research-article

Thou shalt is not you will

Author:

Guido GovernatoriAuthors Info & Claims

ICAIL '15: Proceedings of the 15th International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Law

Pages 63 - 68

https://doi.org/10.1145/2746090.2746105

Published: 08 June 2015 Publication History

Abstract

In this paper we discuss some reasons why temporal logic might not be suitable to model real life norms. To show this, we present a novel deontic logic contrary-to-duty/derived permission paradox based on the interaction of obligations, permissions and contrary-to-duty obligations. The paradox is inspired by real life norms.

References

[1]

L. Åqvist. Deontic logic. In D. M. Gabbay and F. Guenthner, editors, Handbook of Philosophical Logic. 2nd Edition. Vol. 8, pp. 147--264. Springer, 2002.

[2]

J. van Benthem, D. Grossi, and F. Liu. Priority Structures in Deontic Logic. Theoria, 802: 116--152, 2014.

[3]

E. Calardo, G. Governatori, and A. Rotolo. A Preference-based Semantics for CTD Reasoning. In F. Cariani, D. Grossi, J. Meheus, and X. Parent, eds. Deontic Logic in Computer Science (DEON 2014). Lecture Notes in Computer Science 8554, pp. 49--64. Springer, 2014.

[4]

E. Calardo, G. Governatori, and A. Rotolo. A Sequence Semantics for Deontic Logic. Tech. rep. 8580. NICTA, 2015.

[5]

J. Carmo and A. J. Jones. Deontic Logic and Contrary-to-Duties. In D. M. Gabbay and F. Guenther, editors, Handbook of Philosophical Logic. 2nd Edition. Vol. 8, pp. 265--343. Springer, 2002.

[6]

G. Governatori. Business Process Compliance: An Abstract Normative Framework. IT -- Information Technology, 556: 231--238, 2013.

[7]

G. Governatori. Representing Business Contracts in RuleML. International Journal of Cooperative Information Systems, 142-3: 181--216, 2005.

[8]

G. Governatori, F. Olivieri, A. Rotolo, and S. Scannapieco. Computing Strong and Weak Permissions in Defeasible Logic. Journal of Philosophical Logic, 426: 799--829, 2013.

[9]

G. Governatori and A. Rotolo. Logic of Violations: A Gentzen System for Reasoning with Contrary-To-Duty Obligations. Australasian Journal of Logic, 4: 193--215, 2006.

[10]

G. Governatori and S. Sadiq. The Journey to Business Process Compliance. In J. Cardoso and W. van der Aalst, editors, Handbook of Research on BPM, pp. 426--454. IGI Global, 2009.

[11]

G. Piolle. A Dyadic Operator for the Gradation of Desirability. In G. Governatori and G. Sartor, eds. 10th International Conference on Deontic Logic in Computer Science (DEON 2010). Lecture Notes in Computer Science 6181, pp. 33--49. Springer, 2010.

Digital Library

[12]

A. Pnueli. The Temporal Logic of Programs. In Proceedings of the 18th Annual Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science (SFCS '77: ) pp. 46--57. IEEE Computer Society, 1977.

Digital Library

[13]

H. Prakken and M. J. Sergot. Contrary-to-Duty Obligations. Studia Logica, 571: 91--115, 1996.

[14]

R. H. Thomason. Deontic Logic Founded on Tense Logic. In R. Hilpinen, editor, New Studies on Deontic Logic, pp. 165--176. Kluwer, 1981.

[15]

M. Y. Vardi. Branching vs. Linear Time: Final Showdown. In T. Margaria and W. Yi, eds. 7th International Conference Tools and Algorithms for the Construction and Analysis of Systems, (TACAS 2001). Lecture Notes in Computer Science 2031, pp. 1--22. Springer, 2001.

Digital Library

Cited By

Li JCai MXiao S(2024)Reinforcement learning-based motion planning in partially observable environments under ethical constraintsAI and Ethics10.1007/s43681-024-00441-6Online publication date: 11-Mar-2024
https://doi.org/10.1007/s43681-024-00441-6
Governatori G(2024)An ASP Implementation of Defeasible Deontic LogicKI - Künstliche Intelligenz10.1007/s13218-024-00854-9Online publication date: 20-Jul-2024
https://doi.org/10.1007/s13218-024-00854-9
Neufeld E(2024)Learning Normative Behaviour Through Automated Theorem ProvingKI - Künstliche Intelligenz10.1007/s13218-024-00844-xOnline publication date: 16-Apr-2024
https://doi.org/10.1007/s13218-024-00844-x
Show More Cited By

Index Terms

Thou shalt is not you will
1. Applied computing
  1. Law, social and behavioral sciences
    1. Law
2. Social and professional topics
  1. Computing / technology policy

Recommendations

On Blass Translation for Leśniewski’s Propositional Ontology and Modal Logics
Abstract
In this paper, we shall give another proof of the faithfulness of Blass translation (for short, B-translation) of the propositional fragment $L_{1}$ of Leśniewski’s ontology in the modal logic $K$ by means of Hintikka formula. And we extend the result to ...
Towards an Intuitionistic Deontic Logic Tolerating Conflicting Obligations
Logic, Language, Information, and Computation
Abstract
We propose a minimal deontic logic, called MIND, based on intuitionistic logic. This logic gives a very simple solution to handling conflicting obligations: the presence of two conflicting obligations does not entail the triviality of the set of ...
Mechanised Assessment of Complex Natural-Language Arguments Using Expressive Logic Combinations
Frontiers of Combining Systems
Abstract
We present and illustrate an approach to combining logics based on shallow semantical embeddings, a technique that harnesses the high expressive power of classical higher-order logic (HOL) as a meta-language in order to embed the syntax and ...

Comments

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

cover image ACM Other conferences

ICAIL '15: Proceedings of the 15th International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Law

June 2015

246 pages

ISBN:9781450335225

DOI:10.1145/2746090

Conference Chair:
Ted Sichelman
University of San Diego School of Law, San Diego, CA
,
Program Chair:
Katie Atkinson
University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK

Copyright © 2015 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 the author(s) 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

Center for IP Law & Markets: Center for Intellectual Property Law & Markets, University of San Diego School of Law
TrademarkNow: TrademarkNow
The International Association for Artificial Intelligence and Law
Davis Polk: Davis Polk & Wardwell LLP
Legal Robot: Legal Robot
Thomson Reuters: Thomson Reuters Corporation

In-Cooperation

SIGAI: ACM Special Interest Group on Artificial Intelligence

Publisher

Association for Computing Machinery

New York, NY, United States

Publication History

Published: 08 June 2015

Permissions

Request permissions for this article.

Request Permissions

Check for updates

Author Tags

Qualifiers

Research-article

Funding Sources

Australian Government
Australian Research Council

Conference

ICAIL '15

Sponsor:

Center for IP Law & Markets
TrademarkNow
Davis Polk
Legal Robot
Thomson Reuters

ICAIL '15: 15th International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Law

June 8 - 12, 2015

California, San Diego

Acceptance Rates

ICAIL '15 Paper Acceptance Rate 30 of 58 submissions, 52%;

Overall Acceptance Rate 69 of 169 submissions, 41%

Contributors

Other Metrics

View Article Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

30
Total Citations
View Citations
162
Total Downloads

Downloads (Last 12 months)6
Downloads (Last 6 weeks)0

Reflects downloads up to 12 Aug 2024

Other Metrics

View Author Metrics

Citations

Cited By

Li JCai MXiao S(2024)Reinforcement learning-based motion planning in partially observable environments under ethical constraintsAI and Ethics10.1007/s43681-024-00441-6Online publication date: 11-Mar-2024
https://doi.org/10.1007/s43681-024-00441-6
Governatori G(2024)An ASP Implementation of Defeasible Deontic LogicKI - Künstliche Intelligenz10.1007/s13218-024-00854-9Online publication date: 20-Jul-2024
https://doi.org/10.1007/s13218-024-00854-9
Neufeld E(2024)Learning Normative Behaviour Through Automated Theorem ProvingKI - Künstliche Intelligenz10.1007/s13218-024-00844-xOnline publication date: 16-Apr-2024
https://doi.org/10.1007/s13218-024-00844-x
Neufeld EBartocci ECiabattoni AGovernatori G(2022)Enforcing ethical goals over reinforcement-learning policiesEthics and Information Technology10.1007/s10676-022-09665-824:4Online publication date: 1-Dec-2022
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1007/s10676-022-09665-8
Governatori GBench-Capon TVerheij BAraszkiewicz MFrancesconi EGrabmair M(2022)Thirty years of Artificial Intelligence and Law: the first decadeArtificial Intelligence and Law10.1007/s10506-022-09329-430:4(481-519)Online publication date: 6-Sep-2022
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10506-022-09329-4
Neufeld EBartocci ECiabattoni A(2022)On Normative Reinforcement Learning via Safe Reinforcement LearningPRIMA 2022: Principles and Practice of Multi-Agent Systems10.1007/978-3-031-21203-1_5(72-89)Online publication date: 12-Nov-2022
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-21203-1_5
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
Hildebrandt TAndaloussi AChristensen LDebois SHealy NLópez HMarquard MMøller NPetersen ASlaats TWeber B(2020)EcoKnowProceedings of the International Conference on Software and System Processes10.1145/3379177.3388908(155-164)Online publication date: 26-Jun-2020
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3379177.3388908
de Almeida Borges AConejero Rodríguez JFernández-Duque DGonzález Bedmar MJoosten J(2020)To Drive or Not to Drive: A Logical and Computational Analysis of European Transport RegulationsInformation and Computation10.1016/j.ic.2020.104636(104636)Online publication date: Nov-2020
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ic.2020.104636
López HDebois SSlaats THildebrandt T(2020)Business Process Compliance Using Reference Models of LawFundamental Approaches to Software Engineering10.1007/978-3-030-45234-6_19(378-399)Online publication date: 17-Apr-2020
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-45234-6_19
Show More Cited By

View Options

Get Access

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.

Media

Figures

Other

Tables

View Table of Contents