What the documents look like
Closure settlement for chain stores runs in the opposite direction from head-office site selection and store opening. It handles exit and asset recovery rather than expansion. The main data sources are POS inventory, the fixed-asset system, lease contracts and the finance ledger. The documents that matter day to day are closure approvals, inventory clearance sheets, lease termination agreements and asset count sheets. Updates are irregular and per store. Errors carry consequences such as deposit loss, asset loss, and labour or franchise disputes.
This page covers one task: drafting product and marketing copy. The copy objects are clearance goods and closure marketing messages. Whether a proposed sentence is supported has to be judged against the wording of the documents listed above. The interactive forms step does not decide business facts; it collects what a person supplies and passes it to later nodes.
Constraints at the interactive forms step
The form input node is a user interaction node. When it triggers, the conversation enters an interaction state and the workflow state is recorded. After the user fills in the required information and submits, the node collects the submitted form information and passes it to later nodes. The node itself does not act as a business database.
The user selection node is also a user interaction node. When it triggers, the conversation enters an interaction state and the workflow state is recorded. When the user makes a choice, the node judges that choice and executes the corresponding branch. A basic use is to pose a question requiring a decision and then route the workflow according to the feedback.
Field validation, business approval, write-back and bulk operations are not performed by these nodes. They need to be implemented in an external system or in later nodes. A submitted form value is a collected value. It is not a verification, an approval, a database write or an external synchronization.
Hypothetical paper exercise. This is a clearly labelled hypothetical case, not a real record and not a test that was run. Three source sentences are supplied for comparison.
Source sentence one: "The store lease contract expires on 31 March 2026. The lessor agrees to terminate the lease from 1 April 2026. The deposit is refunded according to the contract after the asset count is confirmed."
Source sentence two: "The inventory clearance sheet states: Category A shelving, 12 units, total original book value RMB 24,000, status recoverable."
Source sentence three: "The closure approval sheet states: the store covered by this closure settlement is XX Road store. The approval scope is inventory clearance and asset count, excluding employee settlement."
Proposed copy sentence to be judged: "The store lease has been terminated, the deposit has been refunded in full, and all assets have been recovered."
The proposed sentence asserts three facts: termination has taken effect, deposit refund is complete, and asset recovery is complete. The source sentences state that the lessor agrees to terminate, the condition for deposit refund, and the status of part of the assets. They do not state that the effective date has arrived, that the deposit has actually been refunded, or that all assets have been recovered. Under the supplied material the proposed sentence is not supported.
Configuration and implementation checks
| Configuration item | Setting or check relevant to this page | Relation to the exercise |
|---|---|---|
| Form input node | Triggers into an interaction state, records workflow state, collects submitted form information and passes it to later nodes | Collects the fields that map the proposed sentence to the source sentences |
| Required-information check | List the information this task cannot proceed without; test the missing case and the completed case separately | A missing source sentence cannot be judged as supported |
| User selection node | Judges the user's choice and executes the corresponding branch | Choose "continue checking" or "record the gap" |
| Interaction state | Waits for the interaction to complete before continuing downstream | No downstream node runs before submission |
| Downstream division of work | Field validation, business approval and write-back are implemented in an external system or later nodes as needed | Deposit refund and lease termination effectiveness are not completed by these nodes |
| Hypothetical starting value | All three asserted facts in the proposed sentence are marked "to be verified" because the source sentences do not state completion; the comparison object is the stated scope of the source sentences | A paper starting point for this check only, chosen because the material gives no completion status |
Three common errors
- Treating source sentence one, "the lessor agrees to terminate the lease from 1 April 2026", as termination already in effect. Input: source sentence one. Comparison: "agrees to terminate" against "termination has taken effect". Observable result: the source does not state that the effective date has arrived, so the item is marked to be verified.
- Treating source sentence two, "status recoverable", as all assets already recovered. Input: source sentence two. Comparison: "recoverable" against "recovered". Observable result: the source states only the status of 12 units of Category A shelving, so the claim is not supported.
- Treating source sentence three, "approval scope is inventory clearance and asset count, excluding employee settlement", as evidence that the deposit refund is complete. Input: source sentence three. Comparison: the approval scope against the deposit refund fact. Observable result: the source does not state a deposit refund, so this is an evidence gap.
How to verify the setup
- Input the hypothetical source sentence one together with the proposed copy sentence "the store lease has been terminated". Compare "agrees to terminate from 1 April 2026" with "has been terminated". The condition is met when the output is "to be verified" and the evidence gap about the effective date is retained.
- Input the hypothetical source sentence two together with the proposed copy sentence "all assets have been recovered". Compare "Category A shelving, 12 units, status recoverable" with "all assets recovered". The condition is met when the output is "not supported" and the scope difference is recorded.
- Input the hypothetical source sentence three together with the proposed copy sentence "the deposit has been refunded in full". Compare the approval scope "excluding employee settlement" with the deposit refund fact. The condition is met when the output is "evidence gap" and a note states that deposit refund evidence still needs to be supplied.
These checks describe expected behaviour on paper. They do not report a test that was performed, an approval, a refund or any other completed business action. Where the material is silent, the gap stays open.