What the documents look like
Complaints and official replies are directed at platforms or regulatory authorities, so the working materials are formal evidence and rectification text rather than casual service notes. Sources include the 12315 platform, platform complaint centers, customer service chat, and order systems. The everyday documents are complaint tickets, regulatory inquiry letters, order evidence, and rectification reports. Each case updates these materials, and the update frequency is irregular.
This category differs from after-sales repair or reshipment work. A complaint record may become the basis for an administrative investigation, a platform penalty, or a brand reputation event. During operations handover, the authorization status of each material, action, and request determines whether a cited source can be traced. A retrieval result or a form submission does not serve as proof that authorization is complete.
The citation tracing step inherits these conditions. A knowledge base search node can reference one or more knowledge bases that share the same vector model, and it outputs cited content as an array whose length can be zero. When no content is found, the output path still runs. The citation limit controls the maximum tokens of content cited per search. The minimum relevance value takes effect only during semantic retrieval or when result reranking is used. Hybrid retrieval merges multiple result paths through RRF. Reranking requires a configured model and must be enabled according to settings. Image retrieval requires corresponding image input and model capability. A similarity score reflects content relevance only. It does not perform permission filtering or entity isolation, and retrieval itself does not constitute authorization.
Constraints at the citation tracing step
The citation limit is expressed in tokens, not in an item count, because chunk lengths vary widely across mixed knowledge bases. The minimum relevance value is a filtering threshold, not a final sorting rule. When question optimization, hybrid retrieval, image retrieval, or result reranking is active, final results may come from several merged recall paths and need not follow a single vector similarity order. A reranked result produces a score between 0 and 1 that represents relevance between the search content and the question. That score can support filtering, but it does not identify a business entity or grant access.
The knowledge base search node accepts one or more knowledge bases that use the same vector model. Knowledge bases with different vector models cannot be associated together. The node output is a cited content array, and a zero-length array still allows the downstream path to run.
A hypothetical drill sample follows. The material text is: "A shop received a platform complaint ticket on 1 March 2025, ticket number A-001, concerning a product description issue for order D-1001. On 5 March 2025, the customer service supervisor handed the ticket to legal compliance, with the handover note 'order evidence to be supplemented.'" The sentence to be assessed is: "Legal compliance obtained rectification reply authority for this ticket on 5 March 2025." The subject, object, status, and date needed for judgment all appear in the source text, but the source text records only a handover note about pending evidence. It does not record that authorization took effect.
Configuration and implementation checks
| Configuration or check item | Purpose on this page | Verification method |
|---|---|---|
| Associated knowledge bases | Limit retrieval scope to complaint tickets, regulatory inquiry letters, and similar materials | Check selected knowledge base identifiers and material versions; only knowledge bases with the same vector model can be associated together |
| Citation limit | Control the maximum tokens of content cited per search | Fill in the hypothetical trial starting value for this page, compare it with the actual length of the sample ticket evidence, and adjust after comparison |
| Minimum relevance | Filter low-relevance results; effective only during semantic retrieval or result reranking | Search with the sample ticket text and observe whether traceable sources remain after filtering |
| Search mode | Choose semantic retrieval, full-text retrieval, or hybrid retrieval | For ticket-number and identifier queries, check actual hits under full-text or hybrid retrieval first |
| Result reranking | Reorder candidate results | Confirm the rerank model is configured and enabled according to settings, then observe ordering changes |
| Cited content output | Pass the citation array to the answering step | Check the downstream design with a paper input of [] and compare each answer item against the cited source text |
The hypothetical trial starting value for the citation limit is set at the token scale corresponding to the sample ticket evidence length. The reason for this choice is that the sample ticket evidence is a single page of text. Compare it with the length of a full regulatory inquiry letter to decide whether the value needs to be raised.
Three common errors
- Treating the handover note "order evidence to be supplemented" as effective authorization. The input is the sample handover note. The comparison object is the fields required for authorization to take effect. The observable result is that the note records only a pending task status and does not state a grant of authority, so the claim is unsupported.
- Treating a similarity score as a permission filter. The input is a retrieval request for the sample ticket. The comparison object is the retrieval result against the authorization record. The observable result is that similarity reflects content relevance only and cannot exclude unauthorized records, so retrieval does not carry an authorization function.
- Forcing knowledge bases with different vector models into a shared association. The input is two knowledge base identifiers with different vector models. The comparison object is the association condition. The observable result is that the identifiers do not match, so the nonconforming base is excluded and the actual observation is recorded. Cross-model retrieval is not executed to compare missed recall.
How to verify the setup
- Search with the sample material text. The input is ticket number A-001 and order D-1001. The comparison object is the source identifier in the cited content array. The observable result is that the citation entry can be traced back to the sample ticket text, which satisfies the traceability condition.
- Check the authorization status against the sentence to be assessed. The input is "Legal compliance obtained rectification reply authority on 5 March 2025." The comparison object is the sample handover note text. The observable result is that the source text does not record effective authorization, so the status remains pending verification and authorization material must be supplemented.
- Check empty-result handling with a paper input of []. The input is an empty citation array. The comparison object is the downstream answering step design. The observable result is that the path still runs without error, which satisfies the empty-result handling condition. Whether an actual search returns an empty array must be based on real observation.
This page addresses only complaints and official replies, operations handover management, and citation tracing. During handover, the authorization status of materials, actions, and requests determines how citations are traced. Retrieval and form submission are not authorization execution.