This is an old revision of the document!
Written by Tyesia P. Alexander, Ph.D. (Email Tyesia.P.Alexander.email@example.com) and John H. Coleman, Ph.D. (Email: John.Coleman@Engility.com)
Edited by Wanda J. Eyre (Email firstname.lastname@example.org) and Claude D. Vance (email: email@example.com)
Submitted December, 4, 2018
An authoritative source of truth is an entity such as a person, governing body, or system that applies expert judgement and rules to proclaim a digital artifact is valid and originates from a legitimate source.
The authoritative source of truth for a digital artifact serves as the primary means of ensuring the credibility and coherence of the digital artifact that its creators share with a variety of stakeholders. Stakeholders from diverse organizations and distributed locations have authorized access to observe, analyze, and use digital artifacts validated by an authoritative source of truth. The owners of digital environments or the community for digital engineering ecosystems provides stakeholders with appropriate access to shared, current, and consistent information over the lifecycle of systems. The authoritative source of truth assures confidence in the quality of the digital artifact across disciplines, domains, and life cycle phases. In order to do so, a digital artifact’s authoritative source of truth should meet four conditions. First, the digital artifact originates from a repository recognized by a governing entity as a System of Record (SoR). The originating repository that satisfies the four conditions for a digital artifact is designated Source of Truth (SoT) for the digital artifact . Second, the majority of experts legitimizes the SoT’s credibility, accuracy, and trustworthiness. Finally, the SoT meets the “criteria of truth” . For example, the Model Based Engineering (MBE) domain may meet the criteria of truth when most stakeholders agree that the preponderance of evidence upholds the validity of the digital artifact because it represents a commonly accepted perspective of reality . Third, a digital artifact’s source is an authoritative source of truth when most experts agree that the source is legitimate and that the digital artifact’s content is valid. Finally, enabling the exchange of digital artifacts should originate from technological systems that maintain its integrity such that it meets the conditions for validity of digital artifacts and the legitimacy of sources.
An Authoritative Source of Truth (ASoT) architecture provides the framework to ensure the validity and truthfulness of digital artifacts as they are managed throughout their lifecycle and the integrity of the enabling technological systems. According to a presentation by participants of an Air Force Study , the ASoT architecture owners should organize it according to technical platforms or domains and not by specific programs. The platform or domain focus of the ASoT architecture maximizes the usability of the digital artifacts by the communities of practicing engineers . A governing entity that determines Systems of Record (SoRs) does so on the basis of digital artifacts used in its domain. For example, SoRs may include a requirements database, engineering cost data, a model-based systems engineering (MBSE) environment, and computer aided design (CAD) systems for transport aircraft. In order to satisfy the conditions for authority, the ASoT architecture must maintain the integrity of these technological systems in order to ensure that one – and only – one SoR exists for each digital artifact. As such, there is a one-to-many relationship between an ASoT and many digital artifacts.
Many articles define the physical architectures of an authoritative source of truth or some alternative , .  , . The authors summarize many of the alternatives in the Similar Concepts and Definitions section below. Many forms of implementation fall in the categories of centralized, distributed, or federated .
The need to define ASoT for digital artifacts affirms that digital artifacts are not absolute truth. Moreover, most enterprises and ecosystems have no single source for all digital artifacts. Thus, the governance of ASoT must address the many challenges organizations will face when establishing and using an authorized source that relies on systems with relative truths. A key aspect of governance of the authoritative sources of truth is defining the entities that have authority and explicitly specifying what authority those entities possess. Again, an entity may be a person, group, organization, a technology-based system, or any combination thereof. ASoT governance involves identifying which repositories will serve as SoR for what type of digital artifacts and the stewardship of those SoRs. Governance should also determine what types of graphical and non-graphical information for which each SoR will serve as the authoritative source. Ultimately, governance should define the relationship between the SoTs and SoR’s for digital artifacts. It should seek agreement on methods for establishing SoTs with truthful, high quality and accurate digital artifact holdings. The governance should create rules to establish and distinguish the originator, owner, or steward of the digital artifacts and ASoT. It needs to define methods of identifying and restricting “rogue sources” of digital artifacts. Governance needs to establish means for stakeholders to get access to the authoritative source of truth for the digital artifacts they need in order to perform their assigned responsibilities. These are but a few of the challenges the governance for the ASoT must resolve.
Authoritative Source of Information as stated by USLegal.com gives the following description:
Single Source of Truth as stated by J. Spacey gives the following description:
Master Data Management as stated by the Gartner Company gives the following description:
Data Federation Software as stated by TechTarget.com gives the following description:
System of Record (SOR) as stated by WhatIs.com gives the following description:
 S. Kudva, “The Difference Between System of Record and Source of Truth,” 31 March 2016. [Online]. Available: https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/difference-between-system-record-source-truth-santosh-kudva/. [Accessed 16 November 2018].
 W. S. Sahakian and M. L. Sahakian, Ideas of the Great Philosphers, New York, NY: Barnes & Nobel, 1993.
 Wikipedia, “Truth,” Wikipedia.ort, 2018. [Online]. Available: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Truth. [Accessed 16 November 2018].
 C. Sharbaugh, “USAF Digtial Engineering Ecosystem: AFMC/EN and Center for Analysis Sponsored Assessement,” in The November 2018 Office of the Secretary of Defense (OSD), Digital Engineering Working Group (DEWG) Meeting Presentations, Alexandria, VA, 2018.
 US Legal.com, “Authoritative Sources,” 2016. [Online]. Available: https://legalresearch.uslegal.com/authoritative-sources/. [Accessed 27 November 2018].
 J. Spacey, ”“What is a Single Source Of Truth?”,“ Simplicable, 8 November 2016. [Online]. Available: https://simplicable.com/new/single-source-of-truth. [Accessed 19 November 2018].
 Gartner, “Master Data Management (MDM),” Gartner IT Glossary, 2018. [Online]. Available: https://www.gartner.com/it-glossary/master-data-management-mdm/. [Accessed 19 November 2018].
 TechTarget, “Data Federation Software,” TechTarget, 2018. [Online]. Available: https://searchdatamanagement.techtarget.com/definition/data-federation-technology. [Accessed 19 November 2018].
 WhatIs.com, “System of Record (SOR),” TechTarget, 2018. [Online]. Available: https://whatis.techtarget.com/definition/system-of-record-SOR. [Accessed 19 November 2018].
 R. Westman, “What Constitutes an Authoritative Source?,” 2 September 2009. [Online]. Available: https://csrc.nist.gov/csrc/media/events/privilege-management-workshop/documents/presentations/roger_westman.pdf. [Accessed 27 November 2018].
 S. Zobell, “Why Digital Transformations Fail: Closing The $900 Billion Hole In Enterprise Strategy,” Forbes, 13 March 2018. [Online]. Available: https://www.forbes.com/sites/forbestechcouncil/2018/03/13/why-digital-transformations-fail-closing-the-900-billion-hole-in-enterprise-strategy/#44ee68727b8b. [Accessed 27 November 2018].
 P. Johnson, R. Orzechowski and B. Roger, “M&S Workbench - A Foundation for a Modeling and Simulation Digital Engineering Ecosystem,” in MODSIM World 2017: Modeling and Simulation in the Age of Data, Virginia Beach, VA, 2017.
 Office of the Deputy Assistant Secretaary of Defense for Systems Engineering, “Digital Engineering Strategy,” Department of Defense, Washington, DC, 2018.
 K. Kushiyama, “CERDEC Enhances C4ISR Product Lifecycle data Management Capabilities,” U.S. Army, Communications-Electronics Research, Development and Engineering Center, 6 June 2014. [Online]. Available: https://www.cerdec.army.mil/news_and_media/CERDEC_enhances_C4ISR_product_lifecycle_data_management_capabilities/. [Accessed 27 November 2018].
 Tableau Software, “Journey to a Single Source of Truth at the FAA,” YouTube.com, 2 June 2014. [Online]. Available: https://youtu.be/4XGjQY0uBdg. [Accessed 3 December 2018].
 BIMobject®, “BIMobject Talks – Single Source of Truth,” YouTube, 30 May 2017. [Online]. Available: https://youtu.be/ELF3wjomsfw. [Accessed 03 November 2018].
 Department of Defense, “DoD Directive 8320.2: Data Sharing in a Net-Centric Department of Defense,” Department of Defense, Washington, DC, 2004.
 The Data Goverance Institute, “Defintions of Data Goverance,” The Data Goverance Institute, 2018. [Online]. Available: http://www.datagovernance.com/adg_data_governance_definition/. [Accessed 27 November 2018].