{
  "example_kind": "original synthetic manual planning case",
  "slug": "evidence-provenance-chain",
  "title": "Trace an acceptance claim to its original artifact",
  "scenario": "Synthetic planning case: An acceptance note refers to raw fixture version r1, its transformation t1 and a summary s1. The current raw file is r2; the recorded identity chain still points to r1.",
  "layout": "protocol",
  "dataset": {
    "heading": "Inspect the invented case records",
    "headers": [
      "Artifact stage",
      "Recorded input identity",
      "Recorded output identity",
      "Current relevance"
    ],
    "rows": [
      [
        "Raw snapshot",
        "Source capture",
        "r1",
        "Earlier version"
      ],
      [
        "Transformation",
        "r1",
        "t1",
        "Derived from earlier raw"
      ],
      [
        "Summary",
        "t1",
        "s1",
        "Earlier chain"
      ],
      [
        "Current raw",
        "Source capture",
        "r2",
        "Needs its own relevant chain"
      ]
    ]
  },
  "derivation": "The recorded chain is r1→t1→s1, while the current input is r2. An unchanged copied conclusion cannot bridge that input identity change without evidence.",
  "result": "The old summary may describe r1 correctly but does not establish acceptance of r2. Keep version and transformation links inspectable, then regenerate or re-review the current chain as required.",
  "boundary": "The decision traces input/transform/output version custody, distinct from merely opening a quoted source or counting independent observations.",
  "limitations": "r1,t1,s1 are synthetic version identities, not cryptographic proofs or product audit features. The chain records derivation applicability only.",
  "sources": [
    "original"
  ],
  "tasks": [
    [
      "Recover source and transformation versions",
      "Evidence owner",
      "The raw snapshot and transformation input/output identities are retained."
    ],
    [
      "Check current-chain applicability",
      "Reviewer",
      "The acceptance claim explicitly names r1 or a verified r2 chain."
    ],
    [
      "Rebuild the necessary evidence",
      "Delivery owner",
      "Changed current input receives the appropriate transformation and receiving review; unchanged historical evidence remains labelled."
    ]
  ],
  "faqs": [
    [
      "Do matching identity tags prove the conclusion is correct?",
      "No. They support which artifact was used; relevance, completeness and correctness require separate checks."
    ],
    [
      "Can a checksum establish trusted authorship?",
      "Not alone. Equal content identity does not establish source authority or truthful interpretation."
    ]
  ],
  "method_references": [
    {
      "id": "original",
      "title": "Original worked-case definitions",
      "scope": "Definitions, policy choices, records and calculations are authored for this worksheet. No external standard, statistical validation or live product measurement is claimed."
    }
  ]
}