What the documents look like
Group-buy presale collection takes orders first and organizes procurement and fulfillment afterward. The working documents are the presale product table, the collection result, the procurement plan, and the cutoff notice. Their update rhythm is daily or per session. During operations handover these documents carry two roles at the same time: they state facts about products and sessions, and they record who may continue operating under which status. The retrieval step only recalls relevant content and passes it to the model. It does not decide whether the operator is authorized.
The status words that appear in handover material include pending review, submitted, signed, and effective. Each points to a different fact. When one of them appears in a retrieval result, the others are not established. A retrieval hit is not an approval, and a pending request is not an approval. An unsigned termination is not a completed termination. An offered option is not execution.
Constraints at the retrieval step
The knowledge base search node can associate one or more knowledge bases that use the same vector model. Knowledge bases with different vector models cannot be associated together. Search mode is compared across semantic retrieval, full-text retrieval, and hybrid retrieval for the test question; no single mode is assumed to suit all material. The citation limit is measured in tokens. The minimum relevance value takes effect only in semantic retrieval or when result reranking is used. Question optimization performs coreference resolution and question expansion, and adds one model call before the actual retrieval. Hybrid retrieval merges multiple result paths through RRF. Reranking requires a model and must be enabled by configuration. Image retrieval requires corresponding image input and model capability. A similarity score reflects textual relatedness only; it does not perform permission or entity isolation.
Hypothetical paper exercise sample: the source text of one platform's operations handover material reads "Presale product table V3 was updated at 18:00 on the day before this session's cutoff; the collection result status is pending review; the procurement plan has not yet been generated." The draft sentence to be judged reads "The collection result has passed review, and the procurement plan has been issued." When checking, compare subject, period, and field. The source states only pending review; the draft writes passed review. This is a contradiction between mutually exclusive values in the same field. The procurement plan is not yet generated in the source; the draft writes issued, which is unsupported. If a handover request reads "continue procurement under the reviewed status," that request itself is not authorization. It needs a separate approval and procurement system implementation.
Configuration and implementation checks
| Configuration item | Value or check item on this page | Basis and notes |
|---|---|---|
| Associated knowledge bases | Associate only presale collection knowledge bases that use the same vector model | The node can associate one or more knowledge bases with the same vector model; check identifiers across models and exclude mismatches first |
| Search mode | Hypothetical trial starting point is hybrid retrieval, compared separately with semantic retrieval and full-text retrieval | Compare the three modes against the test question; no single mode is assumed to suit all material |
| Citation limit | Hypothetical trial starting point is a token amount covering the full text of one cutoff notice | Unit is tokens; test with material of different lengths to see whether content is complete |
| Minimum relevance | Label relevant and irrelevant samples first, then set this hypothetical starting point | Takes effect only in semantic retrieval or result reranking; it is a filter threshold |
| Question optimization | Enable for handover follow-up questions containing coreference; compare the original question with the optimized question | Used for coreference resolution and question expansion; check whether the subject was altered |
| Result reranking | After a model is available and the setting is enabled, compare ordering before and after reranking | The rerank score can be used for filtering; requires a model and must be enabled by configuration |
Three common errors
- Treating a retrieval hit as authorization. Input is the handover request "continue procurement under the reviewed status." Compare the collection result field returned by retrieval with the status cited in the request. If the return is pending review while the request writes reviewed, a contradiction between mutually exclusive values in the same field is present. Executable check: read the status field of the returned content, compare it word by word with the status in the request, and record consistent, contradictory, or not stated.
- Writing pending review as effective. Input is the source text "the collection result status is pending review." Compare whether the draft sentence contains wording such as passed review or effective. If it does, the statement is unsupported. Executable check: list every status word in the draft sentence, return each one to the same field in the source, and record a missing evidence gap where the source does not state it.
- Associating knowledge bases across vector models. Input is two knowledge base identifiers. Compare whether their vector model identifiers match. If they do not match, exclude them and do not run cross-model retrieval to compare missed recalls. Executable check: record both model identifiers and the exclusion action; record any observed recall difference separately.
How to verify the setup
- Use the hypothetical sample source text "Presale product table V3 was updated at 18:00 on the day before this session's cutoff; the collection result status is pending review; the procurement plan has not yet been generated" as the retrieval input. Compare whether the returned content contains that status field. If the return is pending review and the draft sentence writes passed review, the contradiction judgment holds. The expectation is to identify the contradiction, without claiming it was actually tested.
- Use the draft sentence "The collection result has passed review, and the procurement plan has been issued" as the object of checking. Compare each status word in it with the same field value in the source. Parts not stated in the source are recorded as unsupported or to be verified. The expectation is to produce a gap list, without inventing authorization or effective clauses.
- Use a paper input of an empty array to check the downstream design. Compare whether the downstream path still runs when the node output citation length is 0, and whether downstream treats an empty result as a conclusion of no authorization. The expectation is to confirm how empty results are handled, without claiming that a fictional rule retrieval necessarily returns an empty array.