What the documents look like
Livestream violation appeals respond to penalties that have already been issued, so the evidence chain has to be reconstructed after the fact. Materials arrive from the platform violation center, livestream replays, customer service records, and the product qualification library. Day-to-day documents include violation notices, livestream recordings, product qualifications, and appeal statements. Updates are irregular and each violation starts a fresh round of material collection. Locating the violating segment, supplementing evidence, and drafting the appeal reasoning are the three most time-consuming steps, and retrieval has to supply checkable source text for each of them.
For operations handover, the question is which materials, actions, and requests sit at which authorization state. A retrieval hit and a completed form are both records of what was searched or entered; neither one executes an authorization decision.
Constraints at the retrieval step
The knowledge base search node can associate one or more knowledge bases that use the same vector model. Semantic search relies on vector distance, full-text search relies on keyword hits, and hybrid search merges the two paths through RRF. The minimum relevance value takes effect only under semantic search or when result reranking is used. The citation limit is measured in tokens. Cited content is output as an array and can have length 0, meaning the downstream path still runs when nothing is retrieved. Retrieval does not perform permission filtering, and a similarity score does not carry entity isolation or authorization information.
Hypothetical paper exercise sample: on 10 March 2025 a store compliance role organizes a violation notice. The notice text states: "Subject: Store A; Object: product X explanation segment in the livestream room from 20:00 to 21:00 on 5 March 2025; Status: appeal pending submission; Valid scope: this notice covers only that product in that time window." The same batch contains a customer service record stating: "Consumer asked about product X qualification; agent replied that the matter was forwarded to the compliance role." A draft sentence awaits judgment: "Store A completed appeal submission and received platform acceptance on 10 March 2025." No submission receipt or acceptance number appears in the checked materials. The draft sentence and the notice's "appeal pending submission" status do not agree, so the draft sentence is unsupported.
Configuration and implementation checks
| Configuration or check item | Value or action on this page | Basis and boundary |
|---|---|---|
| Associated knowledge bases | Associate only appeal material bases that use the same vector model | The node requires the same vector model; bases with different models are not associated together |
| Search mode | Compare semantic, full-text, and hybrid search per test question | No single mode is assumed to suit all appeal materials |
| Citation limit | This paper exercise starts at 3000 tokens and compares content completeness against 1500 and 6000 | This value is a starting point for this paper exercise, not an official default |
| Minimum relevance | Label relevant and irrelevant samples first, then adjust the threshold | Takes effect only under semantic search or result reranking |
| Question optimization | Compare the original question with the optimized question and check whether the subject was altered | Used for coreference resolution and question expansion |
| Handover state check | Mark each material as pending submission, submitted, or accepted | State fields are compared only for the same subject, same period, and same field |
Three common errors
- Treating a retrieved violation notice as an authorized submission. Input is the hypothetical sample notice above; the comparison is between the field "Status: appeal pending submission" and the draft sentence "completed appeal submission and received platform acceptance"; the observable result is that the two state values are mutually exclusive, so the draft sentence is unsupported.
- Treating "forwarded to the compliance role" in the customer service record as a completed appeal statement. Input is the customer service record text; the comparison object is whether an appeal statement document exists; the observable result is that forwarding and statement drafting are different fields, and the missing statement remains a recorded gap.
- Treating a similarity score as a permission filter. Input is cited content returned by semantic search; the comparison object is the handover authorization state field; the observable result is that the score carries no subject authorization information, so it cannot be used to decide that a role holds an operating permission.
How to verify the setup
- Input the hypothetical sample notice text and the draft sentence; compare "appeal pending submission" with "completed appeal submission and received platform acceptance"; the observable result is that the draft sentence does not agree with the source status, so it is judged unsupported and the evidence gap is preserved.
- Input the hypothetical sample customer service record text; compare whether it states that the appeal statement was drafted; the observable result is that the text only records forwarding and does not state drafting, so the item is judged pending verification.
- Input an explicit paper empty result array []; compare whether the downstream handover checklist can still accept that empty citation; the observable result is that the output path runs and the checklist marks no cited content. This does not claim that a retrieval rule necessarily returns an empty array.
The full-text pipeline may include image description retrieval, image vector retrieval, and reranking as optional paths. These run only when the corresponding image input and model capability exist, and reranking requires a rerank model enabled by the setting. Bases with different vector models are not associated together; the check is to verify the identifier and exclude non-matching bases, then record what was actually observed. RRF is a merge step for hybrid results and is not described as a switch. An unsigned termination is not a completed termination, and a pending request is not an approval.