Representing business contracts in RuleML

International Journal of Cooperative Information Systems

Volumn 14, Issue 2-3, 2005, Pages 181-216

  Governatori, Guido ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF QUEENSLAND   (Australia)

Author keywords

Business contracts; Defeasible logic; Deontic logic; Logic of violation; RuleML

Indexed keywords

DATABASE SYSTEMS; FORMAL LOGIC; LAWS AND LEGISLATION; MONITORING; SEMANTICS; SOCIETIES AND INSTITUTIONS;

BUSINESS CONTRACTS; DEFEASIBLE LOGIC; DEONTIC LOGIC; LOGIC OF VIOLATION; RULEML;

CONTRACTS;

EID: 21144443897     PISSN: 02188430     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1142/S0218843005001092     Document Type: Article

References (37)

1. G. Antoniou, Nonmonotonic rule system on top of ontology layer, ISWC 2002, eds. I. Horrocks and J. Hendler, Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Vol. 2432 (Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 2002), pp. 394-398.
2. G. Antoniou, Defeasible logic with dynamic priorities, International Journal of Intelligent Systems 19(5) (2004) 463-472.
3. G. Antoniou, A. Bikakis and G. Wagner, A system for nonmonotonic rules on the Web, Rules and Rule Markup Languages for the Semantic Web: Third International Workshop, RuleML 2004, eds. G. Antoniou and H. Boley, Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Vol. 3323 (Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 2004), pp. 23-36.
4. G. Antoniou, D. Billington, G. Governatori and M. J. Maher, A flexible framework for defeasible logics, in Proc. American National Conference on Artificial Intelligence (AAAI-2000) (AAAI/MIT Press, Menlo Park, CA, 2000), pp. 401-405.
5. G. Antoniou, D. Billington, G. Governatori and M. J. Maher, Representation results for defeasible logic, ACM Transactions on Computational Logic 2(2) (2001) 255-287.
6. G. Antoniou, M. J. Maher and D. Billington, Defeasible logic versus logic programming without negation as failure, Journal of Logic Programming 41(1) (2000) 45-57.
7. N. Bassiliades, G. Antoniou and I. Vlahavas, DR-DEVICE: A defeasible logic system for the Semantic Web, 2nd Workshop on Principles and Practice of Semantic Web Reasoning, eds. H. J. Ohlbach and S. Schaffert, Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Vol. 3208 (Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 2004), pp. 134-148.
8. H. Boley, S. Tabet and G. Wagner, Design rationale for RuleML: A markup language for semantic web rules, Proceedings of SWWS'01, The First Semantic Web Working Symposium, eds. I. F. Cruz, S. Decker, J. Euzenat and D. L. McGuinness, (2001), pp. 381-401.
9. J. Carmo and A. J. I. Jones, Deontic logic and contrary to duties, Handbook of Philosophical Logic, eds. D. M. Gabbay and F. Guenther, 2nd edn. 8 (Kluwer, Dordrecht, 2002), pp. 265-343.
10. T. Eiter, T. Lukasiewicz, R. Schindlauer and H. Tompits, Well-founded semantics for description logic programs in the semantic web, Rules and Rule Markup Languages for the Semantic Web: Third International Workshop, RuleML 2004, eds. G. Antoniou and H. Boley, Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Vol. 3323 (Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 2004), pp. 81-97.
11. J. Gelati, G. Governatori, A. Rotolo and G. Sartor, Normative autonomy and normative co-ordination: Declarative power, representation, and mandate, Artificial Intelligence and Law (2005) (in press).
12. G. Governatori, Defeasible description logic, Rules and Rule Markup Languages for the Semantic Web: Third International Workshop, RuleML 2004, eds. G. Antoniou and H. Boley, Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Vol. 3323 (Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 2004), pp. 98-112.
13. G. Governatori, M. J. Maher, D. Billington and G. Antoniou, Argumentation semantics for defeasible logics, Journal of Logic and Computation 14(5) (2004) 675-702.
14. G. Governatori and A. Rotolo, A Gentzen system for reasoning with contrary-to-duty obligations, A preliminary study, Δeon'02, eds. A. J. I. Jones and J. Horty, Imperial College, London (May 2002), pp. 97-116, http://eprint.uq.edu.au/archive/00001893/01/deon02.pdf.
15. G. Governatori and A. Rotolo, Defeasible logic: Agency, intention and obligation, Deontic Logic in Computer Science, eds. A. Lomuscio and D. Nute, Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Vol. 3065 (Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 2004), pp. 114-128.
16. G. Governatori and A. Rotolo, Representing contracts using RuleML, Legal Knowledge and Information Systems, Frontieres in Artificial Intelligence and Applications, eds. T. Gordon, Vol. 120 (IOS Press, Amsterdam, 2004), pp. 141-150.
17. B. N. Grosof, Representing e-commerce rules via situated courteous logic programs in RuleML, Electronic Commerce Research and Applications 3(1) (2004) 2-20.
18. B. N. Grosof, Y. Labrou and H. Y. Chan, A declarative approach to business rules in contracts: Courteous logic programs in XML. in Proceedings of the 1st ACM Conference on Electronic Commerce (EC99) (ACM Press, 1999), pp. 68-77.
19. B. N. Grosof and T. C. Poon, SweetDeal: Representing agent contracts with exceptions using XML rules, ontologies, and process descriptions, in Proceedings of the 12th International Conference on World Wide Web (ACM Press, 2003), pp. 340-349.
20. H. Herrestad, Norms and formalization, in ICAIL'91: Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Law (ACM Press, 1991), pp. 175-184.
21. H. Herrestad and C. Krogh, Obligations directed from bearers to counterparts, in ICAIL'95: Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Law (ACM Press, 1995), pp. 210-218.
22. R. Hilpinen, Deontic logic, in The Blackwell Guide to Philosophical Logic, ed. L. Goble, No. 4 in Blackwell Philosophy Guides, Chap. 8 (Blackwell, Oxford, 2001), pp. 159-182.
23. A. J. I. Jones and M. Sergot, On the characterization of law and computer systems: The normative systems perspective, Deontic Logic in Computer Science: Normative System Specification, eds. J.-J. Ch. Meyer and R. J. Wieringa (John Wiley and Sons Ltd., 1993), pp. 275-307.
24. A. J. I. Jones and M. Sergot, A formal characterisation of institutionalised power, Journal of the IGPL 4(3) (1996) 429-445.
25. J. K. Lee and M. M. Sohn, The extensible rule markup language, Communications of the ACM 46(5) (May 2003) 59-64.
26. M. J. Maher, A. Rock, G. Antoniou, D. Billignton and T. Miller, Efficient defeasible reasoning systems, International Journal of Artificial Intelligence Tools 10(4) (2001) 483-501.
27. Z. Milosevic, S. Gibson, P. F. Linington, J. Cole and S. Kulkarni, On design and implementation of a contract monitoring facility, First IEEE International Workshop on Electronic Contracts, ed. B. Benatallah (IEEE Press, 2004), pp. 62-70.
28. L. Naish, A declarative debugging scheme, Journal of Functional and Logic Programming 3 (1997).
29. D. Nute, Norms, priorities and defeasibility, Norms, Logics and Information Systems. New Studies in Deontic Logic, eds. P. McNamara and H. Prakken (IOS Press, Amsterdam, 1998), pp. 83-100.
30. J. Pitt, L. Kamara and A. Artikis, Interaction patterns and observable commitments in a multi-agent trading scenario, in AGENTS'01: Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Autonomous Agents (ACM Press, 2001), pp. 481-488.
31. H. Prakken and G. Sartor, A dialectical model of assessing conflicting arguments in legal reasoning, Artificial Intelligence and Law 4 (1996) 331-368.
32. RuleML, The rule markup initiative, 26th February 2005, http://www.ruleml.org.
33. G. Simari and R. Loui, A mathematical treatment of argumentation and its implementation, Artificial Intelligence 53 (1992) 125-157.
34. L. van der Torre and Y.-H. Tan, The many faces of defeasibility, Defeasible Deontic Logic, ed. D. Nute (Kluwer, Dordrecht, 1997), pp. 79-121.
35. G. Wagner, How to design a general rule markup language, in Proceedings of XML Technology for the Semantic Web (XSW 2002), Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Vol. 14 (GI, June 2002), pp. 19-37.
36. G. Wagner, S. Tabet and H. Boley, MOF-RuleML: The abstract syntax of RuleML as a MOF model, OMG Meeting, Boston (October 2003).
37. K. Wang, D. Billington, J. Blee and G. Antoniou, Combining description logic and defeasible logic for the semantic web, RuleML 2004, eds. G. Antoniou and H. Boley, Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Vol. 3323 (Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 2004), pp. 170-181