What the documents look like
Channel receivables collection happens after credit sales, and the work centers on credit usage and cash recovery. Brand finance staff, sales back-office staff, and dealer owners work with receivables aging tables, dunning letters, credit agreements, and shipment freeze notices, updated weekly or monthly. Inventory procurement and supplier materials form a separate object class: purchase orders, goods receipt notes, supplier statements of account, and supply agreements. The two classes are easily mixed when citation sources and tracing are handled, and this page addresses only the verification conditions for the latter at the citation step.
Citation sources and tracing require each answer to return to specific source text. The retrieval output is an array of citations whose length may be zero, and an empty array still completes the output chain. Whether a document is adopted still requires manual review against the valid version.
Constraints at the citation tracing step
Knowledge base search first verifies the selected knowledge bases and document versions; only knowledge bases sharing the same vector model can be associated together. Bases with different vector models cannot be associated together, and the handling method is to check the vector model identifier, exclude non-matching bases, and record the actual observation, without running a cross-model search to compare missed recalls.
Citation content is output as an array and may be empty. Retrieval results must be passed to the answering step, and each answer is then checked against the cited source text. Semantic recall and relevance affect candidate ordering only and do not perform permission or entity isolation; retrieval itself does not constitute authorization.
Hypothetical paper exercise sample. The source text for verification reads: "Supplier A and Buyer B signed a supply agreement in March 2024 specifying a payment term of thirty days. Goods receipt note RK-0512 dated May 2024 records the arrival of one hundred units. The June 2024 statement of account records an unsettled amount at eighty percent of the agreed price." The draft sentence to be judged reads: "Supplier A has agreed to extend the payment term to sixty days, and Buyer B may defer payment." The subjects are Supplier A and Buyer B, the object is the payment term and payment arrangement, the state is extension and deferral, and the effective scope is after June 2024. The source text records only the thirty-day term, the receipt quantity, and the statement amount; no record of a term change or deferred payment appears.
Configuration and implementation checks
Configuration centers on the sample above and lists only officially documented settings or implementation checks relevant to this feature and primary task.
| Configuration item | Hypothetical starting point for this exercise | Reason and comparison method |
|---|---|---|
| Associated knowledge bases | Supplier materials base and purchase order base | First check whether the two bases share the same vector model identifier; associate together only when identical |
| Search mode | Hybrid search | Agreement numbers and receipt numbers are exact queries, combined with semantic recall and merged through RRF |
| Citation limit | Hypothetical starting point of eight hundred tokens for this exercise | The sample material is short; compare against the actual token length returned by retrieval before adjusting |
| Minimum relevance | Hypothetical starting point of zero point three for this exercise | Compare against the actual distribution of rerank scores and observe whether the sample source text is filtered out |
| Result rerank | Enabled | Reranks text when candidates are numerous and filters using the rerank score |
| Citation handoff | Retrieval output connected to the answering step | Check each answer against the cited source text; treat an empty array as zero length |
The citation limit value is a hypothetical starting point for this exercise, not an official default. RRF is the fusion process for mixed results and is an internal step of the retrieval chain, not a standalone switch.
Three common errors
- Treating the draft sentence as verified fact. The sample source text states only a thirty-day term, while the draft sentence states an extension to sixty days and deferred payment. Both share the same subject, the same field, and the same period, and their values are mutually exclusive, which constitutes a contradiction; the source text does not record a change, so the draft sentence is unsupported.
- Treating a pending-review status as granted authorization. The statement of account in the sample records only an unsettled amount and contains no approval record, so it cannot be used to conclude that a term change was approved, nor that the buyer lacks operating permission.
- Treating retrieval results as permission filtering. Similarity settings do not exclude unrelated business or unauthorized records, and retrieval output passed to the answering step must still be checked against sources item by item.
How to verify the setup
- Input the sample source text and the draft sentence, and compare whether the subject, object, state, and effective scope agree. The source text supports only the thirty-day term and the unsettled amount; the extension and deferral in the draft sentence are unsupported, and the observable result is a finding of contradiction with the evidence gap retained.
- Input the vector model identifiers of the two bases and compare whether they are identical. Association together is permitted only when the identifiers match; the observable result is exclusion of non-matching bases with the observation recorded, without running a cross-model search.
- Input a query with no corresponding material and observe whether the citation array is empty. An empty array is handled as zero length, and the observable result is that the downstream step processes it as an empty citation, without inferring that retrieval necessarily returns an empty result.