What the documents look like
Sample inspection for livestream selling happens before a broadcast. The question is whether a product can be sold and whether it suits on-camera presentation. Operating reports and exception reviews pull four document types into one evidence chain: sample evaluation sheets, quality inspection reports, supplier qualifications, and prohibited-sale lists. Supplier materials, testing-agency reports, platform negative catalogs, and historical return rates are the main data sources, refreshed weekly or per item.
Two features of this category shape the tracing task. First, the underlying judgment is a pre-broadcast gate, so a report line that cites a sample conclusion is really citing a go/no-go decision. Second, the source set mixes documents that carry different validity scopes: a supplier qualification has an effective period, a testing report has a report date and a stated conclusion, and a prohibited-sale list has a version. A citation that does not preserve these scopes cannot support an exception review, because a reviewer cannot separate a documentation gap from a disagreement about judgment.
Constraints at the citation tracing step
The knowledge-base search node can associate one or more knowledge bases that use the same vector model, and it outputs a citation array whose length may be zero. When no content is retrieved, that output path still runs. The citation cap controls how many tokens of content a single search may cite. The minimum relevance value applies only under semantic retrieval or result reranking. These are retrieval properties. Retrieval is not authorization, and a form value does not trigger approval, a database write, or external synchronization.
Hypothetical drill sample. A selection manager submits a handover request on 10 March 2025, asking that the inspection conclusion for "Sample A-0310" be written into the March operating report. The source text available for checking contains three sentences. First: "Sample A-0310, supplier qualification document number GYS-2025-0228, valid until 31 December 2025." Second: "Testing agency report number JC-2025-0305, conclusion: meets the requirements of the commissioned items, report date 5 March 2025." Third: "The March 2025 version of the platform negative catalog does not include this product category." The draft sentence to be judged reads: "Sample A-0310 passed inspection and may be written into the March operating report and synchronized to the supplier score." The authorization boundary for this request is: the selection manager holds submission rights only; report writing and supplier-score synchronization require review by an inspection specialist and are carried out through system integration. The materials do not state any authorization clause for supplier-score synchronization.
Configuration and implementation checks
| Configuration or check item | Hypothetical starting point for this drill | Reason and comparison method |
|---|---|---|
| Associated knowledge bases | Select the two bases holding inspection reports and supplier qualifications | First check that both use the same vector model; exclude any that do not match, and do not run a cross-model search |
| Search mode | Hybrid retrieval | Inspection report numbers and qualification numbers need exact hits, while the semantic path supplements natural-language descriptions |
| Citation cap | Set to a token amount covering the full text of one inspection report | Compare against the report's actual length to confirm the conclusion paragraph enters the citation intact |
| Minimum relevance | Set to 0.5 as the starting point for this drill | Compare against semantic or rerank scores in the 0–1 range, and observe whether low-scoring fragments are filtered |
| Question optimization | Enabled | Compare retrieval results with the setting off, and observe whether multi-turn follow-ups restore the subject |
| Citation handoff | Pass the citation array to the answering step | Check each answer line against the cited source text; when the array is empty, check whether the downstream design still runs |
Three common errors
- Treating retrieval output as authorized execution. Input: the handover request above. Compare the retrieved content against the authorization boundary. If a retrieved inspection report is taken as permission to write the report, retrieval has been treated as authorization. Observable result: the request remains pending review, and the report is not written.
- Reading a pending review as missing submission rights. Input: the handover request submitted by the selection manager. Compare the request status against the permission record. If "pending review" is judged as "no submission right," the status has been misread. Observable result: the submission action is recorded, and the review status is unchanged.
- Mixing values from different fields into a contradiction. Input: the supplier qualification valid until 31 December 2025 and the testing report date of 5 March 2025. Compare values within the same field. If the two dates from different fields are judged as conflicting, the fields have been mismatched. Observable result: the two dates belong to different fields, and no mutually exclusive values exist.
How to verify the setup
- Input the three source sentences and the draft sentence from the hypothetical drill above. Compare "passed inspection" in the draft against the report conclusion "meets the requirements of the commissioned items." If the draft widens the scope of the conclusion, the citation tracing requirement is not met. Expected: the draft sentence must be checked word by word against the report text.
- Input the handover request above. Compare "synchronized to the supplier score" in the request against the authorization clause, which the materials do not state. If the materials do not state that authorization, judge the item as unsupported. Expected: keep the evidence gap open, and do not supply an authorization clause.
- Input a paper empty citation array []. Compare the design of the downstream answering step. If the downstream design does not handle an empty array, the citation handoff is incomplete. Expected: the empty array runs through the chain, without claiming that a fictional search necessarily returns an empty result.
The material identities, dates, quantities, and authorization boundary above remain the full evidential context for every check on this page. Where a field is not provided, it stays unknown.