What the documents look like
Fresh-food weighing and sorting happens inside the warehouse fulfillment step, and the core records revolve around weight and specification. A sorting task sheet records the order to be sorted and its specification requirement. An electronic scale produces the weighing result. A weighing label carries the actual weight and batch information. A short-weight compensation form records a request to handle a weight difference. A quality inspection record stores the quality judgment and photos. These materials update per order and per day, and they form the basis of operating reports and exception reviews.
Citation tracing requires that each of these materials can be located back to its original record line by line during reporting and review. The search node outputs citation content as an array, and the length may be zero. An empty array does not mean the workflow has errored or stopped; the downstream chain still runs.
Constraints at the citation tracing step
Retrieval output is citation content and does not constitute business authorization. Knowledge base search only recalls text. Whether a citation is adopted, whether compensation is executed, and whether a loss is approved must still be checked against the sorting task sheet, weighing label, short-weight compensation form, and quality inspection record themselves.
For the same batch, the weighing label and the sorting task sheet must be compared under the same subject, the same period, and the same field. Only clearly mutually exclusive values in the same field constitute a contradiction. The minimum relevance score is a filter threshold and does not carry permission or entity isolation. Linked knowledge bases must have their vector model identifier checked; bases with different vector models cannot be linked together. At this step only the identifier is checked and non-matching bases are excluded; no cross-model retrieval is run to compare missed recalls. Hybrid retrieval merges multiple result paths through RRF, and that process is executed by the system according to the search parameters; it is not set as an independent switch. Image retrieval requires image input and model capability, and reranking requires a model and must be enabled by configuration. Both are optional paths and do not mean every request executes all of them.
A hypothetical drill sample is used below. Sorting task sheet FT-0417 records order A with a specification of 500g±20g. Weighing label W-0417 records an actual weight of 462g. Short-weight compensation form BC-0417 has a status of "pending review." Quality inspection record QC-0417 records "appearance qualified." A draft sentence reads: "BC-0417 has been approved, settle at 462g." The status field in the compensation form is the field to compare, and its current value is pending review.
Configuration and implementation checks
The items below concern this page's sample. They list only settings already described in the official documents, or implementation checks. The values are starting points for this hypothetical trial, with the reason for choosing them and the object of comparison; they are not official defaults.
| Configuration item | Hypothetical trial starting point | Note and comparison method |
|---|---|---|
| Linked knowledge bases | Two bases confirmed to share the same vector model | Link only after the vector model identifiers match; exclude non-matching identifiers and do not run cross-model retrieval |
| Search mode | Hybrid retrieval | Uses vector and full-text recall together, merged through RRF; compare recall coverage against semantic retrieval alone |
| Minimum relevance score | Hypothetical starting point 0.5 | Takes effect only in semantic retrieval or with reranking; compare the change in filtered item count against 0.3 and 0.7 |
| Citation limit | Hypothetical starting point 3000 tokens | Controls citation length by tokens; compare total returned citation content against 1500 and 6000 |
| Question optimization | Enabled | Adds one model call before retrieval for coreference resolution and question expansion; compare recalled items on follow-up turns against the disabled state |
| Citation output | Array, length may be zero | When the array is empty the downstream chain still runs; compare against the downstream design and do not treat an empty array as an error |
Three common errors
- Treating retrieval output as business authorization. In the hypothetical drill sample, sorting task sheet FT-0417 records order A with a specification of 500g±20g, weighing label W-0417 records an actual weight of 462g, short-weight compensation form BC-0417 has a status of "pending review," and quality inspection record QC-0417 records "appearance qualified." The draft sentence is "BC-0417 has been approved, settle at 462g." The error is treating a pending-review status as approval. The check inputs the original text of this material set and the draft sentence, then compares the value of the compensation form's status field. The sentence is supported only when the status field is clearly approved and the subject, period, and field agree. The current status is pending review, so the sentence is not supported.
- Treating the minimum relevance score as a permission or entity filter. In the hypothetical drill sample, retrieval returns three citations from the sorting task sheet, the weighing label, and the short-weight compensation form, with relevance scores of 0.62, 0.58, and 0.41, and the minimum relevance score is set to 0.5. The draft sentence is "records with relevance below 0.5 have no viewing permission." The error is treating a similarity threshold as a permission judgment. The check inputs this citation set and the draft sentence, then compares the scores against the threshold. A score below the threshold only means the item did not pass that filter; permission must be checked against authorization records separately. The sentence is not supported.
- Inferring runtime results after linking knowledge bases with different vector models. In the hypothetical drill sample, base A has vector model identifier M1 and base B has vector model identifier M2. The draft sentence is "after A and B are linked together, recalls will be missed." The error is that checking identifiers first is enough to exclude a non-matching base, and no runtime result after linking should be invented. The check inputs the two vector model identifiers and the draft sentence, then compares whether the identifiers match. When they do not match, linking is excluded, and the missed-recall conclusion has no basis. The sentence is not supported.
How to verify the setup
- Check citations line by line. Input the hypothetical drill sample's sorting task sheet FT-0417, weighing label W-0417, short-weight compensation form BC-0417, quality inspection record QC-0417, and the draft sentence "BC-0417 has been approved, settle at 462g." Compare the status stated in the draft sentence against the value of the compensation form's status field. The sentence meets the condition only when the status field is clearly approved and the subject, period, and field agree. The expected result is that the current status is pending review, the sentence is not supported, and the evidence gap is recorded.
- Check downstream handling of empty citation content. Input a clearly written paper input of an empty array []. Compare whether the downstream node handles the empty array as designed and continues execution. The condition is met only when the citation output is an empty array and the downstream chain runs. The expected result is that the chain runs and the empty array is not treated as an error. Do not claim that a fictional rule retrieval necessarily returns [].
- Check citation display against document currency. Input the original text of weighing label W-0417 from the hypothetical drill sample and its historical version. Compare whether the citation text shown in the answer matches the current version text. The condition is met only when the shown text matches the current version word for word and the source version is noted. The expected result is that the shown text traces to the current version, a historical version does not automatically replace the current version, and whether the citation is adopted still requires review against the valid version.