to the standard parameter identifier, so as to obtain standardized vehicle technical parameter data.

[0137] The rule determination module 340 is used to determine the target rule version corresponding to the audit task data based on at least one of the vehicle type, vehicle purpose, applicable time, application batch and audit object in the audit task data, and load the target rule set corresponding to the target rule version.

[0138] The parameter verification module 350 is used to determine the number of corresponding source parameters for each standard parameter identifier. When there are at least two source parameters corresponding to the same standard parameter identifier and the source priority in the target rule set can uniquely determine a highest priority source parameter, the highest priority source parameter is determined as the consistency benchmark parameter according to the source priority in the target rule set. When there are at least two source parameters corresponding to the same standard parameter identifier and the source priority in the target rule set cannot uniquely determine a highest priority source parameter, a verification result corresponding to the standard parameter identifier is generated, source consistency verification is no longer performed for the standard parameter identifier, and the standard parameter identifier is not... The corresponding source parameters are used for parameter correlation calculation. When the source parameters corresponding to the same standard parameter identifier include only one source parameter and the parameter type corresponding to the standard parameter identifier is numerical, the source parameter is determined as the consistency benchmark parameter, and the standardized parameter value of the source parameter is determined as the representative standardized parameter value of the corresponding standard parameter identifier. When the source parameters corresponding to the same standard parameter identifier include only one source parameter and the parameter type corresponding to the standard parameter identifier is conclusion-type, the standardized parameter conclusion of the source parameter is determined as the standardized parameter conclusion of the corresponding standard parameter identifier. When the source parameter corresponding to the same standard parameter identifier is empty, a result to be verified corresponding to the standard parameter identifier is generated. The parameter review module 350 is further configured to, for numerical standard parameter identifiers with at least two source parameters and a determined consistency benchmark parameter, calculate the absolute difference or deviation rate between the standardized parameter values ​​of other source parameters (excluding the consistency benchmark parameter) and the standardized parameter value of the consistency benchmark parameter, according to the difference representation method in the target rule set; and generate a source consistency pass result or a source parameter conflict result for the other source parameters based on the comparison result of the absolute difference with the allowable absolute difference value in the target rule set or the comparison result of the deviation rate with the allowable deviation rate value in the target rule set; when the absolute difference does not exceed the allowable absolute difference value in the target rule set, or the deviation rate does not exceed the allowable deviation rate value in the target rule set, classify the consistency benchmark parameter and other source parameters that meet the corresponding difference conditions into the same consistency parameter group; mark the standardized parameter values ​​of the consistency benchmark parameter and other source parameters classified into the consistency parameter group as valid parameter values ​​that can be used for parameter association calculation; determine the standardized parameter value of the consistency benchmark parameter as the representative standardized parameter value of the corresponding standard parameter identifier; and mark the standardized parameter values ​​of other source parameters not classified into the consistency parameter group as parameter values ​​with source conflicts. The parameter review module 350 is further configured to, for a conclusion-type standard parameter identifier with at least two source parameters and a determined consistency benchmark parameter, determine whether the standardized parameter conclusion of other source parameters besides the consistency benchmark parameter is the same as or satisfies the conclusion equivalence relation in the target rule set, and generate a source consistency pass result or a source parameter conflict result for the other source parameters based on the judgment result. The parameter verification module 350 is further configured to, based on the parameter association relationships in the target rule set, read the representative standardized parameter values ​​corresponding to each of the at least two associated parameters from the standardized vehicle technical parameter data, and confirm that the representative standardized parameter values ​​corresponding to each of the at least two associated parameters meet the corresponding standard unit of measurement conditions; when it is impossible to read the representative standardized parameter value corresponding to any of the at least two associated parameters, or when the read representative standardized parameter value does not meet the corresponding standard unit of measurement conditions, generate a parameter association calculation pending verification result and stop the corresponding parameter association calculation; when the representative standardized parameter values ​​corresponding to each of the at least two associated parameters meet the corresponding standard unit of measurement conditions, based on... Based on the representative standardized parameter values ​​corresponding to each of the at least two associated parameters and the parameter operation relationships in the parameter association relationship, the estimated value of the parameter to be estimated is calculated; when the standardized parameter value of the source parameter corresponding to the parameter to be estimated and not marked as having a source conflict can be read, the estimated value is compared with the standardized parameter value of the source parameter corresponding to the parameter to be estimated and not marked as having a source conflict, and a logical consistency pass result or a logical anomaly result is generated based on the estimation deviation or estimation deviation rate in the parameter association relationship; when the standardized parameter value of the source parameter corresponding to the parameter to be estimated and not marked as having a source conflict cannot be read, a parameter association estimation pending verification result corresponding to the parameter to be estimated is generated.

[0139] The parameter review module 350 is also used to exclude parameter values ​​marked as having source conflicts when performing parameter association calculation, and to perform applicable vehicle model condition verification and rule compliance verification based on the target rule set.

[0140] The conclusion generation module 360 ​​is used to generate an audit conclusion based on the rule compliance verification result, the source parameter conflict result, the logic anomaly result, the parameter association calculation result to be verified, the parameter missing result and the result to be verified, as well as the anomaly handling conditions and rejection conditions in the target rule set. The audit conclusion is then associated with and stored and output with the corresponding parameter verification result, standard parameter identifier, standardized parameter value or standardized parameter conclusion, source identifier, target rule version and rule basis.

[0141] In some embodiments, the parameter verification module 350 is also used to perform at least one of the following: necessary parameter integrity judgment, parameter association calculation, and logical consistency verification.

[0142] In some embodiments, the system further includes a risk analysis module.

[0143] The risk analysis module is used to obtain historical vehicle technical parameter data corresponding to the vehicle model to be reviewed. Based on the review conclusion and the historical vehicle technical parameter data, it performs horizontal analysis on different vehicle models within the same review task scope, and performs vertical analysis on vehicle technical parameter data of the same enterprise or the same vehicle model at different times. Based on the results of the horizontal and vertical analysis, it determines the risk level and generates a review and handling instruction based on the risk level.

[0144] In some embodiments, the system further includes a dynamic monitoring module.

[0145] The dynamic monitoring module is used to acquire at least one of the following data after the vehicle model to be reviewed has been reviewed: production consistency data, supervision and spot check data, vehicle operation monitoring data and technology change data. The acquired data is standardized, and the standardized data is compared with the standardized vehicle model technical parameter data formed when the review is passed and the target rule set. When the comparison result meets the preset warning conditions, the module generates the monitoring warning information of the vehicle model to be reviewed.

[0146] In some embodiments, the system further includes a rule base construction module, used to acquire at least one of policy documents, technical standard documents, review specification documents, and vehicle model catalog documents, convert the acquired documents into formats, establish a document structure tree based on the chapter and clause levels in the documents, extract at least one of the following from the document structure tree: applicable vehicle model conditions, source priority corresponding to different sources, standard parameter identifier, difference representation method, absolute difference allowable value, deviation rate allowable value, parameter association relationship, parameter operation relationship, standard unit of measurement of the parameters involved in the operation, estimated deviation, estimated deviation rate, parameter threshold, parameter comparison relationship, effective time, expiration time, standard clause, veto conditions, and rule version, and generate a structured rule object based on the extraction results.

[0147] The modules described above can be implemented using software, hardware, or a combination of both. A module can be implemented by one or more program units, and multiple modules can be integrated into the same program unit. The module division is used to describe the functions performed by the system and does not constitute a limitation on the physical deployment of the modules. For details on the specific implementation methods of the operations performed by each module, please refer to the corresponding content in the foregoing method embodiments.

[0148] Computer device examples In one embodiment, a computer device is provided. Figure 4 This is a structural block diagram of a computer device provided in an embodiment of this application.

[0149] The computer device includes a processor, a memory, and a computer program stored in the memory and capable of running on the processor. When the processor executes the computer program, it implements a method for reviewing vehicle technical parameters.

[0150] The computer device may be a server, server cluster, desktop computer, mobile terminal, or other electronic device capable of executing the computer program.

[0151] Computer-readable storage medium embodiments This application also provides a computer-readable storage medium having a computer program stored thereon.

[0152] When the computer program is executed by the processor, it implements a method for reviewing vehicle technical parameters.

[0153] The computer-readable storage medium may include read-only memory, random access memory, magnetic tape, floppy disk, flash memory, optical storage, or other non-volatile or volatile storage media capable of storing computer programs.

[0154] 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 computer program instructions to related hardware. The computer program can be stored in a computer-readable storage medium and, when executed by a processor, implements the corresponding steps in the above method embodiments.

[0155] The technical features of the above embodiments can be combined arbitrarily. For the sake of brevity, not all possible combinations of the technical features in the above embodiments are described. However, as long as the combination of these technical features does not contradict each other, it should be considered within the scope of this specification.

[0156] The above embodiments merely illustrate several implementation methods of this application, and while the descriptions are relatively specific and detailed, they should not be construed as limiting the scope of this application. For those skilled in the art, various modifications and improvements can be made without departing from the concept of this application, and all such modifications and improvements should 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 method for reviewing vehicle technical parameters, characterized in that, include: Obtain the review task data of the vehicle model to be reviewed and the vehicle technical parameter data from at least two sources corresponding to the review task data, wherein the vehicle technical parameter data from different sources have corresponding source identifiers; The vehicle technical parameter data is subjected to parameter field identification to obtain at least one of parameter name, parameter value, parameter unit, and parameter conclusion; According to the preset parameter mapping relationship, parameter fields from different sources are mapped to corresponding standard parameter identifiers. The standard parameter identifiers are used to associate parameter fields representing the same vehicle model technical parameters from different sources, and to associate parameter types, standard units of measurement, and unit conversion relationships. Based on the parameter type and unit conversion relationship corresponding to the standard parameter identifier, parameter fields from different sources mapped to the same standard parameter identifier are standardized to obtain standardized vehicle technical parameter data. When the parameter type is numerical, parameter values ​​from different sources are converted into standardized parameter values ​​under the standard unit of measurement according to the unit conversion relationship. When the parameter type is conclusion type, parameter conclusions from different sources are converted into standardized parameter conclusions according to a preset conclusion equivalence relation; Based on at least one of the vehicle type, vehicle purpose, applicable time, application batch, and audit object in the audit task data, determine the target rule version corresponding to the audit task data, and load the target rule set corresponding to the target rule version; Based on the target rule set, the standardized vehicle technical parameter data is subjected to applicable vehicle condition verification, rule compliance verification, and consistency verification between parameters from different sources to obtain parameter verification results. Based on the parameter verification results, the source identifier, and the rule basis corresponding to the target rule set, an audit conclusion for the vehicle model to be audited is generated; The audit conclusion is associated with and stored and output with the corresponding source parameter conflict results, logical anomaly results, standard parameter identifiers, standardized parameter values ​​or standardized parameter conclusions, source identifiers, target rule versions, and rule bases.

2. The method for reviewing vehicle technical parameters according to claim 1, characterized in that, The sources of the vehicle model technical parameter data include at least two of the following: enterprise declaration data, test report data, experimental data, technical specification data, configuration table data, production consistency data, technical change data, supervision and spot check data, and vehicle operation monitoring data.

3. The method for reviewing vehicle technical parameters according to claim 1, characterized in that, The step of identifying parameter fields in the vehicle model's technical parameter data includes: The document structure of the vehicle technical parameter data in document format is parsed to obtain at least one of the following: text content, table content, and image content; Perform character recognition and field extraction on at least one of the text content, the table content, and the image content to obtain at least one of the following: parameter name, parameter value, parameter unit, parameter conclusion, detection agency information, and data validity period. The extracted parameter name, parameter value, parameter unit, parameter conclusion, testing institution information, and data validity period are associated with at least one of the following and stored with the corresponding source identifier.

4. The method for reviewing vehicle technical parameters according to claim 1, characterized in that, The preset parameter mapping relationship includes at least one of the following: source field name, field alias, field position, standard parameter identifier, standard parameter name, parameter type, and unit conversion relationship; The step of mapping parameter fields from different sources to corresponding standard parameter identifiers according to a preset parameter mapping relationship includes: Determine the correspondence between parameter fields from different sources based on at least one of the source field name, the field alias, and the field position; Associate parameter fields from different sources that have corresponding relationships with the same standard parameter identifier.

5. The method for reviewing vehicle technical parameters according to claim 1, characterized in that, The standardization process for parameter fields from different sources mapped to the same standard parameter identifier includes: Based on the standard parameter name corresponding to the standard parameter identifier, parameter names from different sources are converted into unified parameter names; Based on the unit conversion relationship corresponding to the standard parameter identifier, parameter values ​​from different sources are converted into a unified parameter unit; Based on the parameter type corresponding to the standard parameter identifier, the parameter values ​​or parameter conclusions are standardized in format and validated in validity. The standardized vehicle technical parameter data is formed by associating and storing at least one of the following: the standardized parameter value, parameter unit, parameter conclusion, source identifier, and data validity period.

6. The method for reviewing vehicle technical parameters according to claim 1, characterized in that, The source consistency verification includes: For at least two source parameters that have the same standard parameter identifier and are of numerical type, the difference representation method corresponding to the target rule set is determined. The difference representation method includes either absolute difference or deviation rate. When the source priority in the target rule set can uniquely determine a highest priority source parameter, the highest priority source parameter is determined as the consistency benchmark parameter according to the source priority. When the source priority cannot uniquely determine a highest priority source parameter, a verification result corresponding to the standard parameter identifier is generated, and the source parameter corresponding to the standard parameter identifier is not used for parameter association calculation. When the difference is represented as an absolute difference and the consistency benchmark parameter has been determined, the absolute difference between the standardized parameter value of other source parameters besides the consistency benchmark parameter and the standardized parameter value of the consistency benchmark parameter is calculated, and the absolute difference is compared with the absolute difference allowable value in the target rule set. When the absolute difference does not exceed the allowable absolute difference value in the target rule set, a source consistency pass result is generated for the numerical parameter; when the absolute difference exceeds the allowable absolute difference value in the target rule set, a source parameter conflict result is generated for the numerical parameter. When the difference is represented as a deviation rate and the consistency benchmark parameter has been determined, the deviation rate between the standardized parameter values ​​of other source parameters besides the consistency benchmark parameter and the standardized parameter value of the consistency benchmark parameter is calculated, and the deviation rate is compared with the allowable deviation rate value in the target rule set. When the deviation rate does not exceed the allowable deviation rate value in the target rule set, a source consistency pass result is generated for the numerical parameter; when the deviation rate exceeds the allowable deviation rate value in the target rule set, a source parameter conflict result is generated for the numerical parameter. For at least two source parameters that have the same standard parameter identifier and are of the conclusion type, when the source priority in the target rule set can uniquely determine a highest priority source parameter, the highest priority source parameter is determined as the consistency benchmark parameter according to the source priority; when the consistency benchmark parameter has been determined, it is determined whether the standardized parameter conclusions of other source parameters besides the consistency benchmark parameter are the same as or whether they satisfy a preset conclusion equivalence relation; When the standardized parameter conclusions of other source parameters besides the consensus benchmark parameter are the same as or satisfy the conclusion equivalence relation of the consensus benchmark parameter, a source consensus pass result is generated for the other source parameters; when the standardized parameter conclusions of other source parameters besides the consensus benchmark parameter are different from or do not satisfy the conclusion equivalence relation of the consensus benchmark parameter, a source parameter conflict result is generated for the other source parameters. Record the standard parameter identifier, standardized parameter value or standardized parameter conclusion, and source identifier corresponding to the source consistency pass result or the source parameter conflict result; when the parameter type is numerical, further record the corresponding absolute difference or deviation rate.

7. The method for reviewing vehicle technical parameters according to claim 1, characterized in that, Also includes: Based on the audit necessity corresponding to the standard parameter identifier, determine the required parameters of the vehicle model to be audited; When the required parameters are not identified, not mapped, or not standardized, a parameter missing result or a result to be verified is generated. Based on the missing parameter result or the result to be verified, generate a supplementary material instruction or a manual review task.

8. A vehicle model technical parameter verification system, characterized in that, include: The data acquisition module is used to acquire the audit task data of the vehicle to be audited and the vehicle technical parameter data from at least two sources corresponding to the audit task data, wherein the vehicle technical parameter data from different sources have corresponding source identifiers; The parameter recognition module is used to identify parameter fields in the vehicle technical parameter data and obtain at least one of parameter name, parameter value, parameter unit and parameter conclusion. The parameter mapping and standardization module is used to map parameter fields from different sources to corresponding standard parameter identifiers according to preset parameter mapping relationships. The standard parameter identifier is used to associate parameter fields representing the same vehicle model's technical parameters from different sources, and to associate parameter types, standard units of measurement, and unit conversion relationships. Based on the parameter types and unit conversion relationships corresponding to the standard parameter identifiers, the module standardizes parameter fields from different sources mapped to the same standard parameter identifier to obtain standardized vehicle model technical parameter data. When the parameter type is numerical, the module converts parameter values ​​from different sources to standardized parameter values ​​under the standard units of measurement according to the unit conversion relationships. When the parameter type is conclusive, the module converts parameter conclusions from different sources to standardized parameter conclusions according to preset conclusion equivalence relationships. The rule determination module is used to determine the target rule version corresponding to the audit task data based on at least one of the vehicle type, vehicle purpose, applicable time, application batch and audit object in the audit task data, and load the target rule set corresponding to the target rule version; The parameter verification module is used to perform applicable vehicle condition verification, rule compliance verification, and consistency verification between parameters from different sources on the standardized vehicle technical parameter data based on the target rule set, and to obtain parameter verification results; The conclusion generation module is used to generate an audit conclusion for the vehicle model to be audited based on the parameter verification results, the source identifier, and the rule basis corresponding to the target rule set. The module then associates and stores the audit conclusion with the corresponding source parameter conflict results, logical anomaly results, standard parameter identifiers, standardized parameter values ​​or standardized parameter conclusions, source identifiers, target rule versions, and rule basis, and outputs the conclusion.

9. A computer device comprising a memory, a processor, and a computer program stored in the memory and capable of running on the processor, characterized in that, When the processor executes the computer program, it implements the vehicle technical parameter review method according to any one of claims 1 to 7.

10. A computer-readable storage medium having a computer program stored thereon, characterized in that, When the computer program is executed by the processor, it implements the vehicle technical parameter review method according to any one of claims 1 to 7.

Images