Two useful questions about one result
Suppose a dashboard shows a delivery date extracted from a contract. Asking where the date came from points to a particular field or passage. Asking why that date appears on the dashboard requires knowing which records and selection rules contributed to the result. Provenance research explicitly distinguishes these kinds of questions. The distinction is useful because a visible source link can explain location without explaining the reasoning that chose one value over several competing candidates.
Show both the source and the selection
For a proposed ABOLTUS view, the date could link to the exact contract passage while a separate explanation records that the approved amendment superseded the earlier schedule. A reviewer would then see the source of the displayed value and the rule used to prefer it. If the amendment's status is uncertain, the interface should preserve the alternatives rather than invent an authoritative choice. The same principle applies to customer addresses, acceptance conditions and project budgets assembled from multiple organizational documents.
Evaluate the explanation, not only the value
A useful test would include cases where the final value happens to be correct but was selected for the wrong reason. Reviewers should verify whether they can reconstruct the derivation and identify which change would alter the result. These papers provide conceptual foundations, not a ready-made ABOLTUS business rule engine. The intended product direction is an evidence view that answers both origin and selection questions, making it possible to review a derived record without treating a single source hyperlink as a complete explanation.