What the data for this category looks like
Data sources for cosmetics investment research include brand official filing public documents, original ingredient test reports, third-party compliance assessment documents, archived e-commerce product detail pages, and industry consumption trend documents. Update rhythm varies by data source type. Brand filing information updates per regulatory cycle. New ingredient compliance notices take effect in real time. E-commerce product details change with operational adjustments. Industry research reports are released monthly.
Most documents combine structured fields and free text. Structured fields include filing number, ingredient list, labeled active ingredient content, packaging specification, and production batch. Free text includes efficacy claim descriptions, compliance reminders, and consumer feedback summaries.
What constraints these characteristics impose on deployment and upgrade
Cosmetics investment research data has many structured fields, strict compliance requirements, and widely varying data source update rhythms. This creates multiple constraints for the deployment and upgrade process.
The system must support multi-source incremental sync configuration. It must adapt to different update rhythms: regulatory cycle updates for filing information and real-time adjustments for e-commerce product details, to avoid sync interruptions or data redundancy.
The system must be configured with structured field extraction rules. It must support standardized extraction of fixed fields such as filing numbers, ingredient lists, and specification parameters, while also supporting parsing of compliance reminders from free text.
During upgrades, original sync task configuration mappings must be retained. This prevents historical data format anomalies caused by changes to new version field parsing logic. The compliance sensitive word library must also be synchronously updated to adapt to latest regulatory requirements.
How to set the configurations
| Configuration Item | Recommended Value | Rationale |
|---|---|---|
PARSE_FILE_TIMEOUT_SECONDS | 300 seconds | Cosmetic ingredient reports and compliance documents are usually lengthy, so sufficient parsing time must be reserved |
UPLOAD_FILE_MAX_SIZE | 500 MB | Single compliance test reports and industry research reports may contain large amounts of charts and raw data, so large file uploads must be supported |
maxContext | 10000–15000 characters | Cosmetic investment research requires associating multi-dimensional text including ingredients, compliance, and efficacy, so sufficient context is needed for associated recall |
RECALL_TOP_K | Top 8 entries | Cosmetic investment research needs to cover documents related to ingredients, compliance, and competitors, so an appropriate number of recalls ensures comprehensive information |
SIMILARITY_THRESHOLD | 0.75–0.85 | Need to distinguish similar ingredient names and text from different compliance scenarios, to avoid recalling irrelevant content |
SYNC_INCREMENTAL_INTERVAL | Every 1 hour | E-commerce product details and new ingredient notices require real-time sync, while also avoiding excessive sync frequency that occupies resources |
The parameter values provided on this page are all common recommended starting points for configuration. Actual values are affected by material form, data volume, and business rules. Specific issues require specific analysis, and it is recommended to test on your own samples before finalizing settings.
Three common mistakes
- Symptom: After upgrade, the chat window refreshes and conversation records disappear, but the complete records can still be viewed in the backend management interface's conversation list. Cause: The original configuration of
SYNC_SESSION_CONFIGwas not retained during upgrade, causing the frontend session sync logic to be reset, and only backend storage retained conversation data. - Symptom: When configuring
TEXT_EMBEDDING_MODEL(the text understanding model parameter for version 4.9.0), entering the local large model address prompts a connection timeout. Cause: Port mapping for the local large model was not opened on the deployment node, or the AIproxy forwarding rules did not correctly point to the local large model service address. - Symptom: After importing cosmetic filing documents, the ingredient field parses as empty. Cause: The mapping rule for
PARSE_STRUCTURED_FIELDwas not configured, and the "ingredient list" field in the filing documents was not bound to the system's preset ingredient field, causing the parsing engine to fail to recognize the target content.
How to confirm the configuration is complete
- Run a parsing test for a single cosmetic compliance document, check if the parsed structured fields match the source document, and adjust the corresponding configuration until expectations are met.
- Trigger an incremental sync task, check the number of new documents and update time in the sync log, confirm that the sync frequency matches the data source update rhythm.
- Launch a recall test based on cosmetic ingredient keywords, check the number and relevance of recalled documents, adjust recall-related configurations to meet investment research needs.
- Send a text understanding request to the local large model via AIproxy, check the interface return status, adjust network configurations and forwarding rules until no errors occur.
Question material comes from public community discussions. Configuration values are common starting points and should be measured against your own samples. Verified on 2026-09-14.