hierarchy-aware-structural-grounding

name

hierarchy-aware structural grounding

description

Use this skill when the user asks questions about specific articles, sections, or clauses in complex documents like laws, technical manuals, or company policies. Trigger it for requests like 'what does section 5 say about X', 'find the penalty for violating article 10', 'look up the rules in chapter 3', or 'connect different parts of the law that mention each other'. This skill is specifically for identifying information that is split across a hierarchy (Titles, Chapters, Sections) or linked via internal cross-references.

Skill: hierarchy-aware structural grounding

1. Capability Definition & Real Case

• Professional Definition: The ability to navigate and retrieve information from documents with a rigid hierarchical structure (e.g., Acts, Codes, Manuals) by preserving the relationship between parent nodes (Chapters, Titles) and leaf nodes (Sections). This capability solves 'Hidden Hierarchical Information'—where identical text appears in different chapters—and 'Nested Structure'—where one section explicitly references another to complete its meaning.
• Dimension Hierarchy: Specialized Knowledge Navigation -> Corpus-Specific Retrieval & Reasoning -> hierarchy-aware structural grounding

Real Case

[Case 1]

• Initial Environment: A RAG context containing the Thai Criminal Code, where Section 260 describes the punishment for selling forged tickets, but the definition of the illegal act itself is found in the referenced Sections 258 and 259.
• Real Question: What is the penalty for someone who sells a ticket arising from an act as provided for in Section 258?
• Real Trajectory: 1. Analyze Section 260 to identify it as the penalty provision. 2. Detect the nested reference to Section 258. 3. Retrieve Section 258 to understand the underlying illegal act (forgery of government tickets). 4. Combine the 'act' from Section 258 with the 'penalty' from Section 260. 5. Conclude the final answer regarding imprisonment and fine terms.
• Real Answer: Whoever sells a ticket defined under Section 258 shall be punished with imprisonment [terms from Sec 260] and/or a fine [amount from Sec 260].
• Why this demonstrates the capability: This demonstrates the ability to resolve 'Nested Structures' where a section is semantically incomplete without its referenced siblings. The agent must perform a recursive lookup to bridge the gap between 'behavior' and 'penalty'.

---

[Case 2]

• Initial Environment: A RAG corpus of the Revenue Code containing two identical-looking sections about 'additional charges for late payment' (1.5% per month), but one applies to 'Assessed Taxes' (Chapter 2) and the other to 'Value-Added Tax' (Chapter 4).
• Real Question: What is the additional charge if I pay my Value-Added Tax late?
• Real Trajectory: 1. Search for 'late payment additional charge' and 'Value-Added Tax'. 2. Encounter Section 27 and Section 89/1. 3. Identify that Section 27 belongs to the 'General Procedures' chapter while Section 89/1 is explicitly placed within 'Chapter 4: Value-Added Tax'. 4. Select Section 89/1 as the specific law despite the textual similarity to Section 27. 5. Formulate the answer based on the hierarchical placement.
• Real Answer: The person shall incur an additional charge of 1.5% per month on the tax amount according to Section 89/1.
• Why this demonstrates the capability: This illustrates the resolution of 'Hidden Hierarchical Information.' Without hierarchy awareness, a retriever might provide Section 27, which is factually similar but legally misplaced for a VAT-specific query.

---

[Case 3]

• Initial Environment: A financial legislation corpus where Section 933 describes the 'date of acceptance' for a bill, but the actual term 'bill of exchange' is only defined in the preceding Section 932.
• Real Question: If an acceptance of a bill doesn't have a date, what is the legal deemed date?
• Real Trajectory: 1. Identify the core query intent: 'acceptance date' and 'no date'. 2. Search for 'date of acceptance' rules. 3. Retrieve Section 933. 4. Recognize that Section 933 is a 'dangling leaf' node that needs context from the parent or preceding section (Section 932) to confirm the subject is a bill of exchange. 5. Integrate the sections to provide a grounded legal response.
• Real Answer: According to Section 933 of the Civil and Commercial Code, the last day of the prescribed period for acceptance shall be deemed the date of acceptance.
• Why this demonstrates the capability: This demonstrates 'Hierarchy-aware Chunking' logic. It proves the agent can handle leaf nodes that assume information from the immediate local hierarchy (preceding context) to remain precise.

Pipeline Execution Instructions

To synthesize data for this capability, you must strictly follow a 3-phase pipeline. Do not hallucinate steps. Read the corresponding reference file for each phase sequentially:

1. Phase 1: Environment Exploration Read the exploration guidelines to discover raw knowledge seeds: references/EXPLORATION.md

2. Phase 2: Trajectory Selection Once Phase 1 is complete, read the selection criteria to evaluate the trajectory: references/SELECTION.md

3. Phase 3: Data Synthesis Once a trajectory passes Phase 2, read the synthesis instructions to generate the final data: references/SYNTHESIS.md