What the documents look like
Short-video affiliate distribution relies on long-term content exposure and product-link conversion, without depending on live explanation. For inventory procurement and supplier records, the retrieval step handles material drawn from short-video scripts, product lists for linked carts, commission plans, and violation feedback. These materials update on daily and weekly cycles. Retrieval configuration needs to be checked against the actual rhythm of document change; a daily update cycle does not imply batch synchronization or transaction-triggered processing.
The eight-dimension brief places this page in the category of short-video affiliate distribution operations, within live commerce and creator distribution, at the feature of knowledge-base retrieval and recall. The task is inventory procurement and supplier records. The material identities that matter here are supplier quotations, product lists, commission terms, and compliance feedback. The stage is procurement review before any commitment is made. Retrieval supplies candidate content; it does not decide approval, authorization, or supplier selection.
Constraints at the retrieval step
The knowledge-base search node can associate one or more knowledge bases that use the same vector model. A collection is only for classification management; the minimum search unit is the knowledge base. Reference content is output as an array, and its length can be zero, meaning the downstream chain still executes even when nothing is retrieved.
Semantic retrieval depends on vector distance. Full-text retrieval depends on keyword matching. Hybrid retrieval merges both paths through RRF. A ReRank model produces a 0–1 score. The minimum relevance value takes effect only under semantic retrieval or when result reranking is used. Question optimization performs coreference resolution and question expansion, and it adds one model call before retrieval. The reference limit is measured in tokens. Image retrieval requires image input and corresponding model capability. Reranking requires a model and must be enabled by configuration. Retrieval and recall do not perform authorization decisions, and associating a knowledge base does not create a permission boundary.
Hypothetical drill sample: the source text for comparison is "Supplier A submitted a rebar quotation on 10 March 2025, valid until 9 April 2025, with a quantity basis of 300 tonnes, delivery at the East China warehouse." The draft sentence to be judged is "Supplier A has confirmed delivery of 300 tonnes in April." This sentence treats the quotation validity period as a supply commitment and is unsupported.
Configuration and implementation checks
| Configuration item | Hypothetical trial starting point | Reason and comparison method |
|---|---|---|
| Associated knowledge bases | Inventory procurement and supplier records base | Associate after checking that vector model identifiers across bases match |
| Search mode | Hybrid retrieval | Compare with semantic and full-text retrieval separately on identifier-type and natural-language questions |
| Reference limit | Hypothetical starting value 2000 tokens | Check content completeness with short and long actual materials, then compare with a smaller value |
| Minimum relevance | Hypothetical starting value 0.4 | Label relevant and irrelevant samples first, then compare with adjacent thresholds |
| Question optimization | Enabled | Compare the original question with the optimized question and check whether the subject was altered |
| Result reranking | Enabled | Compare candidate order before and after reranking and check score-based filtering |
Three common errors
- Treating a quotation validity period as a supply deadline. The input is the source text above; comparing "valid until 9 April 2025" with the draft sentence "has confirmed delivery of 300 tonnes in April" shows two different facts, and the draft sentence is unsupported.
- Treating retrieval output as an authorization basis. The input is supplier material returned by one retrieval; comparing the retrieval action with a procurement approval action shows that retrieval produces no authorization, and approval requires a separate downstream implementation.
- Associating knowledge bases with different vector models. The input is the vector model identifiers of two bases; comparing whether the identifiers match shows that a mismatched base is excluded and the observation recorded, without running a cross-model retrieval to compare missed recalls.
How to verify the setup
- Input the source text above and the draft sentence; compare the quotation validity field with the supply commitment field. The condition is met when the draft sentence is marked unsupported and pending verification.
- Input an empty-result query; compare the output reference array with the paper input []. The condition is met when the downstream chain handles the empty result as designed.
- Input two knowledge bases with different vector model identifiers; compare identifier consistency. The condition is met when the mismatched base is excluded and recorded.
The three checks above use the same hypothetical sample and state expected observations without claiming that any test was actually run. Missing evidence remains missing: the quotation validity period does not establish a supply deadline, an unsigned termination is not a completed termination, and a pending request is not an approval.