What the documents look like
For staff training in B2B marketplaces, this page examines FastGPT citation tracing. Trace sample enquiries, supplier statements and learner answers within their training context. The examples are hypothetical.
Constraints at the citation tracing step
A proposed B2B training packet instructs the learner to ask about the required finish, gives a sample customer who wants to see matte and includes a supplier introduction offering several finishes. A learner answer says matte supply is confirmed. The instruction collects requirements, the sample expresses interest and the introduction describes general capability; none confirms this supply. Preserve the fictional-dialogue role. A textbook customer is no actual order, and repetition of matte in the learner answer cannot establish support from the original material or a verified supply arrangement.
Configuration and implementation checks
| Training-source check | Teaching identity and evidence scope | Acceptance action |
|---|---|---|
| Instruction action | Collect requirements first | Do not make it a supply promise. |
| Sample preference | Wants to see matte | Check final-selection evidence. |
| Supplier statement | Several finishes | Inspect product scope. |
| Submission identity | Learning output | Do not use as self-proof. |
| Reference transfer | Teaching and introduction | Inspect actual received content. |
Documented conditions
| Documented item / implementation check | Condition |
|---|---|
Associated knowledge bases | Knowledge bases associated with one search node must use the same embedding model. |
Citation output | The output is an array; an empty array can continue. |
Citation input handoff | Inspect citations actually received by the answer step. |
Citation display check | Trace displayed sources to their originals. |
Document-validity check | Inspect source identity and applicable version separately. |
Three common errors
First, wanting to see matte may become a final selection; read the sample question and reply and inspect any additional confirmation. Second, a general introduction may establish supply for this item; seek product-specific evidence instead of filling current conditions from capability wording. Third, the learner answer may become its own answer key; distinguish instruction, sample and submission, locating the actual origin of the conclusion. These concern requirement state, applicability and evidence hierarchy. A learning output cannot substantiate itself through a repeated phrase presented as a citation.
How to verify the setup
Ask what the instruction requires, what the sample customer expresses and what the supplier states before tracing the learner answer sentence by sentence. Submission-only references require investigation of whether teaching and supplier sources reached the answer, while supply remains unresolved. Added confirmation must match the exercise’s item rather than another finish. Empty references do not themselves establish an incorrect submission. This exercise checks source support without announcing training success, a sale or completed supply; those are different outcomes requiring evidence beyond the proposed classroom documents.