What the documents look like
Central chain procurement materials center on headquarters purchasing and distribution. ERP purchase records, WMS inventory status, store POS data and supplier delivery data update daily or weekly. Everyday documents include centralized procurement contracts, replenishment plans, distribution orders and store requisition orders. These materials share three traits: many parties, staged status, and permissions that shift with handover. A distribution order may be submitted, pending review, signed, or effective, and these states are distinct. Retrieval returns reference content only; it does not judge business status.
A hypothetical drill sample illustrates the gap. A chain supply chain center hands over a batch of distribution orders. The material text reads: "Distribution order SC-2025-0417 was submitted by the distribution center on April 17, status pending review. This order is linked to store requisition order YHD-0417-02, requisition quantity 120 boxes. Centralized procurement contract JT-2025-009 has a signing date of April 10; the contract effective date is not stated." The draft sentence to be checked reads: "This distribution order has completed approval and can proceed to distribution." The comparison objects are the distribution order status field and the contract effective date field. Authorization boundary: retrieval returns the above references only and changes no status.
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; check the vector model identifier first, exclude those that do not match, and record the actual observation. Reference content is output as an array and its length can be 0; the output path still runs even when nothing is retrieved.
The minimum relevance score takes effect only under semantic retrieval or when result reranking is used. It is a filter threshold and does not perform permission or entity isolation. Retrieval is not authorization. A form collecting values does not equal a completed approval. Hybrid retrieval merges multiple result paths through RRF; RRF is a fusion process and has no separate switch. Question optimization performs coreference resolution and question expansion and adds one model call.
The optional paths in the overall retrieval flow do not all execute on every request. Image retrieval requires a corresponding image input and model capability. Reranking requires a model and must be enabled according to settings. The same-vector-model requirement for associated knowledge bases does not extend to business registration sites or other external systems.
Configuration and implementation checks
| Configuration item | Hypothetical trial starting point | Reason and comparison method |
|---|---|---|
| Associated knowledge base | Associate one knowledge base containing distribution orders and requisition orders | Check vector model identifiers for consistency first; compare against another knowledge base and exclude mismatches |
| Search mode | Hybrid retrieval | Distribution order numbers need exact hits; compare number recall against pure semantic retrieval |
| Reference limit | 800 tokens | Hypothetical starting point for this trial because distribution orders have many fields; compare with 400 to see whether content is truncated |
| Minimum relevance | 0.35 | Hypothetical starting point for this trial; label relevant and irrelevant samples first, then compare remaining counts against 0.5 |
| Question optimization | Enabled | Handover questions often contain references; compare with disabled to see whether the subject is altered incorrectly |
| Result reranking | Enabled | Second-pass ordering when candidates are many; compare with disabled to see ranking positions |
Three common errors
- Treating "pending review" as "approved." Input is the distribution order text above. Compare the status field value and observe whether the draft sentence writes pending review as completed approval.
- Treating "signing date" as "effective date." Input is the contract text above. Compare the signing date field and the effective date field, and observe whether a definite conclusion is drawn when the effective date is not stated.
- Treating retrieval recall as authorized execution. Input is the reference array returned by retrieval. Compare the reference content against the authorization action and observe whether distribution is asserted as executable on the strength of references alone.
How to verify the setup
- Input the distribution order text above and the draft sentence. Compare the status field value "pending review" against the draft phrase "completed approval." When the field values do not match, judge the draft unsupported and record the evidence gap.
- Input the contract text. Compare "signing date April 10" against "effective date not stated." When the effective date is not stated, judge the matter pending verification and do not supply an effective clause.
- Input the explicit paper input
[]and check how the downstream design handles an empty reference. Observe whether the path runs through. Do not claim that retrieval under a fictional rule necessarily returns[].
These checks use the same hypothetical sample throughout. They record what to compare and what remains unknown; they do not report a completed test, an approval, or any business action.