Skip to main content

From Policy-Making Statements to First-Order Logic

  • Conference paper
Electronic Government and the Information Systems Perspective (EGOVIS 2010)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNISA,volume 6267))

Abstract

Within a framework for enriched on-line discussion forums for e-government policy-making, pro and con statements for positions are input, structurally related, then logically represented and evaluated. The framework builds on current technologies for multi-threaded discussion, natural language processing, ontologies, and formal argumentation frameworks. This paper focuses on the natural language processing of statements in the framework. A small sample policy discussion is presented. We adopt and apply a controlled natural language (Attempto Controlled English) to constrain the domain of discourse, eliminate ambiguity and unclarity, allow a logical representation of statements which supports inference and consistency checking, and facilitate information extraction. Each of the policy statements is automatically translated into first-order logic. The result is a logical representation of the policy discussion which we can query, draw inferences (given ground statements), test for consistency, and extract detailed information.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Macintosh, A.: Moving toward ”intelligent” policy development. IEEE Intelligent Systems 24(5), 79–82 (2009)

    Google Scholar 

  2. Cartwright, D., Atkinson, K.: Using computational argumentation to support e-participation. IEEE Intelligent Systems 24(5), 42–52 (2009)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Thelwall, M., Hasler, L.: Blog search engines. Online Information Review 31(4), 467–479 (2007)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Prabowo, R., Thelwall, M., Hellsten, I., Scharnhorst, A.: Evolving debate in online communication: A graph analytical approach. Internet Research 18(5), 520–540 (2008)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Reed, C., Rowe, G.: Araucaria: Software for argument analysis, diagramming and representation. International Journal on Artificial Intelligence Tools 13(4), 961–980 (2004)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Gordon, T., Prakken, H., Walton, D.: The carneades model of argument and burden of proof. Artificial Intelligence 171, 875–896 (2007)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  7. Verheij, B.: Argumed - a template-based argument mediation system for lawyers. legal knowledge based systems. In: Hage, J.C., Bench-Capon, T., Koers, A., de Vey Mestdagh, C., Grtters, C. (eds.) JURIX: The Eleventh Conference, Nijmegen, pp. 113–130. Gerard Noodt Instituut (1998)

    Google Scholar 

  8. van Engers, T.: Legal engineering: A structural approach to improving legal quality. In: Macintosh, A., Ellis, R., Allen, T. (eds.) Applications and Innovations in Intelligent Systems XIII, Proceedings of AI-2005, pp. 3–10. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)

    Google Scholar 

  9. Forsythe, D.E., Buchanan, B.G.: Knowledge acquisition for expert systems: some pitfalls and suggestions. In: Readings in knowledge acquisition and learning: automating the construction and improvement of expert systems, pp. 117–124. Morgan Kaufmann Publishers Inc., San Francisco (1993)

    Google Scholar 

  10. Engers, T., van Gog, R., Sayah, K.: A case study on automated norm extraction. In: Gordon, T. (ed.) Legal Knowledge and Information Systems. Jurix 2004: The Seventeenth Annual Conference, Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence and Applications, pp. 49–58. IOS Press, Amsterdam (2004)

    Google Scholar 

  11. Wyner, A., van Engers, T.: A framework for enriched, controlled on-line discussion forums for e-government policy-making. In: Proceedings of eGov 2010, Lausanne, Switzerland (August 2010) (to appear)

    Google Scholar 

  12. Shiffman, R.N., Michel, G., Krauthammer, M., Fuchs, N.E., Kaljurand, K., Kuhn, T.: Writing clinical practice guidelines in controlled natural language. In: Fuchs, N.E. (ed.) Proceedings of the Workshop on Controlled Natural Language (CNL 2009). LNCS. Springer, Heidelberg (2010)

    Google Scholar 

  13. Baroni, P., Giacomin, M.: Argumentation in Artificial Intelligence. In: Semantics of Abstract Argumentation Systems, pp. 25–44. Springer, Heidelberg (2009)

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  14. Kamp, H., Reyle, U.: From Discourse to Logic: Introduction to Model-theoretic Semantics of Natural Language: Formal Logic and Discourse Representation Theory. Springer, Heidelberg (1993)

    Google Scholar 

  15. Asher, N.: Reference to Abstract Objects in Discourse. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht (1993)

    Book  Google Scholar 

  16. de Maat, E., Winkels, R.: Automatic classification of sentences in dutch laws. In: Legal Knowledge and Information Systems. Jurix 2008: The 21st Annual Conference, Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence and Applications, pp. 207–216. IOS Press, Amsterdam (2008)

    Google Scholar 

  17. Pelletier, F., Carlson, G.: The Generic Book. The University of Chicago Press, Chicago (1995)

    Google Scholar 

  18. Horn, L., Ward, G. (eds.): Handbook of Pragmatics. Blackwell, Malden (2004)

    Google Scholar 

  19. Besnard, P., Hunter, A.: Argumentation based on classical logic. In: Rahwan, I., Simari, G. (eds.) Argumentation in Artificial Intelligence, pp. 133–152. Springer, Heidelberg (2009)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  20. Prakken, H.: Formalising ordinary legal disputes: a case study. Artificial Intelligence and Law 16, 333–359 (2008)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Prakken, H.: An abstract framework for argumentation with structure arguments. Argument and Computation (to appear, 2010)

    Google Scholar 

  22. Voorhees, E.M.: Contradictions and justifications: Extensions to the textual entailment task. In: Proceedings of ACL-08: HLT, Columbus, Ohio, June 2008, pp. 63–71. Association for Computational Linguistics (2008)

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2010 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this paper

Cite this paper

Wyner, A., van Engers, T., Bahreini, K. (2010). From Policy-Making Statements to First-Order Logic. In: Andersen, K.N., Francesconi, E., Grönlund, Å., van Engers, T.M. (eds) Electronic Government and the Information Systems Perspective. EGOVIS 2010. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 6267. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-15172-9_5

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-15172-9_5

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-642-15171-2

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-642-15172-9

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics