Every step of a founder's journey deserves a record.Founders · AI · PolicyCHINAOPC / ENGLISH EDITION

FDE Practice in Hangzhou's Wuchang: Entering Businesses with Real Tasks

The Overseas Edition of People's Daily reported on October 30 the FDE talent cultivation and industry docking arrangements in Wuchang Street, Hangzhou, involving collaboration between enterprises, technical service providers and the OPC community. This article studies the division of labor of a small team from contact with requirements to completion of the pilot, discusses how to connect on-site problems, customer confirmation and subsequent maintenance; and understands planning, matching and actual delivery results separately.

Chinese edition published 31 Oct 2026 · 阅读中文原文 ↗

Source timingSource release date: 2026-10-30; data verification: October 31, 2026.
Fictional FDE collaboration scene generated by AI: Engineers and workshop personnel discuss production records, not real shots from Wuchang Community, case characters or companies.
AI-generated fictional scene illustration · Discussion of manufacturing needs · Non-case characters and on-site real shots

Extend from community service to specific work in the enterprise

According to the People's Daily Overseas Edition, Wuchang Street launched the FDE Elite Cultivation Program and promoted the signing of a system base co-construction agreement between Yidao Information, Real Intelligence, Bitrunwan and Qingcheng International OPC Community to meet the demand for docking scenarios in manufacturing, e-commerce and other industries. The report reflects the organization method of talent training and industrial collaboration, and cannot directly prove that each scenario has been deployed or accepted by customers.

What is of reference value to small teams is that the work entrance has changed: problems encountered by customers can first be explained by people familiar with the site, and then engineers can judge which parts are suitable for AI. ChinaOPC is not involved in this plan and has not obtained its project contract or technical documentation. The following are independently proposed implementation ideas and are not a restatement of the internal processes of participating units.

An on-site communication, first bring back problems that can be reproduced

Taking the fictitious production record sorting task as an example, the workshop supervisor may say that sorting records every day is time-consuming. Engineers should not immediately commit to building a fully automated system. Instead, they should first ask where the records come from, who fills them in, where items are often missed, and to whom they are finally handed over. With the customer's permission, a desensitized sample can be selected and the complete process from filling in to confirmation can be reproduced on site.

Three things should be left in this process: existing operation samples, results that the customer considers qualified, and information that is temporarily unavailable. Without the third item, pilots can easily hide unresolved issues from the demo. If there are no unified rules for equipment numbering, asking the customer to confirm the numbering relationship first may advance the project more than continuing to adjust the model prompt words.

The community, customers and engineers each confirm one thing

The community can help introduce needs and coordinate resources, but specific tasks still need to be confirmed by the customer's business leader. Technical service providers can provide models or runtime environments, but should not define the business meaning of production records for customers. Engineers are responsible for completing the agreed tasks and clearly stating the dependency conditions, manual review and troubleshooting methods.

In the above simulation pilot, it can be agreed that only one form will be processed and structured records to be verified will be output, without being directly written into the formal production system. The customer confirms the fields and exceptions, the engineer retains the original source and records modifications, and the community helps coordinate business personnel to participate in testing. This division of labor allows each participant to know what they need to confirm, and it also makes it easier to identify missing responsible persons.

What is reusable is the implementation method, not all the customer’s information

After a pilot is completed, the field mapping methods, test steps, and handover checklist can be compiled for reference in the next similar project. For samples, account permissions, business rules and internal records involving customers, the allowed scope of use should be confirmed first. Just because the project has been matched by the community, it cannot be transferred to the next company by default. When changing clients, the actual process still needs to be rechecked.

The project handover should also agree on who will modify the rules, who will be responsible for checking the model or interface after changes, and how to return to the original manual process when problems arise. These arrangements can be written into the discussable delivery list in conjunction with ChinaOPC's FDE Delivery Acceptance Research. Matching demand is the starting point, and completing demonstrations, customer acceptance, and actual payment collection are different subsequent stages and should not be combined into one success indicator.

Sources and editorial notes

AI-assisted organizing and writing, and the listed public sources have been checked. ChinaOPC analyzed and simulated scenarios independently and did not conduct personal interviews, customer test orders, financial audits or technical testing. The official excerpt remains the original text, and for complete requirements, please refer to the official page. This article does not reproduce the full text of the source or use its images, and it does not constitute a promise of revenue. English translation of the Chinese edition, prepared with machine assistance and editorial checks. Source verification dates refer to the original Chinese research.

Source titles and publisher names are retained in their original language. Refer to the linked originals for official documents and current requirements.

← Back to FDE CasesEditorial standards ↗