Abstract
AbstractIn a world where many activities are carried out digitally, it is increasingly urgent to be able to formally represent the norms, policies, and contracts that regulate these activities in order to make them understandable and processable by machine. In multi-agent systems, the process to be followed by a person to choose a formal model of norms and transform a norm written in a natural language into a formal one by using the selected model is a demanding task. In this paper, we introduce a methodology to be followed by people to understand the fundamental elements that they should consider for this transformation. We will focus mainly on a methodology for formalizing norms using the T-Norm model, this is because it allows us to express a rich set of different types of norms. Nevertheless, the proposed methodology is general enough to also be used, in some of its steps, to formalize norms using other formal languages. In the definition of the methodology, we will explicitly state which types of norms can be expressed with a given model and which cannot. Since there is not yet a set of different types of norms that is sufficiently expressive and is recognized as valid by the Normative Mutiagent Systems (NorMAS) community, another goal of this paper is to propose and discuss a rich set of norms types that could be used to study the expressive power of different formal models of norms, to compare them, and to translate norms formalized with one language into norms written in another language.
Funder
Swiss National Science Foundation
Università della Svizzera italiana
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Reference38 articles.
1. Fornara N, Colombetti M. Specifying and enforcing norms in artificial institutions. In: Baldoni M, Son TC, Riemsdijk MB, Winikoff M, editors. Declarative agent languages and technologies VI. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer; 2009. p. 1–17.
2. Oltramari A, Piraviperumal D, Schaub F, Wilson S, Cherivirala S, Norton TB, Russell NC, Story P, Reidenberg JR, Sadeh NM. Privonto: a semantic framework for the analysis of privacy policies. Semant Web. 2018;9(2):185–203. https://doi.org/10.3233/SW-170283.
3. Sensoy M, Norman TJ, Vasconcelos WW, Sycara KP. OWL-POLAR: a framework for semantic policy representation and reasoning. J Web Semant. 2012;12:148–60. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.websem.2011.11.005.
4. Padget J, Vos MD, Page CA. Deontic sensors. In: Proceedings of the Twenty-Seventh International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, IJCAI-18. Vienna: International Joint Conferences on Artificial Intelligence Organization; 2018. p. 475–81. https://doi.org/10.24963/ijcai.2018/66.
5. Fornara N, Colombetti M. Using semantic web technologies and production rules for reasoning on obligations, permissions, and prohibitions. AI Commun. 2019;32(4):319–34. https://doi.org/10.3233/AIC-190617.