What the data for this category looks like
Data for this category comes from official vehicle identification number (VIN) filing databases, public vehicle parameter announcements from vehicle manufacturers, physical vehicle inspection reports from third-party offline inspection institutions, and vehicle historical transfer and insurance claims records.
Update frequencies vary by data type:
- VIN filing data is updated quarterly
- Physical inspection reports are updated immediately upon completion of inspection
- Historical transaction and claims records are updated in real time after being synchronized to their corresponding platforms
The document structure of a single due diligence report includes vehicle basic information fields, vehicle condition inspection detail fields, historical transaction and claims fields, and residual value assessment fields.
Specific fields use the following units:
- Paint thickness: micrometers (μm)
- Engine displacement: liters (L)
- Driving mileage: kilometers (km)
What constraints these characteristics impose during deployment and upgrade
Multiple heterogeneous data sources require adapting to different data source format interfaces during deployment. These interfaces include structured API data, unstructured PDF inspection reports, and text transaction records. Multiple types of parsing adapters must be configured.
High-resolution vehicle condition inspection images consume significant storage space. File storage threshold configurations must be adjusted during upgrades.
High consistency is required for field units. Unit conversion rules must be preset during deployment to avoid unit conflicts across different data sources.
Real-time updated historical transaction and claims records require configuring an incremental synchronization mechanism during deployment. Upgraded versions must be compatible with logic changes for incremental synchronization. This avoids additional resource consumption caused by full synchronization.
How to set the configurations
| Configuration Item | Recommended Value | Rationale |
|---|---|---|
PARSE_FILE_TIMEOUT_SECONDS | 600 seconds | Vehicle due diligence reports contain multiple high-definition inspection images and long text content, so parsing time is longer than that of general documents |
UPLOAD_FILE_MAX_SIZE | 2000 MB | A single vehicle due diligence report may integrate multiple inspection reports, transaction files, and image materials, resulting in a large total file size |
maxContext | 8000–12000 characters | The text content of a vehicle due diligence report covers basic information, inspection details, and historical records, requiring sufficient context length |
RECALL_TOP_N | Top 8 entries | Vehicle due diligence reports have many associated information dimensions, so enough context fragments must be recalled to support accurate analysis |
TEXT_INDEX_BATCH_SIZE | 50 entries per batch | Batch indexing of multi-source data requires balancing server resource consumption and indexing completion efficiency |
MODEL_PROVIDER_WHITELIST | Add local large model interface addresses | Some scenarios require using locally deployed large models to meet privacy and compliance requirements for vehicle data |
The parameter values provided on this page are general recommendations used as a starting point for configuration. Actual values are affected by material format, 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
- An error
text index required for $text queryis returned after executing a knowledge base indexing operation. The symptom is that the knowledge base cannot recall text content normally. The cause is that after upgrading to version4.8.20, the default text index configuration is not automatically updated. Manual rebuilding of the text index is required. - A local large model interface cannot be added in the model configuration interface. The symptom is that the system prompts that the provider is not in the allowed list. The cause is that the corresponding interface address was not added to the
MODEL_PROVIDER_WHITELISTconfiguration item, causing the system to block non-whitelist providers. - The number of recalled results returned after initiating a question and answer related to a due diligence report does not meet expectations. The symptom is that the number of returned entries is less than the configured recall number. The cause is that the batch processing parameters for the text index were not correctly configured, resulting in some data not completing full indexing.
How to confirm that configurations are correctly set
- Log in to the system backend, enter the file upload test interface, upload a standard vehicle due diligence report, confirm that there are no timeout errors in the upload progress, and verify that the file size limit configuration takes effect.
- Enter the model configuration interface, attempt to add a locally deployed large model interface address, confirm that the configuration can be saved normally, and verify that the model provider whitelist configuration takes effect.
- Execute a text indexing task, check the indexing logs, confirm that the processing quantity of indexing batches matches the preset configuration, and verify that the batch processing parameters take effect.
- Initiate a question and answer request targeting a vehicle due diligence report, check the number of returned context fragments, and confirm that it meets the configured recall number requirements.
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.