What the data for this category looks like
The data used for residential development intelligent due diligence reports comes from publicly available or lawfully obtained sources. These include natural resource department land transfer announcements, housing and urban-rural development department planning permission documents, construction unit progress ledgers, and commercial housing pre-sale filing systems. Update cycles vary significantly. Land transfer information is updated quarterly. Construction progress data is synchronized monthly. Pre-sale filing data is generated in real time. Document formats include structured approval forms (with fields such as land area and floor area ratio), semi-structured project ledgers, and unstructured on-site images and construction logs. Core fields use standard legal units of measurement, including square meters, yuan per square meter, and cubic meters. Some projects also include change documents for historical land acquisition and planning adjustments.
Constraints on Citation and Traceability Posed by These Characteristics
Residential development due diligence relies on multi-source, heterogeneous data, which creates multiple constraints for the citation and traceability process. Field names differ across data sources. For example, the land acquisition date labeled "transaction date" in land transfer announcements and "filing time" in pre-sale filing documents must be mapped to a unified field. Without this mapping, precise association of information during traceability is not possible. Real-time pre-sale filing data and quarterly updated land transfer data have mismatched time cycles. Traceability requires clear labeling of data collection times to avoid confusion between project information from different cycles. Unstructured on-site images and construction logs cannot have structured fields extracted directly. These assets must be linked to corresponding structured ledger numbers to complete traceability. Original file storage paths and upload nodes must also be retained to ensure the original source can be traced when citing.
Configuration Settings
| Configuration Item | Recommended Range | Rationale |
|---|---|---|
Number of recalled entries | Top 8–12 entries | Residential development due diligence data is a mix of structured and unstructured content. Too many recalled entries will introduce irrelevant construction log content, while too few will fail to cover core approval information |
Similarity threshold | 0.72–0.85 | Fields for residential development projects are highly standardized. A threshold that is too low will introduce unrelated neighboring project data, while a threshold that is too high will fail to match revised planning adjustment documents |
Segment length | 800–1200 characters | Residential development due diligence documents often contain long paragraphs of construction records and approval descriptions. This length preserves complete contextual information while avoiding model understanding bias caused by overly long single segments |
PARSE_FILE_TIMEOUT_SECONDS | 600 seconds | A single residential development project ledger may include dozens of pages of approval documents. 600 seconds ensures large-volume documents complete parsing |
Citation source template | {{source}} ({{create_time}}): {{content}} | Must retain data source, collection time, and specific content to adapt to time difference constraints during traceability |
UPLOAD_FILE_BATCH_SIZE | 20–30 files per batch | Residential development due diligence files are often large in individual size. Batch uploading avoids upload timeouts and simplifies batch management during subsequent traceability |
The parameter values provided on this page are common recommended starting points for configuration. Actual values are affected by material format, data volume, and business rules. Specific issues require individual analysis. It is recommended to test on your own samples before finalizing settings.
Three Common Errors
- Issue: After batch uploading 100 5KB due diligence files, the knowledge base reports 50 failed training runs. Re-uploading results in duplicate content when citing. Cause: Deduplication configuration was not enabled during batch upload, and metadata such as file hash values was not generated correctly. The system cannot identify duplicate files.
- Issue: After switching to variable reference mode in the AI chat component, the temperature setting button disappears, and generation parameters cannot be adjusted. Cause: Parameter configuration for variable reference mode must be set separately via chat templates or global variables. Some users cannot locate the corresponding configuration entry.
- Issue: When using the
{{id}}field in the citation content template, the returned ID is the knowledge base collection ID. The ID of individual cited data entries is not returned. Cause: Variable mapping for the citation template was not configured correctly. Collection-level IDs and individual data IDs were confused, making it impossible to locate specific cited file paragraphs during traceability.
How to Verify Proper Configuration
- Upload the largest single residential development due diligence document. Check the parsing log for timeout errors to confirm the
PARSE_FILE_TIMEOUT_SECONDSconfiguration is active. - Submit a query that includes core project fields. Verify that returned citation sources include data collection times and specific file paths to confirm the
Citation source templateconfiguration is correct. - Batch upload 25 due diligence files. Confirm upload progress completes per batch to verify the
UPLOAD_FILE_BATCH_SIZEconfiguration is reasonable. - Switch the AI chat component to variable reference mode. Configure temperature parameters via the chat template, then submit a query. Confirm generated results match the expected effects after parameter adjustment.
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.