What the documents look like
Sample inspection for livestream selling happens before a broadcast, and its purpose is to decide whether a product can be sold and whether it can be shown on camera. The material being reconciled comes from supplier files, testing-agency reports, platform negative lists, and historical return rates. In document form this becomes sample evaluation sheets, quality inspection reports, supplier qualifications, and prohibited-item lists. These materials are updated weekly and per product.
The contract and transaction material comparison task aligns a draft sentence or handover request awaiting judgment against the original text held in the knowledge base, field by field. The retrieval step only brings possibly relevant original text back for a human to compare. It does not decide whether a product may go on air.
Constraints at the retrieval step
The knowledge base search node can link one or more knowledge bases that use the same vector model. Bases built on different vector models cannot be linked together; check the model identifier first and exclude any base whose identifier does not match. Search runs across an entire base. A collection is only a way to group data for management and does not affect search results.
Hybrid search uses vector retrieval and full-text retrieval together, merging the two result sets through the RRF formula. RRF is a fusion process, not a switch that can be turned on. Reranking requires a model and must be enabled in settings. Image retrieval requires image input and matching model capability. These are optional paths, and their presence in the flow diagram does not mean every request executes all of them.
Minimum relevance takes effect only under semantic retrieval or when result reranking is used. It is a filter threshold, not the final ordering rule. The citation limit is measured in tokens and caps how much content a single search may cite. Semantic recall and relevance scores do not perform permission or entity isolation, and a retrieval result is not an authorization.
Hypothetical drill sample: a sample evaluation sheet submitted by a supplier states in its original text, "Sample submitted for testing: portable juicer cup; date submitted: 10 March 2025; test item: migration of food-contact materials; report number: JC-2025-0310; conclusion: the tested items meet the requirements." In the same batch, the supplier qualification file states, "Food-contact product production licence valid until 30 June 2025." A handover request awaiting judgment reads, "This juicer cup passed testing, the qualification is valid, it can be scheduled for broadcast." The comparison must check whether the report number and the sample name point to the same submitted object, whether the tested items cover this product, and whether the qualification validity period covers the planned broadcast date. The original text above does not state a planned broadcast date and does not state an authorization scope. Those fields are unsupported and remain to be verified.
Configuration and implementation checks
| Configuration item | Assumed starting point for this trial | How to check |
|---|---|---|
| Linked knowledge bases | Link only sample inspection bases that use the same vector model | Compare the vector model identifier of each base and exclude any that do not match |
| Search mode | Start with hybrid search, running semantic and full-text together | Observe recalled content separately with a number-type question and a natural-language question |
| Citation limit | Set the starting point to cover the length of one complete report body | Test with actual materials of different lengths to see whether content is truncated, then adjust |
| Minimum relevance | Label relevant and irrelevant samples first, then set the threshold | This value takes effect only under semantic retrieval or result reranking |
| Question optimization | Enable only in multi-turn follow-up and short-question situations | Compare the original question with the optimized question and check whether the subject was altered |
| Result reranking | Enable when a model is available and candidates are numerous | Reranking returns a 0-1 score; filter by that score |
Reason for the citation limit starting point: original material lengths vary widely, and a token-based control is more stable than top k. The comparison object is the measured length of a complete report body, not an official default.
Three common errors
- Treating a retrieval hit as authorization. In the hypothetical sample, retrieving "conclusion: the tested items meet the requirements" returns only a field value from the report text. It does not mean the product has been cleared for broadcast, and it does not mean the handover request has been approved. A pending review does not demonstrate a lack of operating permission. Signing, reaching cooperation, and contract effectiveness are three separate facts.
- Treating optional paths as always executed. The documented flow lists image retrieval, reranking, and other paths. These require the corresponding input and model capability and must be enabled in settings. With no image uploaded, image retrieval results should not be expected. With reranking not enabled, a rerank score should not be expected.
- Treating relevance as a permission filter. Minimum relevance is a filter threshold; it does not exclude unrelated businesses or unauthorized records. The same-vector-model requirement for linked bases cannot be extended to require external systems to use the same model.
How to verify the setup
- Input the sample evaluation sheet original text from the hypothetical sample together with the handover request awaiting judgment. Compare the report number, sample name, and test item fields for the same subject, the same period, and the same field. Observable result: when all three fields point to the same submitted object, the comparison holds; when a field is missing or points to a different object, record it as unsupported or to be verified.
- Input the qualification file original text from the hypothetical sample together with the planned broadcast date. Compare whether the qualification validity period covers that date. Observable result: when the original text does not state a planned broadcast date, the comparison cannot be completed. Keep the evidence gap and do not supply an authorization or effectiveness clause to fill it.
- Input a citation content array explicitly written as empty, and check whether the downstream design can accept an empty result. Observable result: when the output path runs through and the downstream does not treat the empty array as hit content, empty-result handling holds. The documentation does not state that a search under a fictional rule must return an empty array; that behavior is unsupported.
All items above are paper checks. No retrieval, deployment, or approval has been executed, and no business action is claimed to have occurred.