What the data for this category looks like
Data related to agrochemical products mainly comes from industry association public annual reports, production enterprise compliance disclosure documents, Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Affairs registration and filing documents, third-party quality inspection reports, and supply chain collaborative documents. The update rhythm varies significantly by document type: annual industry reports are updated per calendar year, quarterly corporate compliance documents are released quarterly, and single-batch product quality inspection reports are updated in real time alongside production batches. Common document structures include structured tables, long-form compliance descriptions, and supply chain upstream and downstream transaction details. Fields include active ingredient content (units mostly g/L, %, or mg/kg), applicable crop ranges, toxicity ratings, production batch numbers, shelf life, and more.
What constraints do these characteristics impose on the "document parsing and chunking" link
The multi-source and mixed structure characteristics of agrochemical product data impose multiple constraints on document parsing and chunking. Structured tables mixed with multi-unit fields require parsing modules to support cross-format field recognition and unit normalization. Fixed-character chunking can easily break parameter associations within tables. The large differences in update rhythms across different documents mean real-time batch documents may have temporary format adjustments, so parsing logic needs dynamic adaptation to non-standard layouts. Long-form compliance descriptions bound to structured product parameters require retaining contextual associations during chunking to avoid losing the binding between clauses and corresponding products after splitting. Bulk supply chain transaction details are presented in tabular form, so they need to be split by transaction entry instead of fixed character count, to prevent single transaction records from being split across different chunks.
How to set the configurations
| Configuration Item | Recommended Value | Rationale |
|---|---|---|
chunk_size | 800–1200 characters | Agrochemical product documents contain long-form compliance descriptions and structured tables. This range balances contextual completeness and retrieval granularity |
chunk_overlap | 100–150 characters | Prevents cross-chunk compliance clauses and product parameters from being split, retaining key contextual associations |
enable_table_extract | Enabled | Structured tables make up a high proportion of agrochemical product documents. Enabling this option fully extracts field and unit information within tables |
parse_table_unit_auto_fix | Enabled | Multiple unit types such as g/L, %, and mg/kg are commonly mixed in agrochemical product documents. Automatic fixing unifies field unit formats |
upload_file_max_size | 500 MB | Meets the upload requirements for bulk quality inspection reports and supply chain detail documents |
parse_timeout_seconds | 300 seconds | Long documents and bulk table parsing require sufficient time to avoid mid-parsing timeout interruptions |
The parameter values provided on this page are conventional recommendations used as a starting point for configuration. Actual values are affected by material form, data volume, and business rules. Specific issues require case-by-case analysis. It is recommended to test on your own samples before finalizing settings.
Three common mistakes
- After uploading an Excel-format agrochemical product quality inspection report, the parsing result only returns scattered text fragments with no table content. The cause is that the default parsing configuration does not enable Excel table extraction, so structured table data cannot be recognized.
- When switching a third-party document parsing tool, the parsing result does not change as expected. The cause is that the
parser_backendconfiguration item was not modified, and the system still calls the default parsing module. - The retrieved chunked text does not carry metadata such as the corresponding product's registration certificate number and production batch number. The cause is that the metadata binding configuration was not enabled, and fields such as document title and upload time were not associated with the chunked content.
How to confirm the configuration is correct
- Upload an Excel file of an agrochemical product quality inspection report that contains structured tables, and check whether the parsing result fully extracts the field and unit information within the tables.
- After configuring
chunk_sizeandchunk_overlap, upload a long-form compliance description document, and check whether the chunking result retains the contextual association of adjacent paragraphs. - After modifying the
parser_backendconfiguration item, upload a document in the specified format, and compare the parsing result with that under the default configuration to confirm that the parsing tool has been switched. - View the parsing logs to confirm that no timeout errors occurred during long document parsing, verifying that the
parse_timeout_secondsconfiguration takes effect.
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.