What the documents look like
For document comparison in Franchise store supervision, this page examines FastGPT citation tracing. Trace standard versions, photo descriptions and correction feedback to their applicable store subjects. The examples are hypothetical.
Constraints at the citation tracing step
A proposed franchise-supervision packet has a standard page referring chilled-drink display to the current illustration, a store photo description noting an empty left shelf and a reply promising to add display items. It also contains an earlier illustration and a neighbouring store’s completion sheet. A question about current-standard completion needs store, period and action state verified separately. The photo records an observed state, the reply is an intention, and the older or other-store material needs attribution. Four related sources cannot fill the missing current acceptance record.
Configuration and implementation checks
| Transaction-source check | Material and action scope | Acceptance action |
|---|---|---|
| Standard reference | Current illustration | Inspect referenced version. |
| Photo state | This store’s left shelf empty | Retain observation scope. |
| Reply stage | Will add display | Do not call it completed. |
| Completion attribution | Neighbouring-store result | Do not transfer to current store. |
| Acceptance evidence | Current-store matching item absent | Check added-record identity. |
Documented conditions
| Documented item / implementation check | Condition |
|---|---|
Associated knowledge bases | Knowledge bases associated with one search node must use the same embedding model. |
Citation output | The output is an array; an empty array can continue. |
Citation input handoff | Inspect citations actually received by the answer step. |
Citation display check | Trace displayed sources to their originals. |
Document-validity check | Inspect source identity and applicable version separately. |
Three common errors
First, an earlier illustration may become the current requirement; inspect the version referenced by the standard and its applicable period. Second, a promise to add display items may become completed correction; seek this store’s later feedback and acceptance record rather than treating intention as execution. Third, a neighbouring store’s completion sheet may become this store’s result; compare store identity, photo wording and correction item. These concern version relationship, action stage and store attribution. Franchise membership or nearby location establishes no shared adoption or identical completion state.
How to verify the setup
Acceptance should ask which illustration applies, what the photo establishes and what stage the reply describes, inspecting actual references and store labels. Earlier-illustration-only references leave current requirements unresolved, rather than proving nonconformity. A reply alone establishes no acceptance. Added records must match this store and correction item; a general template supplies no actual outcome. Empty references require source and transfer investigation. This text comparison performs no visit and publishes no real correction judgment, keeping unsupported operational conclusions separate from the wording that was actually supplied.