Citation view
Every citation in the answer is a superscript number that hovers a preview:- Source (document title, memory space name, or “graph fact”).
- Exact quoted passage.
- Score (relevance in this retrieval).
- Click to jump to the source in a side panel.
Grounded vs. ungrounded regions
The Trace highlights the answer with two colors:- Green — this sentence is backed by a retrieved chunk or graph fact.
- Gray — this sentence has no direct citation. Could be a bridging sentence, or could be a hallucination.
Citation faithfulness
For each cited region, the Trace also shows a faithfulness score — does the cited chunk actually say what the Agent claims it says? Computed by a small verifier model. Scores:- 1.0 — perfect match.
- 0.7-1.0 — supported (paraphrased but consistent).
- 0.4-0.7 — partial support (parts of the claim are in the source, parts aren’t).
- < 0.4 — misquote or overreach.
Verified vs. unverified claims
Separate from citations, if the Agent has a causal graph attached, the answer’s factual claims are checked against the graph:- Verified — the graph confirms.
- Contradicted — the graph disagrees.
- Unchecked — no matching variable or edge in the graph.
Missing citations
If the Agent stated a fact but didn’t cite it — and retrieval had a relevant chunk it could have cited — the Trace flags it: “Missing citation: ‘Refund policy is 30 days’ — matching chunk:policy-2026.pdf#refunds.”
Turn into a Signal to improve future prompts.
Citation formats
The default format is superscript numbers. Configurable per Agent to:- Inline URLs.
- Footnote-style at end of answer.
- Structured (JSON) — for programmatic consumers.
Debugging “why isn’t this cited”
If you know a source has the answer but the Agent didn’t cite it, work back through the trace:- Did retrieval return this source? See Diagnostics.
- Did it rank high enough to be in the top-K?
- Did the Agent decide it was relevant enough to cite?