What the documents look like
Overseas stock replenishment management draws on overseas warehouse WMS records, ERP sales forecasts, freight forwarding systems and carrier bills. The working documents include replenishment plans, inbound appointment requests, inventory ageing tables and last-mile delivery notes. These materials update weekly or daily. A third-party overseas warehouse can serve several channels, and the seller decides how stock is allocated across those channels.
Product reference and selection questions have to handle model numbers, SKUs, ageing definitions and appointment status. These fields sit close together in meaning and differ by very small character changes. A retrieval setup therefore has to support natural-language questions and exact identifier matching at the same time. The vector index step is where that balance is decided.
Constraints at the vector indexes step
Knowledge bases linked for retrieval must use the same vector model. Check the actual model identifier and the input type before linking anything. One source data block can carry several indexes, so the index entries and the original text are checked separately. Index content is built from complete and focused information; retrieval coverage and index length are weighed against the sample set. Image retrieval depends on whether an image description or image vector index was generated at ingestion time. Uploading an image at query time does not by itself guarantee a hit.
After a model or index change, compare cited source text against the same question set. A vector score alone does not support a claim about answer quality. A relevance score is a similarity threshold, not a category, entity or permission filter. It does not separate channel ownership and does not exclude unauthorized records. Retrieval is not authorization.
Hypothetical paper exercise sample: the source text reads "The replenishment plan PL-0731 for overseas warehouse A covers SKU-8842, planned inbound date 2025-08-05, quantity 600 units, status pending review; the same SKU appears in the ageing table for channel B at 45 days." The draft sentence under review reads "The replenishment plan for SKU-8842 has been approved and inbound can be arranged." The draft conflicts with the source status "pending review." Pending review is not approval. The sample also carries a channel boundary: the channel B ageing record does not authorize a replenishment decision for channel A.
Configuration and implementation checks
| Configuration item | Value or check for this page | Explanation and comparison method |
|---|---|---|
| Linked knowledge bases | Link only bases sharing one vector model | Check the model identifier; exclude bases that do not match |
| Search mode | Semantic retrieval and full-text retrieval together | For identifier questions, observe full-text hits |
| Citation limit | Hypothetical trial starting point 2000 tokens | Compare against cited source length in the sample, then adjust |
| Minimum relevance | Hypothetical trial starting point 0.4 | Compare against the candidate score distribution and observe the count after filtering |
| Result re-ranking | Enabled per settings, score observed | When no re-ranking model is available, this path is not used |
| Index content | One focused index per SKU | Compare field by field against the source text |
The citation limit and minimum relevance figures are hypothetical trial starting points for this page, not official defaults. The citation limit uses the documented token unit. The minimum relevance value applies only to semantic retrieval or to a run that uses result re-ranking. Mixed retrieval results pass through RRF fusion, and the final ordering does not follow a single vector similarity ranking. RRF is a fusion step in the retrieval chain, not a switch to turn on. Image retrieval requires an actual image input and matching model capability; it is not executed on every request.
Three common errors
- Treating a pending-review status as approval. The draft sentence states "has been approved" while the source status field reads "pending review." Same subject, same field, mutually exclusive values. This is a contradiction, and the draft is not supported.
- Treating a similarity score as an entity or permission filter. The retrieval score does not distinguish channel ownership. Recalling the channel B ageing record does not make it usable for a channel A replenishment judgment. The record remains outside the authorized scope for that decision.
- Linking knowledge bases that use different vector models. When model identifiers differ, the link is invalid. Check the identifiers, exclude the non-matching base and record the actual observation. Do not run a cross-model retrieval to compare recall.
How to verify the setup
- Enter the source text above together with the draft sentence. Compare "pending review" against "has been approved." The check is satisfied when the system marks the contradiction. If no contradiction is marked, record the case as pending verification. The channel B ageing record stays outside the channel A decision scope regardless of the retrieval score.
- Enter the identifier "SKU-8842" in full-text retrieval. Compare the returned entries against the SKU field in the source text. The check is satisfied when that record is returned. If it is not returned, check whether the index was created. A first-position hit is not guaranteed, and full recall is not guaranteed.
- Enter an empty citation array
[]and observe the downstream path. The check is satisfied when the output path still completes. This result does not mean that a given retrieval rule always returns an empty array.
Across all three checks, missing evidence stays missing. An unsigned termination is not a completed termination, and an offered option is not execution. Business verification, approval, database writes and external synchronization require their own downstream implementation and are not performed by retrieval or by a form.