What the documents look like
Commission settlement and commission deduction for creators happen after a sale closes. The comparison focus sits on valid promotion and post-sale deduction, so the materials that matter are the commission setting record, the settlement statement, the refund deduction detail and the invoice. These come from the alliance backend, order after-sales data, the finance system and the creator contract. They refresh weekly and monthly, and a refund inside a settlement period changes the commission payable.
Contract and transaction material comparison requires placing contract clauses, settlement statements and refund deduction details under the same party, the same period and the same field. Document chunking decides whether that is possible. If a refund condition and a commission rate are split into separate data chunks, the retrieved content lacks the constraint relation between them. The chunk boundary therefore carries business meaning, not only storage meaning.
An assumed paper exercise sample is used below. The material text reads: "Party A and Party B signed a creator cooperation contract on 1 March 2025, agreeing a 20% commission rate for the beauty category, and refunded orders do not count toward commission. The April 2025 settlement statement shows order A with a transaction amount of 1000 yuan and commission of 200 yuan; that order was refunded on 20 April 2025." The draft sentence to be judged is: "The 200 yuan commission for order A should be deducted in the April settlement." The comparison object is the same contract, the same order and the same settlement period. The source text states only that refunded orders do not count toward commission. It does not state the timing of the deduction or the statement adjustment method, so the deduction timing in the draft sentence is not supported.
Constraints at the document chunking step
Parsing needs to retain a document identity and version that can point back to the source. Segmentation follows the structure of the specific material. A condition, its explanation and the content it constrains stay together. Original data and retrieval index are distinct, and one group of original data can map to multiple indexes. Retrieval finds candidate content; permission judgement and business authorization are carried by downstream implementation, and a similarity score does not perform entity isolation or permission filtering.
Image retrieval requires an image input and a model that supports it. Reranking requires a model and must be enabled by configuration. The optional paths listed in the document flow do not mean every request executes all of them. Libraries built on different vector models cannot be associated together; the identifier is checked and non-matching libraries are excluded. Knowledge base search operates on the whole library, while a collection only classifies data and does not affect search results.
Configuration and implementation checks
| Configuration item | Assumed trial starting point for this exercise | Reason and comparison method |
|---|---|---|
| Search mode | Hybrid search | Contract numbers and order numbers are exact queries; clause meaning is a natural language query; observe the two input types separately |
| Reference upper limit | Assumed at 3000 tokens | Intended to hold contract clauses and statement lines; adjust after comparing with actual statement segment length |
| Minimum relevance | Assumed at 0.4 | Compare with the 0-1 score after reranking is enabled, and observe whether candidates are filtered |
| Question optimization | Assumed enabled for this exercise | A follow-up such as "how is this order deducted" contains a reference; compare with results when disabled |
| Result reranking | Assumed enabled for this exercise | Observe the second-pass ranking score when candidate clauses and statement lines are numerous |
| Segmentation check item | Refund condition and commission rate in the same chunk | Compare with the retrieval result after separation, and observe whether the constraint relation stays complete |
These values are starting points for an assumed trial, not documented defaults. Each is adjusted by comparing observed retrieval output against the material structure.
Three common errors
- Treating a similarity score as permission or entity filtering. Input the same question against libraries for two different creator parties and compare whether returned content includes records outside the target party. A high or low score does not constitute an authorization judgement.
- Treating a successful upload as an updated retrieval index. Input the clause text after a contract change and compare whether returned content is the old version. The actual training and index state must be checked.
- Treating a pending review request as an executed commission deduction. Compare the draft sentence with the contract source text and check whether an explicit clause covers deduction timing and statement adjustment. When the source does not state it, record the item as pending verification.
How to verify the setup
- Input the contract source text and the draft sentence from the assumed sample, then compare whether the draft sentence exceeds the stated scope that refunded orders do not count toward commission. When the returned content does not include a deduction timing clause, the judgement is not supported.
- Input the order number together with "refund commission deduction" and compare whether the returned statement line and refund detail point to the same order and the same period. When the returned content lacks the refund date, record the evidence gap.
- Input an explicit paper empty result [] and check the downstream design, comparing whether the downstream distinguishes an empty result from an unauthorized result. Do not claim that a query against a fictional rule necessarily returns [].
Across these checks, semantic recall and relevance do not carry permission or entity isolation. The same-vector-model requirement for library association does not extend to business registration sites or other external systems. Retrieval is not authorization, and a form collecting values is not a business verification, approval, database write or external synchronization.