Skip to content
Get in touch
A dotted trail begins at a landscape, a person recording information, and a camera drone. It passes through filtering, processing, review, and packaging steps before ending at a blue gem held on a tray.
Reviewed visual · version 1

RS Glossary

Data Provenance

Data provenance is documented evidence of where data or content came from, how it was collected or created, and which material transformations, transfers, or decisions shaped its current form.

Review state
Reviewed in POC
Freshness
Current
Version
2
  • Data Provenance
  • Provenance

Remember it this wayProvenance tells the story of how the data got here.

In plain language

Provenance is the history that travels with information. It helps a reviewer trace the source, custody, edits, generation steps, and other changes rather than treating the current file as context-free.

Why it matters

Without lineage, teams cannot reliably evaluate authority, consent, licensing, freshness, integrity, privacy, or whether human and synthetic material have been mixed.

Example

A training dataset records the original repositories, license terms, collection dates, filtering steps, generated additions, and each version used in a model run.

Common misconception

Provenance does not prove that data is accurate, lawful, or appropriate. It provides evidence needed to evaluate those questions.

Related terms

Sources

Learn more

  • Contrast the lineage of information with the broader contributors captured by [[capability-provenance|Capability Provenance]].

Public history

45 recorded events · 45 public summaries

  1. A potential shared concept was discussed and selected for initial glossary drafting.

  2. The captured candidate received a complete initial draft and entered section-level human review.

  3. Radar reviewed the initial definition draft for human consideration.

  4. Radar reviewed the initial plain-language-explanation draft for human consideration.

  5. Radar reviewed the initial why-it-matters draft for human consideration.

  6. Radar reviewed the initial example draft for human consideration.

  7. Radar reviewed the initial common-misconception draft for human consideration.

  8. Radar reviewed the initial remember-it-this-way draft for human consideration.

  9. Radar reviewed the initial related-terms draft for human consideration.

  10. Radar reviewed the initial sources draft for human consideration.

  11. Radar reviewed the initial learn-more draft for human consideration.

  12. A proposal was opened for section-level human review while preserving the current version.

  13. A human reviewer opened a proposed revision while preserving the current approved or captured version.

  14. definition approved by a human reviewer.

  15. plain-language-explanation approved by a human reviewer.

  16. why-it-matters approved by a human reviewer.

  17. example approved by a human reviewer.

  18. common-misconception approved by a human reviewer.

  19. remember-it-this-way approved by a human reviewer.

  20. related-terms approved by a human reviewer.

  21. sources returned for revision.

  22. learn-more approved by a human reviewer.

  23. Requested wording was prepared without changing approved or existing sections.

  24. Radar reviewed the pending sources section for human consideration.

  25. Radar must rereview the complete data-provenance term after an accepted text change.

  26. Radar must rereview the complete data-provenance term after an accepted text change.

  27. Radar must rereview the complete data-provenance term after an accepted text change.

  28. Radar must rereview the complete data-provenance term after an accepted text change.

  29. Radar must rereview the complete data-provenance term after an accepted text change.

  30. Radar must rereview the complete data-provenance term after an accepted text change.

  31. Radar must rereview the complete data-provenance term after an accepted text change.

  32. Radar must rereview the complete data-provenance term after an accepted text change.

  33. Radar must rereview the complete data-provenance term after an accepted text change.

  34. sources approved by a human reviewer.

  35. sources approved wording became the current section text.

  36. All section gates are approved; content version 2 is now a fully approved term.

  37. Radar rereviewed the human-approved definition wording for this exact version.

  38. Radar rereviewed the human-approved plain-language-explanation wording for this exact version.

  39. Radar rereviewed the human-approved why-it-matters wording for this exact version.

  40. Radar rereviewed the human-approved example wording for this exact version.

  41. Radar rereviewed the human-approved common-misconception wording for this exact version.

  42. Radar rereviewed the human-approved remember-it-this-way wording for this exact version.

  43. Radar rereviewed the human-approved related-terms wording for this exact version.

  44. Radar rereviewed the human-approved sources wording for this exact version.

  45. Radar rereviewed the human-approved learn-more wording for this exact version.

Source: vault/Glossary/terms/data-provenance/term.md · sha256:1da75725f3b22f9e63f27a6a150855ddb7fabac4b3f9309dd3b0365c3c3fc528 · Release: rs-glossary-glossary-team-poc-0.5.5-2026-09-02