What the documents look like
Fruit-store procurement for a fresh produce retailer draws on wholesale market quotations, supplier quotes, store sales, and inspection reports. The daily paperwork includes purchase orders, receiving and acceptance records, pesticide-residue inspection reports, and shrinkage records. Updates arrive daily or per batch, so the timeliness of a document directly determines whether a promotional sentence in a draft can be supported by current material.
For copy drafting, the purchase order and the acceptance record supply the subject, object, grade, and status. The inspection report supplies safety-related fields. The shrinkage record supplies quantity ranges. When a field is absent, the corresponding promotional sentence can only be marked as pending verification. This page addresses only one task: drafting product and marketing copy for a fruit-store procurement context, and tracing the citation sources behind that copy. It does not address identity verification, report analysis, or any other task.
Constraints at the citation tracing step
The knowledge-base search node can select one or more knowledge bases that use the same vector model, for vector search. Its output is a citation array, and the length may be zero, which means the output path still completes even when nothing is retrieved. After the citation array is passed to the answering step, each answer sentence must be checked against the cited source text one by one.
Similarity filtering and the citation cap affect the ordering and trimming of recalled results. They do not perform permission or entity isolation. Knowledge bases built on different vector models cannot be associated together; the vector model identifier must be checked first and non-matching bases excluded. Source-timeliness checks use the current version and a historical version of a document to test the source, and whether a citation is adopted still depends on review of the valid version.
Hypothetical paper exercise sample. This sample is invented for this page and was not run against any real record.
Purchase order source text: "March 10, 2025, purchase of Red Fuji apples from Stall A, grade one, quantity 200 kg, unit price subject to the market quotation of the day."
Acceptance record source text: "March 10, 2025, received 200 kg of Red Fuji apples, appearance sampling passed, pesticide-residue inspection report number A-0310, report result not stated."
Draft sentence to be judged: "The Red Fuji apples in this store come from Stall A, passed pesticide-residue inspection, and were picked and delivered the same day."
The judgment needed is whether "passed pesticide-residue inspection" and "picked and delivered the same day" are supported by the material. The acceptance record states only that the report result is not stated; the report number exists, but the result field is missing. The purchase order and acceptance record record only the March 10 purchase and receipt; they do not state a picking date or a delivery time.
Configuration and implementation checks
The table below ties each row to this page's documents and task. The values in the "hypothetical starting point" column are starting points for this paper exercise. They are not official defaults, and no test has been run.
| Configuration item | Hypothetical starting point for this exercise | Reason and comparison method |
|---|---|---|
| Associated knowledge bases | Select knowledge bases containing purchase orders, acceptance records, and inspection reports | The vector model identifier must be checked for consistency before they can be associated together |
| Search mode | Hybrid search | Compare with semantic search results and observe hits on numbered fields |
| Citation cap | Set to 800 tokens | Compare with 500 tokens and observe the number of citations and truncation |
| Minimum relevance | Set to 0.4 | Compare with 0.3 and observe whether irrelevant fragments decrease |
| Question optimization | Enabled | Compare with disabled and observe whether the retrieval terms are completed in a follow-up turn |
| Result reranking | Enabled | Compare with disabled and observe whether candidates are ordered higher |
The citation cap uses the token unit, which differs from top k. The thinking budget belongs to the model thinking configuration and must not be repurposed as a citation token cap. The RRF step is a fusion process for mixed results, not a switch to be turned on. Image retrieval requires an image input and a model with the corresponding capability; reranking requires a rerank model and must be enabled in the settings. Optional paths shown in the overall retrieval diagram do not all execute on every request.
Three common errors
- Treating "passed pesticide-residue inspection" in the draft sentence as supported by the material. The acceptance record source text states only that the report result is not stated; the report number exists but the result field is missing. The input is the draft sentence plus the two source texts; the comparison is between "passed" and "not stated." These are not mutually exclusive values of the same field, so the claim is unsupported.
- Treating "picked and delivered the same day" as contradictory. The purchase order and acceptance record record only the March 10 purchase and receipt; neither states a picking date or a delivery time. The input is the draft sentence plus the two source texts; the comparison is between "picked the same day" and the date fields in the source. The source lacks that field, so the claim remains pending verification.
- Treating a citation array of length zero as a workflow error. The node output citation array may have a length of zero; an empty array is not the same as a terminated workflow. The input is an explicit paper input of
[]; the comparison is whether the downstream design handles an empty array, and the observation is whether the downstream step continues to execute.
How to verify the setup
- Input the purchase order source text, the acceptance record source text, and the draft sentence from the hypothetical sample above. Compare "passed pesticide-residue inspection" in the draft sentence with "report result not stated" in the acceptance record. Observe whether the system marks "passed" as unsupported. If the system directly judges it as passed, the setup does not meet the checking requirement.
- Input the draft sentence and the two source texts from the hypothetical sample. Compare "picked and delivered the same day" with the date fields in the source texts. Observe whether the system marks it as pending verification. If the system judges it as contradictory or accepts it directly, the setup does not meet the checking requirement.
- Input an explicit paper citation array of
[]. Compare whether the downstream answering step continues to execute, and observe whether the empty array is handled as a normal output. If the downstream design treats the empty array as an error that terminates the workflow, the setup does not meet the checking requirement.
All three items above are paper expectations and were not actually run. Where a document field is not provided, it remains unknown. A pending review does not by itself show that an operation permission is missing.