What the documents look like
Operating reports and exception reviews in the foreign-exchange receipt and settlement category draw on four document families: receipt vouchers for incoming foreign exchange, trade contracts, invoices, and foreign-exchange business registration materials. This category differs from letter-of-credit document examination. The focus is on the authenticity of foreign-exchange funds and the underlying trade background, and a full set of letter-of-credit documents is not examined here. Materials arrive on two rhythms, per transaction and monthly, and the receiving entity, the contract counterparty, and the registration scope need to stay consistent across the individual records.
Three features of these materials shape retrieval work. First, an entity name may appear in different written forms across contracts, invoices, and vouchers, so retrieved results need to preserve the original wording for manual comparison. Second, amounts, currencies, and dates are spread across several documents, and an exception review requires the same entity, the same period, and the same field before a contradiction can be identified. Third, registration materials carry a business status, and retrieval returns text only; the status judgment remains a manual step.
Constraints at the retrieval step
The knowledge base search node can associate one or more knowledge bases that use the same vector model. Knowledge bases built on different vector models cannot be associated together. The practical step is to check the vector model identifier of each base, exclude those that do not match, and record what was observed. A cross-model search is not run to compare missed recalls.
Retrieval results are output as an array of references, and the length may be zero. Even when nothing is retrieved, the output path still completes. Semantic retrieval relies on vector distance, full-text retrieval relies on keyword hits, hybrid retrieval merges the two paths through RRF, and Rerank performs a second ordering of candidate text. The minimum relevance value takes effect only under semantic retrieval or when result reranking is used. That value is a filter threshold and does not perform permission or entity isolation; retrieval by itself does not constitute authorization. The reference limit controls how much content each search cites, measured in tokens. Question optimization performs coreference resolution and question expansion and adds one model call.
The paths shown in the overall document flow are optional combinations. Image retrieval requires a corresponding image input and model capability, and reranking requires a model that is enabled according to the settings. When those conditions are not met, the corresponding path does not execute.
Hypothetical paper exercise sample
The following materials were constructed for this paper comparison and do not involve a real customer or a real transaction.
Material one, contract excerpt: contract number H-2024-031; the seller is domestic trading company A; the buyer is overseas company B; the goods are household textiles; the contract amount is USD 120,000; the signing date is 5 March 2024.
Material two, receipt voucher excerpt: the payee is domestic trading company A; the payer is overseas company B; the amount is USD 120,000; the credit date is 2 April 2024; the transaction remark is goods payment.
Material three, foreign-exchange business registration excerpt: the registered entity is domestic trading company A; the corresponding contract number is H-2024-031; the registration status is accepted.
Draft sentence to be judged: this receipt has completed trade background verification under contract H-2024-031 and settlement has been completed.
Judgment note: the three materials share the same entity, the contract number matches the registration record, and the amount and date range are consistent. The registration status is accepted, and the materials do not state a verification conclusion or a settlement completion record. The verification completion and settlement completion in the draft sentence are not supported and remain pending confirmation; they cannot be written into a report as completed facts.
Configuration and implementation checks
| Configuration or check item | Hypothetical starting point for this exercise | Reason and comparison method |
|---|---|---|
| Associated knowledge bases | Only the knowledge base for this category | Check the vector model identifier of each base; association requires matching identifiers |
| Search mode | Hybrid retrieval | Compare the retrieved content of the same test question under semantic, full-text, and hybrid retrieval |
| Reference limit | 2000 tokens as the starting point | Test with materials of different lengths to see whether content is complete, then compare with adjacent values |
| Minimum relevance | 0.3 as the starting point | Label relevant and irrelevant samples first, then compare filtered results with adjacent thresholds |
| Question optimization | Not enabled at the start | Compare the original question with the optimized question and check whether the entity was altered |
| Result reranking | Not enabled at the start | Compare ordering changes only after a rerank model is available and enabled according to settings |
These values are hypothetical starting points for this exercise. They are not official defaults and not measured conclusions.
Three common errors
- Treating an accepted registration status as completed verification. The input is the registration status field in material three; the comparison object is the verification completion wording in the draft sentence; the observed result is that the registration status field does not state a verification conclusion, so the wording is unsupported.
- Treating a retrieval hit as a basis for authorization. The input is the reference array returned by the search node; the comparison object is the authorization record required for business processing; the observed result is that the reference content contains only document text and no authorization field, so retrieval does not constitute authorization.
- Associating knowledge bases with different vector models and then inferring runtime behavior. The input is two knowledge bases with different vector model identifiers; the comparison object is the same-vector-model requirement in the association condition; the observed result is that mismatched identifiers fail the association condition, and the actual runtime result is not inferred.
How to verify the setup
- Entity consistency check. The input is the seller and payee fields in materials one and two; the comparison object is the two entity names; the observed result is that when the two names match, the entity comparison passes, and when they differ, the difference is recorded and the original wording is preserved.
- Empty-result handling check. The input is a clearly stated paper empty reference array; the comparison object is the downstream node design for handling an empty array; the observed result is that the downstream path still completes and produces no reference content. No claim is made that a fictional rule search necessarily returns an empty array.
- Draft sentence judgment check. The input is the original text of materials one through three and the draft sentence; the comparison object is the verification completion and settlement completion wording in the draft sentence; the observed result is that the original text does not state those two facts, so the judgment is unsupported and the evidence gap is preserved.
All three checks are performed on paper samples, with actual observations recorded. No claim is made that testing has been completed or that approval has been granted.