What the documents look like
Pinduoduo low-price campaign operations revolve around campaign stock, campaign-price gross margin, and refund-rate fluctuation. The working materials are the campaign registration form, the product cost calculation sheet, after-sales refund orders, and platform site messages. Store service and internal training must explain campaign rules, cost conventions, and refund handling clearly, so citation tracing decides whether the training material can be checked at all.
Material updates follow a daily rhythm and a per-campaign rhythm. Citation checks must bind to a specific campaign session and its corresponding dated version. A prior session's calculation conclusion does not carry over to the current session by default.
Three features of this category shape the tracing step. First, campaign stock and campaign-price gross margin come from different documents, so a single draft sentence can mix a platform notice with a cost sheet. Second, refund orders carry their own dates and reasons, which do not automatically align with the campaign period on the registration form. Third, platform site messages communicate limits and notices; a notice is not an approval, and an offered option is not an executed action.
Constraints at the citation tracing step
The knowledge base search node first checks the selected knowledge bases and the material version. Only knowledge bases sharing the same vector model may be associated together. Knowledge bases with different vector models cannot be associated; the handling step is to check the identifiers, exclude the non-matching ones, and record what was observed. Cross-model retrieval is not performed in order to compare missed recalls.
The search node outputs a citation array whose length may be zero. An empty array does not mean the workflow has errored or terminated. The downstream design must accept an empty citation. Citation content is compared item by item against the answer. Original-text display is checked against a traceable sample. A model's thinking process or the fluency of an answer does not substitute for source evidence.
Retrieval is the process of fetching content. It does not perform authorization judgment. Forms collect values; business verification, approval, database writes, and external synchronization require their own downstream implementations.
Hypothetical paper exercise sample. The material originals read: "The campaign registration form for this session states that the campaign period runs from 1 March 2025 to 3 March 2025, the registered product is item A, and the campaign price follows version 2 of the cost calculation sheet." "The after-sales refund order shows one refund for item A on 2 March, with the reason field filled in as wrong size." "The platform site message notifies that the campaign stock ceiling for this session is 500 units." The draft sentence to be judged reads: "Item A's campaign stock of 500 units has been approved by the platform, and the store may stock to this quantity and commit to shipping externally." The draft sentence turns the stock ceiling stated in the site message into an obtained approval, and treats stocking and external commitment as already authorized. This is a pending-verification state.
Configuration and implementation checks
| Configuration or check item | Hypothetical starting point for this exercise | Reason for the choice and comparison method |
|---|---|---|
| Associated knowledge bases | Only libraries sharing the same vector model as the current training material are selected | Check the library identifier and the vector model identifier, and exclude non-matching ones |
| Citation ceiling | Hypothetical starting point of 2000 tokens | Compare against the single-section length of the training material, and adjust by citation completeness |
| Minimum relevance | Hypothetical starting point of 0.4 | Compare against semantic retrieval or rerank scores, and observe whether low-relevance fragments are filtered |
| Search mode | Hybrid retrieval | Compare against semantic-only results; numbers and cost item names rely on full-text recall as a supplement |
| Result rerank | Enabled according to the setting | Compare against the un-reranked candidate order, and confirm the relevance score can be used for filtering |
| Citation input handling | Compare the answer against the cited original text item by item | Compare against the original text's subject, period, and fields; record gaps when missing |
The citation ceiling uses the token unit and does not use top k. The thinking budget is a model thinking setting and cannot be moved to serve as a citation token ceiling. RRF is a hybrid-result fusion process and is not described as a toggle switch.
Three common errors
- Writing the stock ceiling from a site message directly as platform approval. Input is the site message original text above; the comparison object is "has been approved by the platform" in the draft sentence; the site message does not state an approval status, so the judgment is not supported.
- Treating the registration form's campaign period and the refund order's date as the same field. Input is the registration form period and the 2 March refund record; the comparison object is the stocking commitment in the draft sentence; the two have different subjects and fields, so this is not a contradiction and remains pending verification.
- Treating a retrieval hit as authorized execution. Input is the citation array returned by the search node; the comparison object is "may stock to this quantity and commit to shipping externally"; retrieval does not perform authorization judgment, and that action requires downstream approval and business verification.
How to verify the setup
- Input the material originals above together with the draft sentence, and compare whether the draft sentence exceeds the subject, object, status, and effective scope stated in the originals. When "has been approved" or "may commit externally" appears while the originals do not state it, the judgment is not supported and the evidence gap is retained.
- Input an explicit paper-based empty citation array
[], and compare whether the downstream handling design completes and provides an empty-citation handling description. If the downstream treats the empty array as an error and terminates, the handling design does not meet the condition. - Input two knowledge bases whose vector model identifiers differ, and compare whether the identifiers are checked and the non-matching one is excluded before association. If cross-model retrieval is performed, or a missed recall is inferred from it, the check step does not meet the condition.