What the documents look like
Regional dealer stock replenishment runs on daily rolling orders rather than seasonal bulk ordering. The working documents are replenishment requests, inventory turnover sheets, outbound delivery notes and payment collection plans. A brand channel manager and a sales back-office clerk read these materials alongside dealer ERP data, brand ordering system records and warehouse stock figures to judge replenishment quantity and shipping pace.
Copy drafting for replenishment and marketing draws on specific fields in those materials. Citation tracing requires that each promotional sentence can be traced back to the original wording of a corresponding material, so that information a document does not state is not written as a settled conclusion. Materials update weekly or monthly. This page does not depend on real-time synchronization; version confirmation happens only at the point of checking.
The replenishment request carries a status field. The turnover sheet carries period-end stock and average monthly shipment. The delivery note records actual outbound movement. The payment collection plan records amounts due. A sentence about approval belongs to the status field, and a sentence about shipment belongs to the delivery note. Checking one field against a different field does not establish support.
Constraints at the citation tracing step
Drafting draws its cited content from the output of the knowledge base search node. That output is an array, and its length may be zero. Even when no content is retrieved, the output link still runs through. A downstream answer step therefore has to handle an empty array on its own and cannot assume every retrieval returns results.
When associating knowledge bases, only knowledge bases sharing the same vector model may be selected together. Knowledge bases with different vector models cannot be associated jointly. The check is to compare vector model identifiers and exclude those that do not match; retrieval across different models is not performed to compare missed recalls.
The minimum relevance value is a filter threshold, and it takes effect only in semantic retrieval or when result reranking is used. It does not perform permission or entity isolation, and it cannot be used to decide whether a record belongs to the current dealer. Hybrid retrieval merges multiple result paths through RRF as part of the retrieval process. Reranking requires a model and must be enabled by configuration. Image retrieval requires corresponding image input and model capability. These optional paths do not all execute on every request.
Hypothetical paper exercise sample
The following is a paper exercise for illustrating a checking method. It does not represent a real customer or an actual test.
Material text one: “Dealer A in the East China region submitted a replenishment request in March 2025, the requested quantity is 1,200 units, and the request status is pending review by the brand channel manager.”
Material text two: “The dealer’s February 2025 inventory turnover sheet shows period-end stock of 800 units and average monthly shipment of 600 units.”
Draft sentence to be judged: “The dealer’s replenishment request has been approved and shipment will take place this week.”
Checking points: Material one states only that the request status is pending review. It does not state approval or any shipping arrangement. The phrases “has been approved” and “will take place this week” in the draft sentence are not supported by the material. Pending review does not equal approval, and submitting a request does not equal executing a shipment. The draft sentence should be marked as unsupported until an approval record and a delivery note are supplied.
Configuration and implementation checks
| Configuration item | Hypothetical starting point for this exercise | Reason and comparison method |
|---|---|---|
| Associated knowledge bases | Select knowledge bases holding replenishment requests and inventory turnover sheets that share the same vector model | Compare vector model identifiers across bases, exclude those that differ, and do not run retrieval across different models |
| Search mode | Hybrid retrieval | Replenishment requests contain number and status fields, so hybrid retrieval covers both semantics and keywords; compare hit results against semantic retrieval alone |
| Citation limit | 2,000 tokens as the starting point for this exercise | This value is an exercise starting point used to observe whether cited content covers the original material text; compare coverage completeness against a lower value |
| Minimum relevance | 0.5 as the starting point for this exercise | This value is an exercise starting point that takes effect only in semantic retrieval or reranking; compare remaining entries after filtering against a higher value |
| Result reranking | Enabled with a configured rerank model | Reranking requires a model and must be enabled by configuration; compare candidate ordering before and after enabling |
| Question optimization | Not enabled for now | The draft sentence has a clear subject; enabling it adds one model call, so compare elapsed time and retrieval effect |
Three common errors
- Treating a pending-review status as approval. Input material text one and the draft sentence, compare the request status field against the wording of the draft sentence, and if the material states only “pending review” while the draft sentence says “has been approved,” judge the sentence unsupported.
- Using minimum relevance to exclude unrelated business records. Input a low-relevance record that belongs to the current dealer, compare results before and after filtering, and if the record is filtered out for low relevance while not being treated as a permission matter, this shows relevance does not perform entity isolation.
- Treating an empty citation array as a workflow error. Input a retrieval that hits no content, observe the output, and if the output is an array of length zero while the downstream link continues to run, this shows an empty array does not equal an error termination.
How to verify the setup
- Citation source check. Input the original text of material one and the draft sentence, compare the request status field against the approval wording in the draft sentence, and if the material does not state approval while the draft sentence contains approval wording, judge it unsupported and require an approval record.
- Empty result handling check. Input the paper retrieval output [] and compare the design of the downstream answer step. If the downstream step recognizes the empty array and gives a pending-verification notice, the handling condition is met; if the downstream step directly produces a settled conclusion, the condition is not met.
- Material currency check. Input the current version and a historical version of the replenishment request material, compare the cited content of the draft sentence against the original text of each version, and if a cited field exists only in the historical version while the current version has changed it, judge it pending verification and confirm the effective version before adoption.