...
Consider an incorrect PtoU template asserting that a particular chair is an instance of Table. The error was in asserting this PtoU template, not in inserting it into the RTS. Thus, the error was made on the part of the entity designated by iuia (in the PtoU template). Now either this entity (1) really believed that the chair was a table for some reason or (2) made a mistake in picking out a reference to the type Chair (e.g., said "table" when she meant to say "chair" or selected "table" from the dropdown list when she meant to select "chair").
Now, if the entity correcting the error is the same entity as the iuia of the template with the error, then there is the possibility of both change in belief (really believed it was a table when she made the PtoU assertion) and recognition of error (never believed it was a table but just picked the wrong reference somehow).
If the entity correcting the error is a different entity, the same two possibilities exist: the entity may have shared the incorrect belief or it may just have recognized the error (and not have believed it was a table).
We cannot assume either. The remaining question is whether it is worth making the distinction? It would certainly be helpful in the grand scheme of things to capture both, so we could study erroneous beliefs from errors in recording those beliefs.