What the documents look like
Export tax rebate filing happens after goods leave the country. The work matches tax vouchers against export records rather than declaring goods at the border. The main data sources are the electronic tax bureau, the export rebate filing system, customs electronic messages and the finance ledger. The documents handled day to day are the export tax exemption and rebate filing form, the export customs declaration, the purchase invoice and the foreign exchange receipt voucher. Handover takes place among finance staff, tax accountants and documentation clerks, and materials update monthly or per batch.
These features affect citation tracing directly. A citation has to resolve to a specific material version and specific fields, because the filing form, declaration, invoice and receipt voucher each carry a batch and period identity. A retrieval hit on a passage of text does not replace checking the filing entity, the period covered and the voucher status. The update frequency matters only in that handover material must be matched to the batch it belongs to.
Constraints at the citation tracing step
The knowledge base search node can select one or more knowledge bases that use the same vector model for vector search. It outputs cited content as an array, and the length can be zero, meaning the output path still runs even when no content is found. The citation limit is controlled by tokens. The minimum relevance value takes effect only in semantic retrieval or when result reranking is used, and the rerank score is 0-1. Similarity and rerank scores are relevance measures and do not perform permission or entity isolation. Retrieval output is passed to the answering step, where each item is checked against the source text. Retrieval itself does not constitute authorization, approval or a database write.
Hypothetical drill sample: the source material reads, "A foreign trade enterprise's March 2025 batch export tax exemption and rebate filing form (number XB-2025-03) lists customs declaration number BG-0317, purchase invoice FP-0317 and foreign exchange receipt voucher SH-0317; the filing status of this batch is pending review; handover request: transfer the filing operation permission for this batch from documentation clerk A to tax accountant B." The proposed judgement sentence is, "Batch XB-2025-03 has completed the rebate filing and has received the rebate payment." Comparing that sentence with the source: the source status is pending review and records no completed approval or treasury refund record, so the judgement sentence is unsupported.
Configuration and implementation checks
| Configuration or check item | Value or check method on this page | Basis and boundary |
|---|---|---|
| Associated knowledge bases | Select only knowledge bases that use the same vector model | Official description requires the same vector model for joint association |
| Citation limit | Hypothetical trial starting point of 2000 tokens, adjusted after comparing with actual citation length of historical batches | This value is a hypothetical starting point, not an official default |
| Minimum relevance | Hypothetical trial starting point of 0.3, compared with the rerank score distribution | Takes effect only in semantic retrieval or result reranking |
| Citation output handoff | Check whether the citation array is passed to the answering step | Output length can be zero; an empty array does not mean the workflow errored |
| Handover material version | Check batch and period identifiers on the filing form, declaration, invoice and receipt voucher | When a version identifier is missing, record the gap |
| Authorization status record | Record that the handover request is in pending review status | Pending review does not equal completed approval or transferred permission |
Three common errors
- Treating a retrieval hit as the basis for authorization. The input is a filing form fragment returned by one knowledge base search; the comparison object is that fragment against the authorization scope in the handover request. If the fragment records no approval status and no authorizing entity, permission cannot be treated as transferred on that basis.
- Writing a pending review status as a completed rebate. The input is the sample source text "filing status is pending review"; the comparison object is the proposed judgement sentence "has completed the rebate filing and has received the rebate payment." The two take mutually exclusive values on the same field, so the judgement sentence contradicts the source.
- Treating a similarity score as a permission filter. The input is a retrieval result at minimum relevance 0.3; the comparison object is whether the result contains records of other entities. If it does, the relevance setting has not excluded unrelated records, and the access scope needs separate checking.
How to verify the setup
- Input the sample source text and the proposed judgement sentence, and compare the filing status field value. When the source says pending review and the proposed sentence says the rebate filing is complete, the result is a contradiction with the source.
- Input the handover request and the material version identifiers, and compare the batch number in the request with the batch number on the materials. When the two match and the authorization status record is pending review, the result is pending verification, and permission is not treated as transferred.
- Input the paper citation array
[]and the downstream answering design, and compare whether the downstream continues on an empty citation. When the design explicitly handles an empty array, the result is a normal handoff; this paper input does not mean an actual search will return an empty array.