What the documents look like
Livestream after-sales work tends to arrive in a burst once a session's traffic ends. Refund requests, reshipment orders, and explanation commitments come in during the same window, and the handling outcome is strongly tied to what the host promised on air. The everyday materials are the livestream order list, refund applications, reshipment orders, and script templates. These materials sit across shop after-sales records, customer-service IM, warehouse WMS, and logistics tracking, and they update after each session and daily.
For contract and transaction material comparison, the question this page addresses is narrow: how a proposed explanation or a handover request is traced back to the exact source text and its valid scope. The comparison does not decide whether a refund is owed or whether a reshipment is approved. It records which material a statement came from, what that material actually says, and where the evidence stops.
Constraints at the citation tracing step
The knowledge base search node can associate one or more knowledge bases that share the same vector model. Its output is a citation array, and the length may be zero, which means the output path still completes even when nothing is found. The citation limit controls, in tokens, the maximum amount of content cited per search. The minimum relevance value is a 0–1 threshold that takes effect only under semantic retrieval or when result reranking is used, and it is a filter threshold rather than a permission or entity-isolation control. Retrieval results then pass to the answering stage, where each answer is checked against the cited source text line by line. For material timeliness, current and historical document versions are used to test the source, and whether a citation is adopted still depends on valid-version review.
Hypothetical drill sample. Source text one: "This session's livestream commitment is seven-day no-reason return and exchange; a return request must be submitted within seven days of signed receipt; the subject is the order buyer; the object is that order's goods." Source text two: "A reshipment order is generated only after the after-sales supervisor confirms it in the system; the warehouse exception post releases goods against a confirmed reshipment order." Proposed sentence: "The buyer has submitted a refund request, therefore this order has entered the reshipment process." This proposed sentence lacks the reshipment-order confirmation status field. A refund request and a reshipment order are different materials and cannot be inferred from each other.
Configuration and implementation checks
| Configuration or check item | Setting method or check action | Relation to this page's documents |
|---|---|---|
| Associated knowledge bases | Select one or more knowledge bases with the same vector model | Cross-model association is not allowed; verify identifiers first and exclude non-matching ones |
| Citation limit | Set the maximum cited content per search in tokens | Controls the size of returned citation content; does not perform permission filtering |
| Minimum relevance | A 0–1 threshold effective only under semantic retrieval or result reranking | Filters low-relevance results; does not exclude unrelated business or unauthorized records |
| Search mode | Semantic retrieval, full-text retrieval, or hybrid retrieval | Precise queries such as numbers and models suit full-text or hybrid retrieval |
| Citation output | Array format, length may be zero | An empty array does not mean the workflow errored and stopped; check downstream handling |
| Material timeliness check | Test the source with current and historical document versions | Whether a citation is adopted still depends on valid-version review |
Hypothetical trial starting point for this drill: set the citation limit to a small value. The reason is to first use a small number of citations to check whether the source hits the material text, then compare with the returned content under a larger value, observing changes in citation count and coverage. This value is a starting point for this paper drill only and is not an official default.
Three common errors
- Treating a refund request as evidence that a reshipment order is confirmed. In the proposed sentence "The buyer has submitted a refund request, therefore this order has entered the reshipment process," the refund request and the reshipment order are two separate materials. A reshipment order is generated only after after-sales supervisor confirmation. Pending review does not demonstrate confirmation, and the sentence is unsupported.
- Treating minimum relevance as a permission or entity-isolation measure. Minimum relevance is a filter threshold. It does not exclude unrelated business or unauthorized records, and retrieval itself does not constitute authorization.
- Treating an empty citation array as a workflow that has errored and stopped. Citation content length may be zero, and the output path still completes. Check how the downstream stage handles an empty array rather than asserting that the system must report an error.
How to verify the setup
- Input source text one, source text two, and the proposed sentence above. Compare the claim "has entered the reshipment process" against the field stating that a reshipment order requires confirmation. Observe whether the proposed sentence is supported by the source text. If the materials contain no reshipment-order confirmation record, the sentence is unsupported.
- Input a query containing an order number. Compare the citations returned by full-text retrieval and by semantic retrieval, and observe whether the citations point to the material text. If a returned citation does not match the number field, record it as a miss and do not infer a specific failure cause.
- Input an explicit paper empty result []. Compare the downstream answering stage's design for handling an empty array, and observe whether the downstream treats it as no citation. This check confirms empty-result handling and does not claim that any particular search must return [].