What the documents look like
Multi-warehouse allocation and inventory synchronization material centers on four document types: allocation rules, inventory synchronization tables, transfer orders, and stockout warnings. Allocation rules determine which warehouse ships an order at the routing stage. Inventory synchronization tables update daily or hourly. Transfer orders record movements between warehouses. Stockout warnings mark insufficient sellable stock. Contract and transaction material comparison handles allocation rule text, inventory synchronization records, transfer orders, stockout warnings, and the handover requests and draft sentences built around them. The subject, object, status, and effective scope of these materials often sit in separate fields, and the retrieval step needs to place the same field of the same subject together for comparison.
Constraints at the retrieval step
The knowledge base search node can associate one or more knowledge bases that use the same vector model. Bases with different vector models cannot be associated together. Check the identifier first and exclude those that do not match. Do not run cross-model retrieval to compare missed recalls. Search modes are compared across semantic, full-text, and hybrid retrieval for the test question, without presuming one mode suits all material. The citation limit uses the token unit. Test with actual material of different lengths to see whether content stays complete. The minimum relevance score takes effect only in semantic retrieval or when result reranking is used. Question optimization performs coreference resolution and question expansion. Compare the original question with the optimized question and check whether the subject was altered incorrectly. Citation content is output as an array, and its length can be 0. When no content is found, the output path still runs through. Similarity and relevance are filter thresholds. They do not carry permission or entity isolation. Retrieval itself is not authorization. Forms collect values, and business verification, approval, database writes, and external synchronization each need their own downstream implementation.
Hypothetical exercise sample: The allocation rule text retained by a supply chain planning role states, "Orders in the East China region ship by default from the Suzhou warehouse; when Suzhou sellable stock is insufficient, shipping transfers to the Hangzhou warehouse." The transfer order in the same batch of material states, "Suzhou warehouse transfers 200 units of model A to Hangzhou warehouse; transfer order status is pending review." A draft sentence to be judged reads, "Suzhou sellable stock was insufficient, and shipping has transferred to the Hangzhou warehouse." During comparison, compare the subject, trigger condition, and shipping warehouse of the draft sentence against the allocation rule text, and compare whether the transfer order status has moved from a stage without execution effect into an executable stage. Pending review does not constitute execution. The phrase "has transferred to" in the draft sentence is not supported by the existing material.
Configuration and implementation checks
| Configuration item | Hypothetical starting point for this exercise | Reason for the choice and comparison method |
|---|---|---|
| Associated knowledge bases | Associate only bases with the same vector model that contain allocation rules, inventory synchronization tables, transfer orders, and stockout warnings | Check the vector model identifier of each base first, exclude those that do not match, then compare whether recalled content falls within the target scope |
| Search mode | Run semantic retrieval and full-text retrieval separately, then run hybrid retrieval | Allocation rules carry natural-language conditions, while transfer orders and warnings carry identifiers and status words; compare the three modes by question type |
| Citation limit | Start at a token amount covering one complete allocation rule and one complete transfer order | Test with actual material of different lengths to see whether content is truncated, and adjust after comparing with the truncation observed |
| Minimum relevance score | Start at a middle value, used only for semantic retrieval or result reranking | Label relevant and irrelevant samples first, then compare whether irrelevant fragments decrease after threshold adjustment |
| Question optimization | Enable for follow-up questions containing references; disable for already explicit questions | Compare the original question with the optimized question, and check whether subject and object were altered incorrectly |
| Result reranking | Use when a rerank model is available and enabled by the setting | Compare candidate order before and after reranking, and confirm how question completeness affects the score |
Three common errors
- Treating the similarity threshold as a permission or entity filter. The minimum relevance score only filters low-relevance results. It does not exclude unrelated businesses or unauthorized records. To check, input a query for a subject outside the authorized scope, compare whether the returned content still includes material for that subject, and observe whether threshold adjustment changes that behavior.
- Treating a pending-review transfer order as executed. In the sample, the transfer order status is pending review, and the draft sentence writes "has transferred to the Hangzhou warehouse." To check, input the transfer order text and the draft sentence, compare the status field with the action wording in the draft sentence, and observe whether the two agree.
- Associating bases with different vector models together. To check, input the vector model identifiers of two bases, compare whether the identifiers are the same, exclude those that do not match, and record the actual observation. Do not infer missed recalls or redundant results from this.
How to verify the setup
- Input the allocation rule text and the draft sentence from the hypothetical sample, compare the three fields of subject, trigger condition, and shipping warehouse, and observe whether the draft sentence agrees with the original text. If the draft sentence states an execution status not recorded in the original text, judge it as unsupported.
- Input the transfer order text and the request to be judged from the hypothetical sample, compare the transfer order status field with the action wording in the request, and observe whether the request writes pending review as executed. If the status is pending review and the request writes executed, judge it as an evidence gap.
- Input one explicit identifier-type question and one natural-language question, run full-text retrieval and semantic retrieval respectively, compare the hit content for the two question types, and observe whether the identifier is hit precisely and whether the natural-language question recalls semantically close fragments. If the identifier-type question does not hit under semantic retrieval, record that observation. Do not assert from it that full-text retrieval necessarily hits.
Empty-result handling can use the explicit paper input [] to check the downstream design, without claiming that a fictional rule retrieval necessarily returns an empty array. Image retrieval requires a corresponding image input and model capability. Reranking requires a model and must be enabled by the setting. The optional paths listed in the overall document flow diagram do not mean that every request executes all of them.