No Cover Image

Journal article 405 views 42 downloads

Compliance checking on first-order knowledge with conflicting and compensatory norms: a comparison among currently available technologies

Livio Robaldo Orcid Logo, Sotiris Batsakis, Roberta Calegari, Francesco Calimeri, Megumi Fujita, Guido Governatori, Maria Concetta Morelli, Francesco Pacenza, Giuseppe Pisano, Ken Satoh, Ilias Tachmazidis, Jessica Zangari

Artificial Intelligence and Law

Swansea University Author: Livio Robaldo Orcid Logo

  • 63481.VOR.pdf

    PDF | Version of Record

    © Authors 2023. Distributed under the terms of a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License (CC BY 4.0).

    Download (943.38KB)

Check full text

DOI (Published version): 10.1007/s10506-023-09360-z

Abstract

This paper analyses and compares some of the automated reasoners that have been used in recent research for compliance checking. Although the list of the considered reasoners is not exhaustive, we believe that our analysis is representative enough to take stock of the current state of the art in the...

Full description

Published in: Artificial Intelligence and Law
ISSN: 0924-8463 1572-8382
Published: Springer Science and Business Media LLC 2023
Online Access: Check full text

URI: https://cronfa.swan.ac.uk/Record/cronfa63481
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
first_indexed 2023-05-16T15:05:48Z
last_indexed 2023-05-16T15:05:48Z
id cronfa63481
recordtype SURis
fullrecord <?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?><rfc1807 xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" xmlns:xsd="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema"><bib-version>v2</bib-version><id>63481</id><entry>2023-05-16</entry><title>Compliance checking on first-order knowledge with conflicting and compensatory norms: a comparison among currently available technologies</title><swanseaauthors><author><sid>b711cf9f3a7821ec52bd1e53b4f6cf9e</sid><ORCID>0000-0003-4713-8990</ORCID><firstname>Livio</firstname><surname>Robaldo</surname><name>Livio Robaldo</name><active>true</active><ethesisStudent>false</ethesisStudent></author></swanseaauthors><date>2023-05-16</date><deptcode>HRCL</deptcode><abstract>This paper analyses and compares some of the automated reasoners that have been used in recent research for compliance checking. Although the list of the considered reasoners is not exhaustive, we believe that our analysis is representative enough to take stock of the current state of the art in the topic. We are interested here in formalizations at the first-order level. Past literature on normative reasoning mostly focuses on the propositional level. However, the propositional level is of little usefulness for concrete LegalTech applications, in which compliance checking must be enforced on (large) sets of individuals. Furthermore, we are interested in technologies that are freely available and that can be further investigated and compared by the scientific community. In other words, this paper does not consider technologies only employed in industry and/or whose source code is non-accessible. This paper formalizes a selected use case in the considered reasoners and compares the implementations, also in terms of simulations with respect to shared synthetic datasets. The comparison will highlight that lot of further research still needs to be done to integrate the benefits featured by the different reasoners into a single standardized first-order framework, suitable for LegalTech applications. All source codes are freely available at https://github.com/liviorobaldo/compliancecheckers, together with instructions to locally reproduce the simulations.</abstract><type>Journal Article</type><journal>Artificial Intelligence and Law</journal><volume>0</volume><journalNumber/><paginationStart/><paginationEnd/><publisher>Springer Science and Business Media LLC</publisher><placeOfPublication/><isbnPrint/><isbnElectronic/><issnPrint>0924-8463</issnPrint><issnElectronic>1572-8382</issnElectronic><keywords>Compliance checking, first-order knowledge, technologies</keywords><publishedDay>6</publishedDay><publishedMonth>6</publishedMonth><publishedYear>2023</publishedYear><publishedDate>2023-06-06</publishedDate><doi>10.1007/s10506-023-09360-z</doi><url>http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10506-023-09360-z</url><notes/><college>COLLEGE NANME</college><department>Hillary Rodham Clinton Law School</department><CollegeCode>COLLEGE CODE</CollegeCode><DepartmentCode>HRCL</DepartmentCode><institution>Swansea University</institution><apcterm>SU Library paid the OA fee (TA Institutional Deal)</apcterm><funders>Livio Robaldo has been supported by the Legal Innovation Lab Wales operation within Swansea University’s Hillary Rodham Clinton School of Law. The operation has been part-funded by the European Regional Development Fund through the Welsh Government. Francesco Calimeri, Maria Concetta Morelli, Francesco Pacenza, and Jessica Zangari acknowledge the support of the PNRR project FAIR - Future AI Research (PE00000013), Spoke 9 - Green-aware AI, under the NRRP MUR program funded by the NextGenerationEU, and the support of the project PRIN PE6, Title: “Declarative Reasoning over Streams”, funded by the Italian Ministero dell’Università, dell’Istruzione e della Ricerca (MIUR), CUP:H24I17000080001. The research of Roberta Calegari and Giuseppe Pisano has been partially supported by the “CompuLaw” project, funded by the European Research Council (ERC) under the European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme (Grant Agreement No. 833647).</funders><projectreference/><lastEdited>2024-07-10T12:31:22.8263425</lastEdited><Created>2023-05-16T16:03:48.0429374</Created><path><level id="1">Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences</level><level id="2">Hilary Rodham Clinton School of Law</level></path><authors><author><firstname>Livio</firstname><surname>Robaldo</surname><orcid>0000-0003-4713-8990</orcid><order>1</order></author><author><firstname>Sotiris</firstname><surname>Batsakis</surname><order>2</order></author><author><firstname>Roberta</firstname><surname>Calegari</surname><order>3</order></author><author><firstname>Francesco</firstname><surname>Calimeri</surname><order>4</order></author><author><firstname>Megumi</firstname><surname>Fujita</surname><order>5</order></author><author><firstname>Guido</firstname><surname>Governatori</surname><order>6</order></author><author><firstname>Maria Concetta</firstname><surname>Morelli</surname><order>7</order></author><author><firstname>Francesco</firstname><surname>Pacenza</surname><order>8</order></author><author><firstname>Giuseppe</firstname><surname>Pisano</surname><order>9</order></author><author><firstname>Ken</firstname><surname>Satoh</surname><order>10</order></author><author><firstname>Ilias</firstname><surname>Tachmazidis</surname><order>11</order></author><author><firstname>Jessica</firstname><surname>Zangari</surname><order>12</order></author></authors><documents><document><filename>63481__27905__06e38f6ff64e43af82601f7f2fb3b15e.pdf</filename><originalFilename>63481.VOR.pdf</originalFilename><uploaded>2023-06-21T10:43:58.3920945</uploaded><type>Output</type><contentLength>966025</contentLength><contentType>application/pdf</contentType><version>Version of Record</version><cronfaStatus>true</cronfaStatus><documentNotes>© Authors 2023. Distributed under the terms of a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License (CC BY 4.0).</documentNotes><copyrightCorrect>true</copyrightCorrect><language>eng</language><licence>https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/</licence></document></documents><OutputDurs/></rfc1807>
spelling v2 63481 2023-05-16 Compliance checking on first-order knowledge with conflicting and compensatory norms: a comparison among currently available technologies b711cf9f3a7821ec52bd1e53b4f6cf9e 0000-0003-4713-8990 Livio Robaldo Livio Robaldo true false 2023-05-16 HRCL This paper analyses and compares some of the automated reasoners that have been used in recent research for compliance checking. Although the list of the considered reasoners is not exhaustive, we believe that our analysis is representative enough to take stock of the current state of the art in the topic. We are interested here in formalizations at the first-order level. Past literature on normative reasoning mostly focuses on the propositional level. However, the propositional level is of little usefulness for concrete LegalTech applications, in which compliance checking must be enforced on (large) sets of individuals. Furthermore, we are interested in technologies that are freely available and that can be further investigated and compared by the scientific community. In other words, this paper does not consider technologies only employed in industry and/or whose source code is non-accessible. This paper formalizes a selected use case in the considered reasoners and compares the implementations, also in terms of simulations with respect to shared synthetic datasets. The comparison will highlight that lot of further research still needs to be done to integrate the benefits featured by the different reasoners into a single standardized first-order framework, suitable for LegalTech applications. All source codes are freely available at https://github.com/liviorobaldo/compliancecheckers, together with instructions to locally reproduce the simulations. Journal Article Artificial Intelligence and Law 0 Springer Science and Business Media LLC 0924-8463 1572-8382 Compliance checking, first-order knowledge, technologies 6 6 2023 2023-06-06 10.1007/s10506-023-09360-z http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10506-023-09360-z COLLEGE NANME Hillary Rodham Clinton Law School COLLEGE CODE HRCL Swansea University SU Library paid the OA fee (TA Institutional Deal) Livio Robaldo has been supported by the Legal Innovation Lab Wales operation within Swansea University’s Hillary Rodham Clinton School of Law. The operation has been part-funded by the European Regional Development Fund through the Welsh Government. Francesco Calimeri, Maria Concetta Morelli, Francesco Pacenza, and Jessica Zangari acknowledge the support of the PNRR project FAIR - Future AI Research (PE00000013), Spoke 9 - Green-aware AI, under the NRRP MUR program funded by the NextGenerationEU, and the support of the project PRIN PE6, Title: “Declarative Reasoning over Streams”, funded by the Italian Ministero dell’Università, dell’Istruzione e della Ricerca (MIUR), CUP:H24I17000080001. The research of Roberta Calegari and Giuseppe Pisano has been partially supported by the “CompuLaw” project, funded by the European Research Council (ERC) under the European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme (Grant Agreement No. 833647). 2024-07-10T12:31:22.8263425 2023-05-16T16:03:48.0429374 Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences Hilary Rodham Clinton School of Law Livio Robaldo 0000-0003-4713-8990 1 Sotiris Batsakis 2 Roberta Calegari 3 Francesco Calimeri 4 Megumi Fujita 5 Guido Governatori 6 Maria Concetta Morelli 7 Francesco Pacenza 8 Giuseppe Pisano 9 Ken Satoh 10 Ilias Tachmazidis 11 Jessica Zangari 12 63481__27905__06e38f6ff64e43af82601f7f2fb3b15e.pdf 63481.VOR.pdf 2023-06-21T10:43:58.3920945 Output 966025 application/pdf Version of Record true © Authors 2023. Distributed under the terms of a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License (CC BY 4.0). true eng https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
title Compliance checking on first-order knowledge with conflicting and compensatory norms: a comparison among currently available technologies
spellingShingle Compliance checking on first-order knowledge with conflicting and compensatory norms: a comparison among currently available technologies
Livio Robaldo
title_short Compliance checking on first-order knowledge with conflicting and compensatory norms: a comparison among currently available technologies
title_full Compliance checking on first-order knowledge with conflicting and compensatory norms: a comparison among currently available technologies
title_fullStr Compliance checking on first-order knowledge with conflicting and compensatory norms: a comparison among currently available technologies
title_full_unstemmed Compliance checking on first-order knowledge with conflicting and compensatory norms: a comparison among currently available technologies
title_sort Compliance checking on first-order knowledge with conflicting and compensatory norms: a comparison among currently available technologies
author_id_str_mv b711cf9f3a7821ec52bd1e53b4f6cf9e
author_id_fullname_str_mv b711cf9f3a7821ec52bd1e53b4f6cf9e_***_Livio Robaldo
author Livio Robaldo
author2 Livio Robaldo
Sotiris Batsakis
Roberta Calegari
Francesco Calimeri
Megumi Fujita
Guido Governatori
Maria Concetta Morelli
Francesco Pacenza
Giuseppe Pisano
Ken Satoh
Ilias Tachmazidis
Jessica Zangari
format Journal article
container_title Artificial Intelligence and Law
container_volume 0
publishDate 2023
institution Swansea University
issn 0924-8463
1572-8382
doi_str_mv 10.1007/s10506-023-09360-z
publisher Springer Science and Business Media LLC
college_str Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences
hierarchytype
hierarchy_top_id facultyofhumanitiesandsocialsciences
hierarchy_top_title Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences
hierarchy_parent_id facultyofhumanitiesandsocialsciences
hierarchy_parent_title Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences
department_str Hilary Rodham Clinton School of Law{{{_:::_}}}Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences{{{_:::_}}}Hilary Rodham Clinton School of Law
url http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10506-023-09360-z
document_store_str 1
active_str 0
description This paper analyses and compares some of the automated reasoners that have been used in recent research for compliance checking. Although the list of the considered reasoners is not exhaustive, we believe that our analysis is representative enough to take stock of the current state of the art in the topic. We are interested here in formalizations at the first-order level. Past literature on normative reasoning mostly focuses on the propositional level. However, the propositional level is of little usefulness for concrete LegalTech applications, in which compliance checking must be enforced on (large) sets of individuals. Furthermore, we are interested in technologies that are freely available and that can be further investigated and compared by the scientific community. In other words, this paper does not consider technologies only employed in industry and/or whose source code is non-accessible. This paper formalizes a selected use case in the considered reasoners and compares the implementations, also in terms of simulations with respect to shared synthetic datasets. The comparison will highlight that lot of further research still needs to be done to integrate the benefits featured by the different reasoners into a single standardized first-order framework, suitable for LegalTech applications. All source codes are freely available at https://github.com/liviorobaldo/compliancecheckers, together with instructions to locally reproduce the simulations.
published_date 2023-06-06T12:31:22Z
_version_ 1804191485967466496
score 11.017797

Similar Items