What the documents look like
Pinduoduo low-price campaign operations revolve around low-price resource slots, campaign inventory, and refund-rate swings. The working documents for operating reports and exception reviews are campaign registration forms, product cost calculation sheets, after-sales refund slips, and platform in-site messages. These materials update daily or per campaign, so a single campaign can carry several versions of its registration price, cost basis, and refund record within the campaign window. Citation tracing answers a narrow question: which material, which version, and which campaign period does a review conclusion quote, and does that quotation still fall inside its valid range.
Constraints at the citation tracing step
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. When nothing is retrieved, the output path still runs through. The citation cap is controlled in tokens. The minimum relevance value takes effect only under semantic retrieval or result reranking, and a rerank score is a 0-1 value. Hybrid retrieval merges multiple result paths through RRF, so final citations do not necessarily follow a single vector similarity order. Retrieval itself does not constitute authorization, and a similarity score does not perform entity isolation or permission filtering.
Hypothetical drill sample: on 10 March 2025 a campaign operator prepares an exception review, and the source text available for checking consists of three sentences. The first sentence comes from a campaign registration form: "The registration period for this campaign runs from 1 March to 5 March 2025; the registered product is item A, and the campaign price is the amount stated in the registration form." The second sentence comes from a product cost calculation sheet: "The cost calculation for item A is based on the February 2025 purchase unit price; the sheet states a valid range of 1 February to 28 February 2025." The third sentence comes from an after-sales refund slip: "Refund slip number R-0310-07, product item A, refund application date 8 March 2025, current status pending review." The draft sentence to be assessed reads: "Item A sold below cost during the 1 March to 5 March campaign period, and refund slip R-0310-07 has completed its refund." The draft cites three materials, but the registration form states only that the campaign price follows the amount in the form and does not state that this amount is below cost. The cost sheet's valid range ends on 28 February and does not overlap the 1 March to 5 March campaign period. The refund slip status is pending review, which does not constitute a completed refund. All three assertions in the draft lack direct evidence from the same period and the same field.
Configuration and implementation checks
| Configuration or check item | Hypothetical trial starting point for this page | Reason for the choice and comparison method |
|---|---|---|
| Associated knowledge bases | Select knowledge bases that already contain the campaign registration forms, cost calculation sheets, after-sales refund slips, and platform in-site messages | Check that the vector model identifier is the same across the selected bases; bases with different identifiers are not associated together, and the excluded items are recorded |
| Citation cap | Set to a token amount that covers the full source text of one material | Compare against the full-text token count of a single material to confirm the citation is not truncated; the value is a trial starting point for this page |
| Minimum relevance | Leave it off first and observe the recalled source text | Compare with the recall set after enabling it to confirm whether filtering removes same-period materials |
| Search mode | Use hybrid retrieval | Compare with semantic retrieval alone to check whether identifier and slip-number fields are hit by full-text recall |
| Result reranking | Not enabled in this trial | When no rerank model is available, it stays off; if enabled, the rerank score must be compared against the corresponding source text |
| Citation output handoff | Check whether the citation array is passed item by item into the answering step | Use a paper input to check whether the downstream step displays the cited source text and whether the path continues when the array is empty |
Three common errors
- Splicing evidence from different periods into one conclusion. Observable error: the draft uses the February cost sheet to support a March claim that the campaign price was below cost. Executable check: input the cost sheet's valid range and the campaign registration period, then compare whether the two date ranges overlap; when they do not overlap, mark the assertion as unsupported.
- Writing a pending status as completed. Observable error: the draft states that refund slip R-0310-07 has completed its refund. Executable check: input the original status field of the refund slip and compare whether "pending review" and "completed" are mutually exclusive values of the same field; when the status is pending review, the refund cannot be judged complete.
- Treating a retrieval hit as a permission or entity confirmation. Observable error: because a record was recalled, it is assumed to belong to this store or this campaign. Executable check: input the recalled source text together with the store and campaign identifiers, and compare whether the subject fields match; the retrieval score is not used to judge ownership, and ownership requires a separate system check.
How to verify the setup
- Compare the first sentence of the hypothetical sample with the draft sentence. Input: the registration form text "the campaign price is the amount stated in the registration form." Compare: does the draft contain the phrase "below cost," and does the registration form state a cost comparison. Observation: when the registration form does not state cost, the assertion is not satisfied and is recorded as an evidence gap.
- Compare the second sentence of the hypothetical sample with the draft sentence. Input: the cost sheet valid range 1 February to 28 February 2025, and the campaign period 1 March to 5 March 2025. Compare: do the two ranges overlap. Observation: the ranges do not overlap, the cost basis does not cover the campaign period, and the assertion is not satisfied.
- Compare the third sentence of the hypothetical sample with the draft sentence. Input: the refund slip status "pending review." Compare: is the draft phrase "has completed its refund" a mutually exclusive value of the same field against the source status. Observation: the status is pending review, no completion record appears, and the assertion is not satisfied; pending review does not demonstrate a lack of operating authority and does not constitute a completed refund.
This page addresses only Pinduoduo low-price campaign store operations, operating reports and exception reviews, and citation tracing. When operations are handed over, which materials, actions, or requests sit at what authorization state cannot be treated as authorized execution on the basis of retrieval or a form.