Paper detail

A Deterministic Agentic Workflow for HS Tariff Classification: Multi-Dimensional Rule Reasoning with Interpretable Decisions

Harmonized System (HS) tariff classification is a high-stakes, expert-level task in which a free-form product description must be mapped to a specific six- or eight-digit code under the General Interpretive Rules (GIR), section notes, chapter notes, and Explanatory Notes. The difficulty lies not in knowledge volume but in *multi-dimensional rule reasoning*: a correct classification must satisfy competing priority rules along several axes simultaneously, including material, form, function, essential character, the part-versus-whole boundary, and specific listing versus residual headings. End-to-end prompting of large language models fails characteristically by resolving one axis while ignoring the priority constraints on the others. We present a *deterministic agentic workflow* in contrast to self-planning agents: the control flow is fixed, language model calls are confined to narrow stages, and reflection and verification are retained as local mechanisms. This design yields interpretability by construction--each decision is decomposed into stage-wise structured outputs with verbatim citation of the chapter or section notes that bear on it. The architecture combines offline knowledge-engineering of the Chinese HS tariff with an online six-stage pipeline. Evaluated on HSCodeComp at the six-digit level, the workflow reaches 75.0% top-1 and 91.5% top-3 at four digits, and 64.2% top-1 and 78.3% top-3 at six digits with Qwen3.6-plus; an open-weight Qwen3.6-27B-FP8 backbone in non-thinking mode achieves 84.2% four-digit and 77.4% six-digit top-1 agreement with the frontier model. A two-stage manual audit of 226 six-digit disagreements suggests that a non-trivial fraction of HSCodeComp ground-truth labels may deviate from HS general rules; full adjudication records are released in the appendix as preliminary findings for community review.

preprint2026arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.