What the documents look like
Community group-buy leader operations coordinate community nodes and commissions. This category does not perform cold-chain quality inspection. In the procurement and supplier materials task, citation tracing rests on four document types: leader agreements, commission tables, pickup lists, and community announcements. The brief states that these documents update daily and per group, so within a single day the procurement quantity, supplier name, and pickup arrangement for different group rounds may each appear in separate documents.
Leader agreements and commission tables govern settlement relationships. Pickup lists and community announcements govern delivery scope. Citation tracing asks whether a given procurement quantity, supplier name, or commission rate can be matched to source text with the same subject, the same period, and the same field. The stated update frequency describes how documents are produced; it does not establish batch synchronization, full synchronization, real-time triggers, or transaction-triggered mechanisms.
The knowledge base search node can associate one or more knowledge bases that share the same vector model, and it outputs citations as an array whose length may be zero. Knowledge bases using different vector models cannot be associated together. Semantic recall and relevance scores do not perform permission or entity isolation. The minimum relevance setting takes effect only under semantic search or when result reranking is used; it is a filter threshold, not a sorting rule, and it does not exclude unrelated businesses or unauthorized records.
Paths shown in the overall retrieval flow diagram are optional. Image retrieval requires corresponding image input and model capability. Reranking requires a model and must be enabled according to settings. RRF is a fusion process for mixed results. Thinking budget is a thinking budget and does not serve as a citation token limit. The citation limit controls, in tokens, the maximum content cited per search.
Hypothetical paper exercise sample: a leader agreement states, "Party A commissions Party B to conduct group-buy promotion in Sunshine Lane Community, with the agreement period from March 1, 2025 to August 31, 2025." A commission table states, "Sunshine Lane Community, March 2025, fresh produce commission rate 8%." A draft sentence reads, "The fresh produce commission rate for Sunshine Lane Community in March 2025 is 8%, and the agreement takes effect from March 1, 2025." The question is whether the phrase "takes effect" in the draft sentence has source support in the same subject, same period, and same field.
Constraints at the citation tracing step
The search node returns citation content as an array, and a zero-length array still allows the output path to proceed. An empty array does not mean the workflow has errored out. When a downstream answer step receives citations, the answer and the cited source text must be compared item by item. A retrieval hit is not an authorization event; it shows that text was recalled, not that an agreement was signed, a partnership was reached, or a contract took effect.
The minimum relevance value applies only under semantic search or result reranking. It does not act as a permission filter, an entity filter, or a business-category filter. Associating knowledge bases requires the same vector model; this requirement does not extend to business registration sites or other external systems. When vector model identifiers differ, the correct action is to check the identifiers, exclude the non-matching base, and record the actual observation, rather than running a cross-model search to compare missed recalls.
For the hypothetical sample, the commission table records a rate and a month. It does not record agreement effectiveness. Determining effectiveness requires an effectiveness field in the agreement source text. If that field is absent, the evidence gap remains and the draft claim is unsupported. A supplier material submission still under review is in a pending-review state; this does not show that operation permission is missing, and it does not mean the material has been stored or synchronized to an external system.
Configuration and implementation checks
| Configuration or check item | Setting for this page | Basis and boundary |
|---|---|---|
| Associated knowledge bases | Include only the leader agreement base and commission table base whose vector model identifiers match | Knowledge bases sharing the same vector model can be associated; exclude non-matching bases after checking identifiers |
| Search mode | Hypothetical exercise starting point: hybrid search | Numeric and rate fields suit full-text recall; semantic recall supplements natural-language questions |
| Citation limit | Hypothetical exercise starting point: 3000 tokens | This value is a paper-check starting point for this exercise, compared against sample source text length and adjusted |
| Minimum relevance | Hypothetical exercise starting point: 0.3 | Takes effect only under semantic search or result reranking; compared against rerank scores |
| Citation output | Received item by item as an array, zero length allowed | An empty array does not mean the workflow has errored out |
| Citation display check | Compare the draft sentence against sample source text item by item | Thinking process or answer fluency does not replace source evidence |
Three common errors
- Treating the commission table line "commission rate 8%" as evidence that the agreement took effect. The commission table records a rate and a month; it does not record agreement effectiveness status. Determining effectiveness requires an effectiveness field in the agreement source text. When that field is absent, the result is recorded as unsupported.
- Treating a retrieval hit as authorized execution. Returned citation content shows that text was recalled. It does not constitute signing, partnership formation, or contract effectiveness, and it does not mean the leader has obtained procurement or settlement authority.
- Treating a pending review request as a completed operation. A supplier material submission still under review is in a pending-review state. This does not show that operation permission is missing, and it does not mean the material has been stored or synchronized to an external system.
How to verify the setup
- Input the agreement source text and the commission table source text from the sample, and compare the draft sentence "the agreement takes effect from March 1, 2025" against both source texts for the same subject, same period, and same field values. The condition is met when the agreement source text contains an effectiveness field with a matching value; the observable result is that the citation array includes that source text and the draft sentence can be traced word by word. If the agreement source text does not state an effectiveness field, record the evidence gap and judge the claim unsupported.
- Input a paper attempt to associate two knowledge bases with different vector models, and compare the vector model identifiers of the two knowledge bases. The condition is met when identifiers match before association; the observable result is that non-matching bases are excluded and recorded, without running a cross-model search to compare missed recalls.
- Input a paper empty result
[], and compare how the downstream answer step is designed to receive it. The condition is met when the downstream step proceeds with a zero-length citation and marks that no source is present; the observable result is that the output path is not interrupted. This check does not claim that a fictional-rule search necessarily returns an empty array.