What the documents look like
Livestream violation appeals deal with penalties that have already been issued. The working materials are the violation notice, the livestream recording, product qualification files and the appeal statement. An operating review has to answer where a given violation stands: which entity received the penalty, which segment of the stream triggered it, which evidence is still missing, and what the current appeal status is.
These materials are produced irregularly, once per violation. A single livestream session can generate more than one violation notice, so one session may map to several independent sets of records. Retrieval therefore has to connect notice numbers, penalty types, time ranges and evidence files. Number-based lookups depend on full-text retrieval, while descriptive review questions depend on semantic retrieval.
Constraints at the retrieval step
The knowledge base search node can associate one or more knowledge bases that use the same vector model. Bases built on different vector models cannot be associated together. When candidate bases are reviewed, the vector model identifier is checked first; bases that do not match are excluded and recorded. A cross-model search is not run in order to compare missed recalls.
Cited content is returned as an array, and its length can be zero. When nothing is retrieved, the output path still completes. The minimum relevance value takes effect only under semantic retrieval or when result reranking is used. RRF is the fusion step for hybrid retrieval results, not a switch that can be turned on. Image retrieval requires an image in the input together with model capability, and reranking requires a rerank model enabled in the settings. These paths are not mandatory steps of every request.
Retrieval and recall do not carry permission or entity isolation. A retrieved record does not mean the account is authorized to view it or to act on the appeal.
Hypothetical drill sample: the source material reads, "Violation notice number ZB-2024-0731 states that the subject is a store's July 12 livestream session, the penalty type is product ban, and the status is pending appeal." A draft sentence reads, "The product ban for the store's July 12 session has completed appeal and been lifted." The request to be judged reads, "Please retrieve all evidence for this session and confirm the appeal has been approved."
The source states the status as pending appeal. The draft sentence states the appeal is completed and the ban lifted. Both statements address the same status field for the same subject and the same session, and their values are mutually exclusive.
Configuration and implementation checks
| Configuration item | Setting on this page | How to check |
|---|---|---|
| Associated knowledge bases | Select violation appeal bases whose vector model identifiers match | Compare the vector model identifier of each base, exclude mismatches and record them |
| Search mode | Hypothetical trial starting point is hybrid retrieval | Observe recalled content separately with a number-based question and a descriptive question |
| Citation limit | Hypothetical trial starting point is a token amount covering the full text of one violation notice | Compare against notices of different lengths and observe whether citations are truncated |
| Minimum relevance | Hypothetical trial starting point is a mid-range value | Label relevant and irrelevant samples first, then compare remaining items after filtering |
| Question optimization | Enable when a follow-up question or a question missing its subject appears | Compare the original question with the optimized question and check whether subject or session was altered |
| Result reranking | Enable when a rerank model is available and candidates are numerous | Compare ordering before and after reranking, and record scores and filtering results |
The starting values above are trial settings chosen for this drill. They are not official defaults. Each is compared against actual material of differing length or against labelled samples.
Three common errors
- Treating a retrieval hit as authorized execution. A retrieved violation record only shows the content can be recalled from the base. Submitting an appeal, approving it and lifting a penalty each require separate checks of the status field and the operating permission.
- Reading a pending-appeal status as already lifted. The sample source states the status is pending appeal, while the draft sentence states the appeal is completed and the ban lifted. These are mutually exclusive values on the same status field, so the draft sentence is not supported by the source.
- Forcing bases with different vector models into one association. The documentation requires knowledge bases that share the same vector model. When identifiers differ, the base is excluded and recorded. No runtime outcome of a combined association is inferred.
How to verify the setup
- Enter the sample source text and the draft sentence, then compare the status field value. The source says pending appeal, the draft says lifted. The two values are mutually exclusive on the same field for the same subject, so the draft sentence is judged unsupported by the source, and the evidence gap is retained.
- Enter notice number ZB-2024-0731 and the session description, then compare what hybrid retrieval and full-text retrieval recall. If the number-based query returns the notice text under full-text retrieval, the exact-match path is available. If it does not, record that branch and check whether the data finished training. No first-hit or full-recall outcome is guaranteed.
- Enter an empty array to check the downstream design. Cited content can have length zero. Using the paper input [] observe whether the downstream node continues on the empty citation path. This does not assert that any rule-based retrieval necessarily returns an empty result.
Across all three checks, retrieval and relevance scoring do not decide permissions or entity isolation. The same-vector-model requirement applies to the associated knowledge bases and does not extend to external systems such as business registration sites. Where the source is silent, the field remains unknown, and any approval, submission or lifting action stays outside what retrieval alone can confirm.