What the documents look like
Franchise filing management handles legal disclosure and the commerce department system. It does not handle the engineering of a specific store location. In order fulfillment and after-sales question answering, the knowledge base has to carry the franchise contract, the operations manual, filing materials, and information disclosure documents.
The parties named in these materials are the franchisor headquarters, franchise legal staff, and the commerce liaison. The consequences of error include an order to file, franchise contract disputes, and administrative penalties. The brief records an update frequency of irregular and yearly. This page does not derive batch synchronization, full synchronization, real-time refresh, or transaction-triggered mechanisms from that frequency.
Three industry facts shape this retrieval task. First, the material set mixes contract language, manual procedure language, and filing or disclosure statements, so the same after-sales question can touch several document types with different wording. Second, the named parties are internal roles, so a retrieved passage does not by itself show who approved anything. Third, an error in this category can become a filing order or a contract dispute, which makes the difference between a recorded submission and a recorded approval worth checking at the retrieval step.
Constraints at the retrieval step
The knowledge base search node can associate one or more knowledge bases that use the same vector model. Semantic retrieval, full-text retrieval, and hybrid retrieval are compared against test questions. No single mode is assumed to suit every document type. The citation limit is measured in tokens. The minimum relevance value takes effect only under semantic retrieval or when result reranking is used. Question optimization performs coreference resolution and question expansion. Retrieval returns cited content. It does not perform authorization checks, and a similarity score does not act as a permission filter or an entity isolation boundary.
Hybrid retrieval merges results through RRF, which is a fusion step in the pipeline. Rerank is a separate capability that requires a model and an enabled setting. Image retrieval requires an image input and the relevant model capability. The optional paths shown in the overall retrieval flow are not executed on every request.
Hypothetical drill sample:
Source text: "Franchisor A submitted filing materials to the commerce authority in March 2024. The disclosure document lists that franchise store B holds a contract term ending in December 2026. Section 4 of the operations manual states that after-sales parts requests must be submitted by the franchisee in the system."
Draft sentence to be assessed: "Franchise store B's after-sales parts request has been approved by headquarters."
The source text records a submission method. It does not record an approval fact. The draft sentence is not supported by the source text. The status remains pending verification, and the missing evidence stays missing.
Configuration and implementation checks
| Configuration item | Hypothetical starting value for this drill | Reason for the choice and comparison target |
|---|---|---|
| Associated knowledge bases | Filing materials base and contract ledger base | Both bases use the same vector model, so they can be associated together |
| Search mode | Hybrid retrieval | Compared with semantic retrieval alone on numbered or named-item questions |
| Citation limit | 1500 tokens | Hypothetical starting point, compared with 800 tokens for completeness of returned content |
| Minimum relevance | 0.35 | Hypothetical starting point, compared with 0.5 for the number of unrelated fragments |
| Question optimization | Enabled | Compared with disabled on a follow-up question in a continuous conversation |
| Result reranking | Enabled | Compared with disabled on the ordering of candidates |
These values are starting points for this drill. They are not documented defaults, limits, or units beyond the token unit that the technical text states for the citation limit.
Three common errors
- Treating the minimum relevance value as a permission filter. Input the same query, compare the returned citations against the authorized scope, and observe whether content outside that scope appears. Retrieval is not authorization, and the relevance score does not exclude unrelated businesses or unauthorized records.
- Associating knowledge bases that use different vector models. Check the base identifiers, exclude any base whose vector model does not match, and record what is actually observed. Do not run a cross-model retrieval to compare missed recalls, and do not assert a runtime result for an association the documentation does not permit.
- Writing a pending state as an approved state. Input the draft sentence and the source text, compare the subject, the period, and the field, and observe whether an approval fact is recorded. The source text records a submission method only. A pending request is not an approval.
How to verify the setup
- Input the source text above and the draft sentence. Compare "has been approved by headquarters" with the source wording "must be submitted by the franchisee in the system." The condition is met when the draft sentence is found to lack approval evidence and the approval fact remains unrecorded. The condition is not met if the comparison is skipped or if the missing evidence is filled in from outside the source text.
- Input the same query twice, once with the minimum relevance at 0.35 and once at 0.5. Compare the number of returned citations and the number of unrelated fragments. The condition is met when the two settings produce an observable difference in the returned set. If the returned sets are identical, record that observation and leave the effect of the threshold unknown. Do not claim that a higher threshold guarantees the first hit or that an unrelated query returns an empty result.
- Input an empty citation array, written as [], and check whether the downstream chain still runs. The documented behavior is that the output length can be 0 and the chain still completes. The condition is met when the downstream step proceeds on the empty array. Do not claim that a fictional rule search necessarily returns [].
Across all three checks, the same subject, the same period, and the same field must be compared. A contradiction requires mutually exclusive values in the same field. An unrecorded fact, or evidence that reaches only a related stage, counts as unsupported or pending verification. A pending review does not show that an operation permission is absent. Signing, reaching cooperation, and contract effectiveness are three distinct facts. Where the source text does not state an authorization or effectiveness clause, the evidence gap is preserved rather than filled.