DR-CONTRACT: an architecture for e-contracts in defeasible logic

International Journal of Business Process Integration and Management

Volumn 4, Issue 3, 2009, Pages 187-199

  Governatori, Guido ^a   Pham, Duy Hoang ^a  

^a CSIRO   (Australia)

Author keywords

defeasible deontic logic; e contract; violations

Indexed keywords

EID: 70649103241     PISSN: 17418763     EISSN: 17418771     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1504/IJBPIM.2009.030985     Document Type: Article

References (47)

1. Adi, A., Stoutenburg, S. and Tabet, S. (Eds.) (2005) ‘Rules and rule markup languages for the Semantic Web’, First International Conference, RuleML 2005, Galway, Ireland, 10-12 November, 2005, Proceedings, Vol. 3791 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Springer.
2. Alberti, M., Chesani, F., Gavanelli, M., Lamma, E., Mello, P., Montali, M. and Torroni, P. (2008) ‘Expressing and verifying business contract with abductive logic programming’, International Journal of Electronic Commerce, Vol. 12, No. 4, pp.9–38.
3. Antoniou, G., Billington, D., Governatori, G. and Maher, M.J. (2000a) ‘A flexible framework for defeasible logics’, in Proc. American National Conference on Artificial Intelligence (AAAI-2000), AAAI/MIT Press, Menlo Park, CA, pp.401–405.
4. Antoniou, G., Billington, D., Governatori, G. and Maher, M.J. (2001) ‘Representation results for defeasible logic’, ACM Transactions on Computational Logic, Vol. 2, No. 2, pp.255–287.
5. Antoniou, G., Billington, D., Governatori, G. and Maher, M.J. (2006). ‘Embedding defeasible logic into logic programming’, Theory and Practice of Logic Programming, Vol. 6, No. 6, pp.703–735.
6. Antoniou, G., Billington, D., Governatori, G., Maher, M.J. and Rock, A. (2000b) ‘A family of defeasible reasoning logics and its implementation’, in Horn, W. (Ed.): ECAI 2000, Proceedings of the 14th European Conference on Artificial Intelligence, IOS Press, Amsterdam, pp.459–463.
7. Antoniou, G., Maher, M.J. and Billington, D. (2000c) ‘Defeasible logic versus logic programming without negation as failure’, Journal of Logic Programming, Vol. 41, No. 1, pp.45–57.
8. Bacarin, E., Madeira, E.R. and Medeiros, C.B. (2008) ‘Contract e-negotiation in agricultural supply chains’, International Journal of Electronic Commerce, Vol. 12, No. 4, pp.71–97.
9. Bassiliades, N., Antoniou, G. and Vlahavas, I. (2006) ‘A defeasible logic reasoner for the Semantic Web’, International Journal on Semantic Web and Information Systems, Vol. 2, pp.1–41.
10. Bassiliades, N., Kontopoulos, E. and Antoniou, G. (2005) ‘A visual environment for developing defeasible rule bases for the semantic web’, in Adi et al. (2005), pp.172–186.
11. Boley, H., Tabet, S. and Wagner, G. (2001) ‘Design rationale for RuleML: a markup language for semantic web rules’, in Cruz, I.F., Decker, S., Euzenat, J. and McGuinness, D.L. (Eds.): Proceedings of SWWS’01, The first Semantic Web Working Symposium, pp.381–401.
12. Governatori, G. (2005) ‘Representing business contracts in RuleML’, International Journal of Cooperative Information Systems, Vol. 14, Nos. 2–3, pp.181–216.
13. Governatori, G. and Milosevic, Z. (2006) ‘A formal analysis of a business contract language’, International Journal of Cooperative Information Systems, Vol. 15, No. 4, pp.659–685.
14. Governatori, G. and Pham, D.H. (2005a) ‘DR-CONTRACT: an architecture for e-contracts in defeasible logic’, in Bartolini, C., Governatori, G. and Milosevic, Z. (Eds.): 2nd EDOC Workshop on Contract Architectures and Languages (CoALA 2005), IEEE Digital Library, Published on CD.
15. Governatori, G. and Pham, D.H. (2005b) ‘A semantic web based architecture for e-contracts in defeasible logic’, in Adi et al. (2005), pp.172–186.
16. Governatori, G. and Rotolo, A. (2002) ‘A Gentzen system for reasoning with contrary-to-duty obligations. a preliminary study’, in Jones, A.J. and Horty, J. (Eds.): Aeon’02, Imperial College, London, pp.97–116.
17. Governatori, G. and Rotolo, A. (2004) ‘Defeasible logic: agency, intention and obligation’, in Lomuscio, A. and Nute, D., (Eds.): Deontic Logic in Computer Science, No. 3065 in LNAI, pp.114–128, Springer, Berlin.
18. Governatori, G. and Rotolo, A. (2006) ‘Logic of violations: a Gentzen system for reasoning with contrary-to-duty obligations’, Australasian Journal of Logic, Vol. 4, pp.193–215.
19. Governatori, G. and Rotolo, A. (2008a) ‘An algorithm for business process compliance’, in Francesconi, E., Sartor, G. and Tiscornia, D. (Eds.): Legal Knowledge and Information Systems, Vol. 189 of Frontieres in Artificial Intelligence and Applications, pp.186–191, IOS Press.
20. Governatori, G. and Rotolo, A. (2008b) ‘BIO logical agents: norms, beliefs, intentions in defeasible logic’, Journal of Autonomous Agents and Multi Agent Systems, Vol. 17, No. 1, pp.36–69.
21. Governatori, G., Hoffmann, J., Sadiq, S. and Weber, I. (2008) ‘Detecting regulatory compliance for business process models through semantic annotations’, in Ardagna, D. (Ed.): BPM 2008 Workshops, Vol. 7 of LNBIP, pp.5–17, Springer.
22. Governatori, G., Maher, M.J., Billington, D. and Antoniou, G. (2004) ‘Argumentation semantics for defeasible logics’, Journal of Logic and Computation, Vol. 14, No. 5, pp.675–702.
23. Governatori, G., Milosevic, Z. and Sadiq, S. (2006a) ‘Compliance checking between business processes and business contracts’, in Hung, P.C.K. (Ed.): 10th International Enterprise Distributed Object Computing Conference (EDOC 2006), IEEE Computing Society, pp.221–232.
24. Governatori, G., Rotolo, A. and Padmanabhan, V. (2006b) ‘The cost of social agents’, in Stone, P. and Weiss, G. (Eds.): 5th International Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multi-Agent Systems, ACM Press, New York, pp.513–520.
25. Governatori, G., Rotolo, A. and Sartor, G. (2005) ‘Temporalised normative positions in defeasible logic’, in Gardner, A. (Ed.): 10th International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Law (ICAIL05), ACM Press. pp.25–34.
26. Griethuysen, J.V. (Ed.) (1982) Concepts and Terminology for the Conceptual Schema and the Information Base, Publ. nr. ISO/TC97/SC5/WG3-N695, ANSI, 11 West 42nd Street, New York, NY 10036.
27. Grosof, B.N. (2004) ‘Representing e-commerce rules via situated courteous logic programs in RuleML’, Electronic Commerce Research and Applications, Vol. 3, No. 1, pp.2–20.
28. Grosof, B.N. and Poon, T.C. (2003) ‘SweetDeal: representing agent contracts with exceptions using XML rules, ontologies, and process descriptions’, in Proceedings of the Twelfth International Conference on World Wide Web, ACM Press, pp.340–349.
29. Hoffner, Y. and Field, S. (2005) ‘Transforming agreements into contracts’, International Journal of Cooperative Information Systems, Vol. 14, Nos. 2–3, pp.217–244.
30. Lam, H.P. and Governatori, G. (2009) ‘The making of SPINdle’, in Governatori, G., Hall, J. and Paschke, A. (Eds.): Rule Interchange and Applications (RuleML 2009), No. 5858 in LNCS, pp.316–323, Springer, Berlin.
31. Lee, R.M. (1988) ‘A logic model for electronic contracting’, Decision Support Systems, Vol. 4, pp.27–44.
32. Linington, P.F., Milosevic, Z., Cole, J.B., Gibson, S., Kulkarni, S. and Neal, S. (2004) ‘A unified behavioural model and a contract language for extended enterprise’, Data & Knowledge Engineering, Vol. 51, No. 1, pp.5–29.
33. Maher, M.J., Rock, A., Antoniou, G., Billignton, D. and Miller, T. (2001) ‘Efficient defeasible reasoning systems’, International Journal of Artificial Intelligence Tools, Vol. 10, No. 4, pp.483–501.
34. McBride, B. (2001) ‘Jena: implementing the RDF model and syntax specification’, in Proc 2nd Int. Workshop on The Semantic Web.
35. Milosevic, Z., Gibson, S., Linington, P.F., Cole, J. and Kulkarni, S. (2004) ‘On design and implementation of a contract monitoring facility’, in Benatallah, B. (Ed.): First IEEE International Workshop on Electronic Contracts, IEEE Press, pp.62–70.
36. Padmanabhan, V., Governatori, G., Sadiq, S., Colomb, R.M. and Rotolo, A. (2006) ‘Process modelling: the deontic way’, in Stumptner, M., Hartmann, S. and Kiyoki, Y. (Eds.): Conceptual Modelling 2006. Proceedings of the Thirds Asia- Pacific Conference on Conceptual Modelling (APCCM2006), Australian Computer Science Communications, Sydney, No. 53 in CR-PIT, pp.75–84.
37. Reeves, D.M., Wellman, M.P. and Grosof, B.N. (2002) ‘Automated negotiation from declarative contract descriptions’, Computational Intelligence, Vol. 18, No. 4, pp.482–500.
38. Rittgen, P. (2008) ‘A contract-based architecture for business networks’, International Journal of Electronic Commerce, Vol. 12, No. 4, pp.115–145.
39. RuleML (2009) ‘RuleML’, The Rule Markup Initiative.
40. Skylogiannis, T., Antoniou, G., Bassiliades, N. and Governatori, G. (2005) ‘DR-NEGOTIATE - a system for automated agent negotiation with defeasible logic-based strategies’, in 2005 IEEE International Conference on e-Technology, e-Commerce, and e-Services, IEEE Computer Society, pp.44–49.
41. Strano, M., Molina-Jimenez, C. and Shrivastava, S.K. (2008) ‘A rule-based notation to specify executable electronic contracts’, in Bassiliades, N., Governatori, G. and Paschke, A. (Eds.): RuleML, Vol. 5321 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pp.81–88, Springer.
42. van der Torre, L. and Tan, Y-H. (1997) ‘The many faces of defeasibility’, in Nute, D. (Ed.): Defeasible Deontic Logic, pp.79–121, Dordrecht, Kluwer.
43. Wagner, G. (2002) ‘How to design a general rule markup language’, in Proceedings of XML Technology for the Semantic Web (XSW 2002), Vol. 14 of LNI, pp. 19–37, GI.
44. Notice that a strict rule can be defeated only when its antecedent is defeasibly provable.
45. The ⊗ is allowed only in the head of defeasible rules. Governatori (2005) fully motivates this design choice.
46. It is not the scope of the present paper to address contract negotiation. The only aspect we want to remark is that the methodology presented here can be used in the contract negotiation phase. For models of contract negotiation see, among others, Reeves et al. (2002), Rittgen (2008) and Bacarin et al. (2008).
47. Although the current version of RuleML (Version 0.91) is based on XML Schema, here due to space limitation and for ease of presentation, we will give the XML grammar using simplified DTD definitions.