research-article

Towards compliance checking in reified I/O logic via SHACL

Author:

Livio RobaldoAuthors Info & Claims

ICAIL '21: Proceedings of the Eighteenth International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Law

Pages 215 - 219

https://doi.org/10.1145/3462757.3466065

Published: 27 July 2021 Publication History

Abstract

Reified Input/Output logic [29] has been recently proposed to handle natural language meaning in Input/Output logic [17]. So far, the research in reified I/O logic has focused only on KR issues, specifically on how to use the formalism for representing contextual meaning of norms (see [28]). This paper is the first attempt to investigate reasoning in reified I/O logic, specifically compliance checking. This paper investigates how to model reified I/O logic formulae in Shapes Constraint Language (SHACL) [2], a recent W3C recommendation for validating and reasoning with RDFs/OWL.

References

[1]

2012. Web Ontology Language (OWL). Technical Report. W3C. https://www.w3.org/OWL

[2]

2017. Shapes constraint language (SHACL). Technical Report. W3C. https://www.w3.org/TR/shacl

[3]

Cesare Bartolini, Andra Giurgiu, Gabriele Lenzini, and Livio Robaldo. 2016. Towards Legal Compliance by Correlating Standards and Laws with a Semi-automated Methodology. In BNCAI (Communications in Computer and Information Science, Vol. 765). Springer, 47--62.

[4]

G. Boella, L. di Caro, L. Humphreys, L. Robaldo, and L. van der Torre. 2012. NLP Challenges for Eunomos, a Tool to Build and Manage Legal Knowledge. Proceedings of the International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation.

[5]

Guido Boella, Luigi Di Caro, Daniele Rispoli, and Livio Robaldo. 2013. A System for Classifying Multi-label Text into EuroVoc. In Proceedings of the Fourteenth International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Law (Rome, Italy) (ICAIL '13). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 239--240.

Digital Library

[6]

Piero A. Bonatti, Luca Ioffredo, Iliana M. Petrova, Luigi Sauro, and Ida Sri Rejeki Siahaan. 2020. Real-time reasoning in OWL2 for GDPR compliance. Artificial Intelligence 289 (2020).

[7]

Julien Corman, Juan L. Reutter, and Ognjen Savkovic. 2018. Semantics and Validation of Recursive SHACL. In The Semantic Web - ISWC 2018 - 17th International Semantic Web Conference, Monterey, CA, USA, October 8--12, 2018, Proceedings, Part I (Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Vol. 11136), Denny Vrandecic, Kalina Bontcheva, Mari Carmen Suárez-Figueroa, Valentina Presutti, Irene Celino, Marta Sabou, Lucie-Aimée Kaffee, and Elena Simperl (Eds.). Springer, 318--336.

[8]

Christophe Debruyne, Harshvardhan J. Pandit, Dave Lewis, and Declan O'Sullivan. 2019. Towards Generating Policy-Compliant Datasets. In 13th IEEE International Conference on Semantic Computing, ICSC 2019, Newport Beach, CA, USA, January 30 - February 1, 2019. IEEE, 199--203.

[9]

Enrico Francesconi and Guido Governatori. 2019. Legal Compliance in a Linked Open Data Framework. In Legal Knowledge and Information Systems - JURIX 2019: The Thirty-second Annual Conference, Madrid, Spain, December 11--13, 2019 (Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence and Applications, Vol. 322), Michal Araszkiewicz and Víctor Rodríguez-Doncel (Eds.). IOS Press, 175--180.

[10]

G. Governatori, F. Olivieri, A. Rotolo, and S. Scannapieco. 2013. Computing Strong and Weak Permissions in Defeasible Logic. Journal of Philosophical Logic 6, 42 (2013), 799--829.

[11]

Jörg Hansen. 2014. Reasoning about permission and obligation. In David Makinson on Classical Methods for Non-Classical Problems, S. O. Hansson (Ed.). Outstanding Contributions to Logic Volume 3, Springer, 287--333.

[12]

J.R. Hobbs and A.S. Gordon. 2017. A formal theory of commonsense psychology, how people think people think. Cambridge University Press.

[13]

J. R. Hobbs. 2008. Deep Lexical Semantics. In Proc. of the 9th International Conference on Intelligent Text Processing and Computational Linguistics (CICLing-2008). Haifa, Israel.

Digital Library

[14]

R Kowalski and M Sergot. 1986. A Logic-based Calculus of Events. New Generation Computing 4, 1 (1986), 67--95.

Digital Library

[15]

Tomer Libal and Alexander Steen. 2020. Towards an Executable Methodology for the Formalization of Legal Texts. In Logic and Argumentation - Third International Conference, CLAR 2020, Hangzhou, China, April 6--9, 2020, Proceedings (Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Vol. 12061), Mehdi Dastani, Huimin Dong, and Leon van der Torre (Eds.). Springer, 151--165.

[16]

David Makinson and Leendert van der Torre. 2001. Constraints for input/output logics. Journal of Philosophical Logic 30, 2 (2001), 155--185.

[17]

David Makinson and Leendert W. N. van der Torre. 2000. Input/Output Logics. Journal of Philosophical Logic 29, 4 (2000), 383--408.

[18]

Rohan Nanda, Luigi Di Caro, Guido Boella, Hristo Konstantinov, Tenyo Tyankov, Daniel Traykov, Hristo Hristov, Francesco Costamagna, Llio Humphreys, Livio Robaldo, and Michele Romano. 2017. A Unifying Similarity Measure for Automated Identification of National Implementations of European Union Directives. In Proceedings of the 16th Edition of the International Conference on Articial Intelligence and Law (ICAIL 2017). Association for Computing Machinery.

Digital Library

[19]

Monica Palmirani, Michele Martoni, Arianna Rossi, Cesare Bartolini, and Livio Robaldo. 2018. PrOnto: Privacy Ontology for Legal Compliance. In Proceedings of the 18^th European Conference on Digital Government (ECEG).

[20]

Harshvardhan Jitendra Pandit, Declan O'Sullivan, and Dave Lewis. 2018. Exploring GDPR Compliance Over Provenance Graphs Using SHACL. In Proc. of the Posters and Demos Track of the 14th International Conference on Semantic Systems co-located with the 14th International Conference on Semantic Systems (SEMANTiCS 2018), Vienna, Austria, September 10--13, 2018 (CEUR Workshop Proceedings, Vol. 2198), Ali Khalili and Maria Koutraki (Eds.).

[21]

Harshvardhan J. Pandit, Declan O'Sullivan, and Dave Lewis. 2019. Test-Driven Approach Towards GDPR Compliance. In Semantic Systems. The Power of AI and Knowledge Graphs, Maribel Acosta, Philippe Cudré-Mauroux, Maria Maleshkova, Tassilo Pellegrini, Harald Sack, and York Sure-Vetter (Eds.). Springer International Publishing, 19--33.

[22]

Xavier Parent and Leon van der Torre. 2014. Aggregative Deontic Detachment for Normative Reasoning. In Principles of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning: Proceedings of the Fourteenth International Conference, KR 2014, Vienna, Austria, July 20--24, 2014.

[23]

Xavier Parent and Leendert van der Torre. 2014. "Sing and Dance!". In Deontic Logic and Normative Systems, Fabrizio Cariani, Davide Grossi, Joke Meheus, and Xavier Parent (Eds.). Springer International Publishing, 149--165.

[24]

Paolo Pareti, George Konstantinidis, Fabio Mogavero, and Timothy J. Norman. 2020. SHACL Satisfiability and Containment. In The Semantic Web - ISWC 2020 - 19th International Semantic Web Conference, Athens, Greece, November 2--6, 2020, Proceedings, Part I (Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Vol. 12506), Jeff Z. Pan, Valentina A. M. Tamma, Claudia d'Amato, Krzysztof Janowicz, Bo Fu, Axel Polleres, Oshani Seneviratne, and Lalana Kagal (Eds.). Springer, 474--493.

[25]

Paolo Pareti, George Konstantinidis, Timothy J. Norman, and Murat Sensoy. 2019. SHACL Constraints with Inference Rules. In The Semantic Web - ISWC 2019 - 18th International Semantic Web Conference, Auckland, New Zealand, October 26--30, 2019, Proceedings, Part I (Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Vol. 11778), Chiara Ghidini, Olaf Hartig, Maria Maleshkova, Vojtech Svátek, Isabel F. Cruz, Aidan Hogan, Jie Song, Maxime Lefrançois, and Fabien Gandon (Eds.). Springer, 539--557.

[26]

L. Robaldo. 2010. Independent Set readings and Generalized Quantifiers. The Journal of Philosophical Logic 39(1) (2010), 23--58.

[27]

L. Robaldo. 2011. Distributivity, Collectivity, and Cumulativity in terms of (In)dependence and Maximality. The Journal of Logic, Language, and Information 20(2) (2011), 233--271.

[28]

L. Robaldo, C. Bartolini, M. Palmirani, A. Rossi, M. Martoni, and G. Lenzini. 2020. Formalizing GDPR provisions in reified I/O logic: the DAPRECO knowledge base. The Journal of Logic, Language, and Information 29 (2020). Issue 4.

[29]

L. Robaldo and X. Sun. 2017. Reified Input/Output logic: Combining Input/Output logic and Reification to represent norms coming from existing legislation. The Journal of Logic and Computation 7 (2017). Issue 8.

[30]

X. Sun and L. Robaldo. 2017. On the complexity of Input/Output logic. The Journal of Applied Logic 25 (2017), 69--88.

Cited By

Robaldo LPacenza FZangari JCalegari RCalimeri FSiragusa G(2023)Efficient compliance checking of RDF dataJournal of Logic and Computation10.1093/logcom/exad03433:8(1753-1776)Online publication date: 6-Jun-2023
https://doi.org/10.1093/logcom/exad034
Mitsikas TSchäfermeier RPaschke A(2023)Modeling a GDPR Compliant Data Wallet Application in Prova and AspectOWLThe Review of Socionetwork Strategies10.1007/s12626-023-00149-917:2(319-340)Online publication date: 26-Sep-2023
https://doi.org/10.1007/s12626-023-00149-9
Robaldo LBatsakis SCalegari RCalimeri FFujita MGovernatori GMorelli MPacenza FPisano GSatoh KTachmazidis IZangari J(2023)Compliance checking on first-order knowledge with conflicting and compensatory norms: a comparison among currently available technologiesArtificial Intelligence and Law10.1007/s10506-023-09360-z32:2(505-555)Online publication date: 2-Jun-2023
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1007/s10506-023-09360-z
Show More Cited By

Towards compliance checking in reified I/O logic via SHACL
1. Computing methodologies
  1. Artificial intelligence
2. Theory of computation

Recommendations

Stable Model Semantics for Recursive SHACL
WWW '20: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020

SHACL (SHape Constraint Language) is a W3C recommendation for validating graph-based data against a set of constraints (called shapes). Importantly, SHACL allows to define recursive shapes, i.e. a shape may refer to itself, directly of indirectly. The ...
SHACL: A Description Logic in Disguise
Logic Programming and Nonmonotonic Reasoning
Abstract
SHACL is a W3C-proposed language for expressing structural constraints on RDF graphs. In recent years, SHACL’s popularity has risen quickly. This rise in popularity comes with questions related to its place in the semantic web, particularly about ...
A Short Introduction to SHACL for Logicians
Logic, Language, Information, and Computation
Abstract
The Shapes Constraint Language (SHACL) was recommended by the W3C in 2017 for describing constraints on web data (specifically, on the so-called RDF graphs) and validating them. At first glance, it may not seem to be a topic for logicians, but as ...

Comments

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

cover image ACM Conferences

ICAIL '21: Proceedings of the Eighteenth International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Law

June 2021

319 pages

ISBN:9781450385268

DOI:10.1145/3462757

Conference Chair:
Juliano Maranhão
University of São Paulo, Brazil
,
Program Chair:
Adam Zachary Wyner
Swansea University, United Kingdom

Copyright © 2021 ACM.

Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

Sponsors

SIGAI: ACM Special Interest Group on Artificial Intelligence

Publisher

Association for Computing Machinery

New York, NY, United States

Publication History

Published: 27 July 2021

Permissions

Request permissions for this article.

Request Permissions

Check for updates

Author Tags

Qualifiers

Research-article

Funding Sources

European Regional Development Fund through the Welsh Government

Conference

ICAIL '21

Sponsor:

SIGAI

ICAIL '21: Eighteenth International Conference for Artificial Intelligence and Law

June 21 - 25, 2021

São Paulo, Brazil

Acceptance Rates

Overall Acceptance Rate 69 of 169 submissions, 41%

Contributors

Other Metrics

View Article Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

6
Total Citations
View Citations
100
Total Downloads

Downloads (Last 12 months)24
Downloads (Last 6 weeks)2

Reflects downloads up to 18 Feb 2025

Other Metrics

View Author Metrics

Citations

Cited By

Robaldo LPacenza FZangari JCalegari RCalimeri FSiragusa G(2023)Efficient compliance checking of RDF dataJournal of Logic and Computation10.1093/logcom/exad03433:8(1753-1776)Online publication date: 6-Jun-2023
https://doi.org/10.1093/logcom/exad034
Mitsikas TSchäfermeier RPaschke A(2023)Modeling a GDPR Compliant Data Wallet Application in Prova and AspectOWLThe Review of Socionetwork Strategies10.1007/s12626-023-00149-917:2(319-340)Online publication date: 26-Sep-2023
https://doi.org/10.1007/s12626-023-00149-9
Robaldo LBatsakis SCalegari RCalimeri FFujita MGovernatori GMorelli MPacenza FPisano GSatoh KTachmazidis IZangari J(2023)Compliance checking on first-order knowledge with conflicting and compensatory norms: a comparison among currently available technologiesArtificial Intelligence and Law10.1007/s10506-023-09360-z32:2(505-555)Online publication date: 2-Jun-2023
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1007/s10506-023-09360-z
Francesconi EGovernatori G(2022)Patterns for legal compliance checking in a decidable framework of linked open dataArtificial Intelligence and Law10.1007/s10506-022-09317-831:3(445-464)Online publication date: 4-Jul-2022
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1007/s10506-022-09317-8
Amantea IRobaldo LSulis EBoella GGovernatori G(2021)Semi-automated checking for regulatory compliance in e-Health2021 IEEE 25th International Enterprise Distributed Object Computing Workshop (EDOCW)10.1109/EDOCW52865.2021.00063(318-325)Online publication date: Oct-2021
https://doi.org/10.1109/EDOCW52865.2021.00063
Al Bassit AKrasnashchok KSkhiri SMustapha M(2021)Policy-Based Automated Compliance CheckingRules and Reasoning10.1007/978-3-030-91167-6_1(3-17)Online publication date: 8-Sep-2021
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1007/978-3-030-91167-6_1

View Options

Login options

Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

Full Access

Get this Publication

View options

PDF

View or Download as a PDF file.

eReader

View online with eReader.

Figures

Tables

Media

View Table of Conten