Source Resolution Table¶
Reference table — instantiates Contingency-Visibility Across Scales
Catalogs each source by the analytical resolution it can actually support, so evidence is matched to the scale of the question instead of stretched across it.
A Source Resolution Table is a reference table that lists each available source alongside the resolution it can genuinely support — how fine in time, space, and actor detail its evidence resolves, and therefore which scales of question it can and cannot answer. Its defining function is matchmaking between evidence and question: it stops a source that resolves only at the decade-and-region grain from being used to answer a day-and-individual question, and the reverse. It neither reconstructs events nor draws trends; it certifies what each piece of evidence is entitled to say.
Example¶
A team reconstructing the decline of a settlement builds a Source Resolution Table before writing. Row by row: a single trench's stratigraphy resolves to individual building phases at one location (fine spatial, medium temporal, no regional reach); a regional pollen core resolves to century-scale vegetation change across the whole valley (coarse temporal, broad spatial, no site detail); a cache of dated coins resolves to a narrow decade but only where they were dropped; a later chronicle names individuals but is two centuries removed and secondhand.
The table makes the mismatch explicit: the pollen core cannot speak to "what happened in the final decade at the citadel," and the coins cannot speak to "regional climate." When a draft sentence later claims a valley-wide drought caused the citadel's specific abandonment, the table shows that no single source resolves both the regional cause and the local event — the claim needs two sources at two resolutions, not one stretched across both. That catch is the table's whole reason to exist.
How it works¶
One row per source; columns for spatial resolution, temporal grain, actor / agent visibility, proximity (primary or secondary, contemporaneous or later), and — the operative column — "questions it can answer / cannot answer." That last column binds each source to a scale band, so any downstream claim can be checked for whether a cited source actually resolves at the claim's scale. It is a resolution ledger, not a reliability audit: a source can be perfectly trustworthy and still resolve at the wrong grain, and the table is built to surface exactly that distinction.
Tuning parameters¶
- Resolution axes — temporal only, or temporal plus spatial plus actor plus proximity. More axes catch more mismatches; fewer is quicker.
- Grain bands — how many resolution levels each axis is bucketed into. Finer bands locate a source precisely; coarser bands are faster to assign.
- Answerability strictness — how conservatively you fill the "cannot answer" column. Strict prevents overreach; lenient keeps more sources in play.
- Update cadence — one-time, or revised as new sources arrive. Revising keeps the table honest as the evidence base grows.
When it helps, and when it misleads¶
Its strength is that it is the direct cure for evidence-resolution mismatch — it stops the analysis from answering a fine-grained question with coarse evidence, or vice versa, the error that silently corrupts cross-scale accounts.
Its failure mode is that a resolution table can be mistaken for a reliability ranking, so a coarse-but-solid source gets discounted next to a fine-but-shaky one; resolution and trustworthiness are orthogonal. The classic misuse is invoking the table to exclude an inconvenient source on "resolution" grounds when the real objection is that its content is unwelcome. The guard is to keep grain-and-extent[n1] strictly separate from source criticism — the table certifies what scale a source resolves, never whether it is true — and to run a distinct reliability check alongside it.
How it implements the components¶
source_resolution_table— the mechanism is this component realized: the ledger binding each source to the resolution it supports.temporal_granularity_control— its temporal-grain column sets, per source, the finest time resolution the evidence licenses, controlling how fine a temporal claim that source may support.
It does NOT lay sources or events out on nested time bands, nor reconcile the scales into one reading — that is scale_frame_pair and cross_scale_reconciliation_rule, owned by Nested Scale Timeline; both mechanisms tune temporal grain, but this table sets the grain a single source may claim, while the timeline uses grain to arrange the whole sequence.
Related¶
- Instantiates: Contingency-Visibility Across Scales — the table is the input that keeps every scale-specific claim matched to evidence that can actually resolve it.
- Sibling mechanisms: Nested Scale Timeline · Aggregate Trend Overlay · Hinge-Point Timeline · Actor-Constraint Map · Counterfactual Sensitivity Matrix · Branch-Pruning Protocol · Paired Micro/Macro Case Study · Interpretive Weighting Memo · Scale-Shift Review Prompt
Editorial Notes¶
Form Classification¶
Form family: Representation, Specification & Plan
Rationale: Source Resolution Table operates as a static representation, map, specification, schema, or prospective plan that externalizes information because it catalogs each source by the analytical resolution it can actually support, so evidence is matched to the scale of the question instead of stretched across it.
Independent corroboration: The frozen evidence defines Source Resolution Table as 'Catalogs each source by the analytical resolution it can actually support, so evidence is matched to the scale of the question instead of stretched across it', so its operative form is Representation, Specification & Plan.
Nearest alternative: Record, Log & Register — Source Resolution Table includes features of a persistent ledger, log, register, or case record that preserves history and traceability, but its defining operation is a static representation, map, specification, schema, or prospective plan that externalizes information.
Review outcome: Independent reviewer agreement; medium confidence.
Origin Attribution¶
Primary origin: Library & Information Science
Origin pattern: Cross-disciplinary synthesis
Present-day reach: Universal
Rationale: Cataloging the granularity each source can support is information-quality and metadata governance.
Related originating lineages:
- Computer Science & Software Engineering — Computer science and software-engineering practice supplies a parallel or contributing lineage for the mechanism's defining operation: catalogs each source by the analytical resolution it can actually support, so evidence is matched to the scale of the question instead of stretched across it.
- Data Science & Analytics — Aggregation level constrains analytical questions and joins.
- History & Historiography — Sources differ in temporal, spatial, and social resolution.
- Statistics & Experimental Design — Sampling and measurement resolution bound valid inference.
Review resolution: The blind reviewers agree that library_information_science is the primary origin and differ only on alternate origin disagreement, origin mode disagreement. I preserve every independently explained alternate from both records rather than imposing a numeric cap. I retain cross_disciplinary_synthesis because the combined evidence shows material contributions from several lineages. The broader reach of universal records portability separately from historical provenance; encyclopedia_synthesis=true preserves the affirmative synthesis judgment where either reviewer identified one.
Encyclopedia synthesis: The exact catalogued form synthesizes established practice rather than reproducing a single standard historical label.
Review outcome: Reconciled after independent review; medium confidence.
Notes¶
[n1] In landscape ecology, grain is the finest resolution at which data are recorded and extent is the total scope of the study; a measurement can only resolve patterns coarser than its grain and no larger than its extent. Applied to sources, grain-and-extent fixes what scale of question a piece of evidence is entitled to answer — independent of whether the evidence is reliable. ↩