What the data for this category looks like
Data sources for wind power intelligent due diligence reports include project feasibility studies, factory inspection reports for tower tubes and blades, grid connection acceptance opinions, annual operation and maintenance logs, electricity price verification documents, and more. The update rhythm varies by project phase: full documents are uploaded by milestones during the construction phase, operation records are updated monthly during the operation phase, and grid connection-related documents are updated annually after grid connection. Documents contain fixed fields: project number, installed capacity, hub height, tower wall thickness, and other fields, with dedicated supporting units. They also include a large number of structured parameter tables and unstructured descriptive text, covering core information across the full project lifecycle.
What constraints do these characteristics impose on the knowledge base retrieval and recall link
The multi-source and phased update characteristics of wind power due diligence reports require the knowledge base to support incremental upload and version coverage by project batches. The presence of fixed fields and dedicated units requires the retrieval link to support field-level matching and unit verification, preventing recall of approximate parameters from unrelated projects. The long document and mixed structure characteristics require retaining the integrity of structured parameters during segment parsing, avoiding retrieval information breaks caused by splitting parameter rows. The differences in document update frequency across phases require the knowledge base to support flexible update trigger rules, adapting to different update needs for one-time project documents and regular operation and maintenance data.
Configuration Settings
| Configuration Item | Recommended Value | Rationale |
|---|---|---|
PARSE_FILE_MAX_SIZE | 200 MB | Wind power due diligence reports often include multi-page drawings and operation logs, resulting in large single-file volume |
Segment Length | 800–1200 characters | Balances long document segmentation and the integrity of structured parameters, avoiding splitting parameter rows |
Recall Count | Top 8–10 results | Wind power due diligence reports need to cover multiple types of content including project parameters, operation records, and acceptance documents; sufficient recall volume ensures full coverage |
Similarity Threshold | 0.72–0.80 | Distinguishes approximate descriptions of wind power project parameters, preventing recall of similar parameters from unrelated projects |
UPLOAD_FILE_TIMEOUT_SECONDS | 600 seconds | Large-volume document parsing takes a long time, avoiding timeout interruptions |
Reranked Return Count | Top 5 results | Focuses on core due diligence documents, avoiding result redundancy |
The parameter values provided on this page are 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 Configuration Errors
- Phenomenon: A
408 Request Timeouterror is returned when parsing large-volume due diligence reports. Cause: TheUPLOAD_FILE_TIMEOUT_SECONDSsetting is lower than the actual time required for document parsing. - Phenomenon: Parameters with mismatched units appear in retrieval results (such as recalling installed capacity marked as kW as MW). Cause: Field-level unit matching retrieval configuration is not enabled.
- Phenomenon: Insufficient retrieval accuracy, with a large number of non-core operation log fragments being recalled. Cause: Documents are not uploaded according to the fixed classification for wind power due diligence reports, and classification retrieval rules are not configured.
How to Confirm Correct Configuration
- Upload a test document matching the characteristics of a wind power due diligence report, check that the parsing task has no timeout errors, and that the parsed segments do not split structured parameter rows.
- Enter a search term containing a dedicated unit, check that the retrieval results only match parameter entries with the corresponding unit.
- Upload a new version of the due diligence report for the same project, check that the old version of the document is automatically overwritten with no duplicate entries.
- Adjust the
similarity thresholdto the test range, check that the retrieval results do not recall approximate parameters from unrelated projects.
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.