Declarative Materials and File Review for Fiscal Expenditure Performance Evaluation: Citation Sources and Traceability

Declarative Materials and File Review for Fiscal Expenditure Performance Evaluation: Citation Sources and Traceability

What This Category’s Data Looks Like

The core data for this category comes from the unified budget management system, project declaration materials, fund payment data, business system ledgers, and satisfaction surveys. Daily processed documents include performance target forms, self-assessment forms, performance evaluation reports, supporting material lists, and rectification reports. Data updates follow an annual cycle. Each individual document includes fields such as project number, fund amount, performance indicators, and supporting material number. It must match the field requirements of corresponding business scenarios, with no unified fixed unit.

Constraints Imposed on Citation Sources and Traceability

Low-frequency annual data updates require the traceability link to stably associate historical archived data, preventing cross-cycle data confusion. Mixed structured and unstructured data from multiple sources means traceability must match both structured fields in system ledgers and unstructured content in supporting materials. Each individual document contains multiple associated fields, so accurate correspondence must be maintained between project numbers, fund usage records, and performance indicators during citation, to avoid misattribution. Additionally, materials submitted by different entities use varying formats, so the traceability link must support citation matching across multiple document structures.

Configuration Settings

This configuration is formulated for FastGPT v4.17.0.

Configuration ItemRecommended ValueRationale
quoteMaxToken800–1200 tokenAdapts to the content length of mixed documents such as performance evaluation reports and supporting materials, avoiding truncation of core associated information
responseDataEnabledAdapts to structured ledger data retrieved from the unified budget management system, ensuring fields like project numbers and fund payment records can be matched during citation
detailDisplay the top 3 entries by association priorityMatches the annual low-frequency update data characteristics of this category, preventing redundant results from interfering with file review
Citation source range restrictionOnly associate archived data for the current projectBased on the annual update rule for this category’s data, limiting the scope to stop cross-project data from being incorrectly cited

Three Common Configuration Errors

  • Phenomenon: Returned citation content does not match database text snippets, only showing generalized descriptions. Cause: The responseData configuration is not enabled, and the original data source snippet extraction logic is not associated.
  • Phenomenon: The number of citation results exceeds expectations, with file materials from other projects mixed in. Cause: The project association range of citation sources is not restricted, leading to cross-cycle and cross-entity data being recalled.
  • Phenomenon: Core supporting materials are truncated and cannot be fully displayed. Cause: The quoteMaxToken value is too low, failing to cover the complete content length of individual supporting materials.

How to Confirm the Configuration Is Correct

  • Submit a test performance declaration material and corresponding ledger data, check whether the returned citation content includes matching project numbers and fund payment records.
  • Adjust the quoteMaxToken value, verify whether the display length of citation content meets expectations across different values.
  • View the display range of citation sources, confirm that only associated materials for the current test project are shown, with no cross-project content present.
  • Check the number of entries displayed by the detail configuration, confirm that returned results are sorted by relevance and the quantity conforms to the set rules.

Note: The configuration values listed above are common starting points. They should be evaluated against the reader’s own specific samples.

Question material comes from public community discussions. Configuration values are common starting points and should be measured against your own samples. Verified on 2026-09-28.