Processes as Causal Glue in a Framework for Ontology-Based Responsibility Attribution Rinke Hoekstra Joost Breuker
Overview <ul><li>Introduction </li></ul><ul><li>Framework </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Functional Ontology of Law  (Andre Valente...
Introduction <ul><li>Exercise in Computational Jurisprudence </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Which information, </li></ul></ul><ul><...
Functional Ontology of Law Case Epistemology
LRI-Core <ul><li>Core Ontology </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Core concepts:  Norm, role, document, … </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Re...
Main Categories <ul><li>Physical Concepts </li></ul><ul><li>Mental Concepts </li></ul><ul><li>Roles (Social Concepts) </li...
Example Case : The Air Rifle <ul><li>“ In breach of a statute forbidding the sale to an infant under the age of 16 of dang...
Legal Case Description Situation Situation Ontology State Case Description
Processes as Causal Glue <ul><li>Basic hypothesis:  Two events are causally related if and only if there exists some  proc...
Causation by Process <ul><li>Physical causation </li></ul><ul><li>Agent causation </li></ul><ul><li>Interpersonal causatio...
Recognizing Processes Event Situation Situation State 1 State 2 Case Description Ontology Process Object Object pre post m...
Actions & Intentionality Situation Situation Case Description Ontology Action Object Object pre post mapping mapping Trans...
Attributing Responsibility Situation Situation Case Description Ontology Action Object Object pre post mapping mapping Tra...
Equilibria, Attempts & Negligence <ul><li>Equilibria: no  change,  two states? </li></ul><ul><li>Attempts: partial actions...
  DIRECT <ul><li>Discovery of REsponsibilty and CausaliTy </li></ul><ul><li>Built using Protégé-OWL 2.1 API (Java) </li></...
Example <ul><li>No situations specified    loose states </li></ul><ul><li>No events specified </li></ul><ul><li>Purely ph...
Example Process
Smurfification yellow2green large2small large2small green2blue green2blue
Smurfification Case <ul><li>Three states of the same object (individual) </li></ul>
 
Conclusions <ul><li>Recognition of physical processes seems feasible for small number of participants  </li></ul><ul><li>E...
(Near) Future Work <ul><li>Group states into situations </li></ul><ul><li>Specification of  the occurrence of events </li>...
That’s it <ul><li>LRI-Core available at:  http://www.leibnizcenter.org/ontostore/lricore </li></ul>
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in …5
×

Processes as Causal Glue in a Framework for Ontology Based Responsibility Attribution

450 views

Published on

Direct Icail2005 Loait Ws 20050606

Published in: Technology, Education
0 Comments
1 Like
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

No Downloads
Views
Total views
450
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
1
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
0
Comments
0
Likes
1
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide
  • Legal minimalists? Liability attributed strictly on the basis of comparing the agents participating in a situation with a set of norms. What really happens does not play any role of significance. Although such a view might even be sensible when humans interpret, and decide cases,
  • Michott
  • The only thing missing here is the verdict! Als er een systeem zonder vooroordelen aan de hand is Onvolledig op fysiek terrein Wat gebeurt er met de ammunitie? Onvolledig op juridisch terrein Waar zijn de ouders van het 2 e jongetje? Die horen wel voor te komen bij elke juridische handeling... Overcomplete Physical: causal relations are prespecified Legal: legal(istic) qualifications of occurrences (“In breach of a statute...”, “defendant”, “weapon” etc.)
  • Legal Case Description: Minimal description of a collection of states (scenario) Direct can show the causal- and responsibility dependencies between the events that connect the states
  • Action -&gt; Intention Communitcation -&gt; Giving reasons etc.
  • Toegekende (fysieke) properties (tijd, plaats) + Kwalificaties (dat in een bepaalde situatie sprake is van een overtreding): iemand op een plantsoen waar staat dat het niet mag Inherente properties
  • Toegekende (fysieke) properties (tijd, plaats) + Kwalificaties (dat in een bepaalde situatie sprake is van een overtreding): iemand op een plantsoen waar staat dat het niet mag Inherente properties
  • If a Norm is specified that forbids the resulting situation, we know it was the action performed by the agent which caused the violation and we can hold the agent responsible.
  • Do not recognize equilibrial processes untill they suddenly stop, or change Negative causation is
  • Generates 13 processes!
  • Processes as Causal Glue in a Framework for Ontology Based Responsibility Attribution

    1. 1. Processes as Causal Glue in a Framework for Ontology-Based Responsibility Attribution Rinke Hoekstra Joost Breuker
    2. 2. Overview <ul><li>Introduction </li></ul><ul><li>Framework </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Functional Ontology of Law (Andre Valente, 1995) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>LRI-Core Ontology </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Causality Detection: D IRECT </li></ul><ul><ul><li>General idea </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Example </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Future Work & Conclusions </li></ul>
    3. 3. Introduction <ul><li>Exercise in Computational Jurisprudence </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Which information, </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>and how much, </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>is needed for responsibility attribution. </li></ul></ul><ul><li>“ Causal reconstruction is a necessary (though insufficient) requirement for the attribution of responsibility” </li></ul>
    4. 4. Functional Ontology of Law Case Epistemology
    5. 5. LRI-Core <ul><li>Core Ontology </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Core concepts: Norm, role, document, … </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Reuse </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Unifying Framework </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Knowledge Acquisition </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Reasoning </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Commonsense Stance </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Cognitive Science </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Evolution/Design view </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Description Logics (OWL) </li></ul>
    6. 6. Main Categories <ul><li>Physical Concepts </li></ul><ul><li>Mental Concepts </li></ul><ul><li>Roles (Social Concepts) </li></ul><ul><li>(Abstract Concepts) </li></ul><ul><li>Occurrences </li></ul>
    7. 7. Example Case : The Air Rifle <ul><li>“ In breach of a statute forbidding the sale to an infant under the age of 16 of dangerous weapons, the defendant sold an air rifle and ammunition to a boy of 13. The boy's mother told the boy to return the weapon to the defendant and get a refund: on the defendant's refusal to take the rifle back, the boy's mother took it from the boy and hid it. Six months later the boy found it and allowed a playmate to use it, who shot and accidentally wounded the plaintiff, destroying the sight of one eye.” </li></ul><ul><li>(Henningsen v. Markovitz, 1928) </li></ul>
    8. 8. Legal Case Description Situation Situation Ontology State Case Description
    9. 9. Processes as Causal Glue <ul><li>Basic hypothesis: Two events are causally related if and only if there exists some process which explains their occurrence. </li></ul><ul><li> Classifying state-changes (events) in a case description as processes or actions. </li></ul>
    10. 10. Causation by Process <ul><li>Physical causation </li></ul><ul><li>Agent causation </li></ul><ul><li>Interpersonal causation </li></ul><ul><li>Physical process </li></ul><ul><li>Action </li></ul><ul><li>Communication </li></ul><ul><li>Ontology-based: processes are pre-defined </li></ul><ul><li>Recognition of process  evidence of causal relation </li></ul>
    11. 11. Recognizing Processes Event Situation Situation State 1 State 2 Case Description Ontology Process Object Object pre post mapping mapping Transition part
    12. 12. Actions & Intentionality Situation Situation Case Description Ontology Action Object Object pre post mapping mapping Transition part Agent performs Intention
    13. 13. Attributing Responsibility Situation Situation Case Description Ontology Action Object Object pre post mapping mapping Transition part performs Agent F Intention
    14. 14. Equilibria, Attempts & Negligence <ul><li>Equilibria: no change, two states? </li></ul><ul><li>Attempts: partial actions </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Intention/plan to perform an action </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Partial mapping to event structure of intended action </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Negligence (negative causation) </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Hypothetical, counterfactual reasoning (normative) </li></ul></ul>
    15. 15. DIRECT <ul><li>Discovery of REsponsibilty and CausaliTy </li></ul><ul><li>Built using Protégé-OWL 2.1 API (Java) </li></ul><ul><li>DIG interface with the RACER Description Classifier </li></ul><ul><li>Lazy generate and test </li></ul><ul><li>Evaluation of validity by classification </li></ul>
    16. 16. Example <ul><li>No situations specified  loose states </li></ul><ul><li>No events specified </li></ul><ul><li>Purely physical, not legal </li></ul>
    17. 17. Example Process
    18. 18. Smurfification yellow2green large2small large2small green2blue green2blue
    19. 19. Smurfification Case <ul><li>Three states of the same object (individual) </li></ul>
    20. 21. Conclusions <ul><li>Recognition of physical processes seems feasible for small number of participants </li></ul><ul><li>Enforcing restrictions at the transition-level greatly reduces the number of processes that need to be tested. </li></ul>
    21. 22. (Near) Future Work <ul><li>Group states into situations </li></ul><ul><li>Specification of the occurrence of events </li></ul><ul><li>Identity in OWL </li></ul><ul><li>Non-trivial Toy Domain </li></ul><ul><li>More complex problems (Roles, Actions) </li></ul><ul><li>Advanced search/planning strategy </li></ul><ul><li>Further extend & complete LRI-Core </li></ul><ul><li>Legal views on relation btw. causation, responsibility & liability (Lehmann, 2001) </li></ul>
    22. 23. That’s it <ul><li>LRI-Core available at: http://www.leibnizcenter.org/ontostore/lricore </li></ul>

    ×