Cosmetics Intelligent Due Diligence Report Citation Sources and Traceability

Cosmetic-related data comes from three main sources: the National Medical Products Administration Cosmetic Filing Public Platform, official brand

What the data for this category looks like

Cosmetic-related data comes from three main sources: the National Medical Products Administration Cosmetic Filing Public Platform, official brand compliance documents, and third-party compliance test reports. Data updates synchronize with newly filed product launches and industry compliance standard revisions, with no fixed cycle. Most documents are structured tables or standardized PDF files. They contain filing numbers, full product names, ingredient lists, manufacturer information, and compliance judgment fields. Ingredient fields must list International Nomenclature of Cosmetic Ingredients (INCI) and their corresponding Chinese names. Some documents include quantitative annotations for test items.

Constraints imposed on citation sources and traceability

Cosmetic data comes from multiple dispersed sources. Unified multi-source field mapping is necessary to avoid naming deviations during traceability. Data has no fixed update cycle. The traceability link must support real-time pulling of the latest compliance data to ensure cited content timeliness. Structured documents include multi-dimensional compliance fields. Precise matching of specific cited entries is required, such as ingredient INCI names and filing batch information. The original unit system of quantitative annotations must be retained to ensure traced content compliance and accuracy. Cosmetic compliance requirements are strict. Traceability must target specific filing batches; otherwise, compliance risks may arise.

Configuration Settings

Configuration ItemRecommended ValueRationale
citation_countTop 3-5 entriesCompliance entries related to a single cosmetic product are concentrated. Too many will introduce redundant non-core compliance information, while too few will fail to cover complete compliance judgment basis
reference_formatRetain only original source name and number, hide markup symbolsAvoid custom citation markers in output, which aligns with formal display standards for due diligence reports
similarity_threshold0.75-0.85Semantic similarity between cosmetic ingredients and compliance statements is high, so low-relevance non-target entries need to be filtered
rerank_top_nTop 8-10 entriesThe reranking step can optimize the relevance of recall results and supplement the coverage of basic recall
parse_chunk_size800-1200 charactersAdapts to the structured paragraph length of cosmetic filing documents, avoiding loss of association between ingredients and filing numbers during splitting
citation_source_whitelist["国家药监局化妆品备案平台", "品牌官方合规文档"]Filter non-compliant third-party data sources to ensure the authority and compliance of traced content

The parameter values provided on this page are common 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.

Three Common Mistakes

  • Phenomenon: Custom citation markers such as [1] remain in output content. Cause: The reference_format parameter is not configured correctly, and the default markup symbol output logic is retained.
  • Phenomenon: Non-official filing third-party non-compliant data source entries are mixed into recall results. Cause: The citation_source_whitelist parameter is not configured, and the scope of legal traceability sources is not limited.
  • Phenomenon: Cited ingredient information does not match the batch number of the original filing document. Cause: The parse_chunk_size parameter value is unreasonable, and the association between ingredients and filing numbers is broken during paragraph splitting.

How to Confirm the Configuration Is Correct

  • Initiate a due diligence query for a cosmetic product, check whether custom citation markers exist in the output content, and adjust the reference_format parameter until the expected result is achieved.
  • View the source list of recall results, confirm that only the whitelist data sources configured are included, and remove unauthorized source entries.
  • Verify the correspondence between cited ingredient names, filing numbers and the original filing documents, adjust the parse_chunk_size parameter to ensure complete field association.
  • Test query scenarios for different products, confirm that the number of cited recall entries meets requirements, and adjust the citation_count parameter to adapt to the query scenario.

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.