References of "van der Torre, Leon 50003247"
     in
Bookmark and Share    
Full Text
Peer Reviewed
See detailPopulating legal ontologies using semantic role labeling
Humpreys, Lilo; Boella, Guido; van der Torre, Leon UL et al

in Artificial Intelligence and Law (2021), 29(2), 171-211

This article seeks to address the problem of the ‘resource consumption bottleneck’ of creating legal semantic technologies manually. It describes a semantic role labeling based information extraction ... [more ▼]

This article seeks to address the problem of the ‘resource consumption bottleneck’ of creating legal semantic technologies manually. It describes a semantic role labeling based information extraction system to extract definitions and norms from legislation and represent them as structured norms in legal ontologies. The output is intended to help make laws more accessible, understandable, and searchable in a legal document management system. [less ▲]

Detailed reference viewed: 25 (4 UL)
Full Text
Peer Reviewed
See detailExpectation: Personalized Explainable Artificial Intelligence for Decentralized Agents with Heterogeneous Knowledge
Calvaresi, Davide; Ciatto, Giovanni; Najjar, Amro UL et al

in Calvaresi, Davide; Najjar, Amro; Winikoff, Michael (Eds.) et al Explainable and Transparent AI and Multi-Agent Systems - Third International Workshop, EXTRAAMAS 2021, Virtual Event, May 3-7, 2021, Revised Selected Papers (2021)

Explainable AI (XAI) has emerged in recent years as a set of techniques and methodologies to interpret and explain machine learning (ML) predictors. To date, many initiatives have been proposed ... [more ▼]

Explainable AI (XAI) has emerged in recent years as a set of techniques and methodologies to interpret and explain machine learning (ML) predictors. To date, many initiatives have been proposed. Nevertheless, current research efforts mainly focus on methods tailored to specific ML tasks and algorithms, such as image classification and sentiment analysis. However, explanation techniques are still embryotic, and they mainly target ML experts rather than heterogeneous end-users. Furthermore, existing solutions assume data to be centralised, homogeneous, and fully/continuously accessible—circumstances seldom found altogether in practice. Arguably, a system-wide perspective is currently missing. The project named “Personalized Explainable Artificial Intelligence for Decentralized Agents with Heterogeneous Knowledge” (Expectation) aims at overcoming such limitations. This manuscript presents the overall objectives and approach of the Expectation project, focusing on the theoretical and practical advance of the state of the art of XAI towards the construction of personalised explanations in spite of decentralisation and heterogeneity of knowledge, agents, and explainees (both humans or virtual). To tackle the challenges posed by personalisation, decentralisation, and heterogeneity, the project fruitfully combines abstractions, methods, and approaches from the multi-agent systems, knowledge extraction / injec- tion, negotiation, argumentation, and symbolic reasoning communities. [less ▲]

Detailed reference viewed: 81 (5 UL)
Full Text
Peer Reviewed
See detailA Principle-based Analysis of Abstract Agent Argumentation Semantics
Yu, Liuwen UL; Chen, Dongheng; Qiao, Lisha et al

in Bienvenu, Meghyn; Lakemeyer, Gerhard; Erdem, Esra (Eds.) Proceedings of the 18th International Conference on Principles of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning, KR 2021, Online event, November 3-12, 2021 (2021)

Abstract agent argumentation frameworks extend Dung’s theory with agents, and in this paper we study four types of semantics for them. First, agent defense semantics replaces Dung’s notion of defense by ... [more ▼]

Abstract agent argumentation frameworks extend Dung’s theory with agents, and in this paper we study four types of semantics for them. First, agent defense semantics replaces Dung’s notion of defense by some kind of agent defense. Second, social agent semantics prefers arguments that belong to more agents. Third, agent reduction semantics considers the perspective of individual agents. Fourth, agent filtering semantics are inspired by a lack of knowledge. We study five existing principles and we introduce twelve new ones. In total, we provide a full analysis of fifty-two agent semantics and the seventeen principles. [less ▲]

Detailed reference viewed: 21 (5 UL)
Full Text
Peer Reviewed
See detailArguing coalitions in abstract argumentation
Qiao, Lisha; Shen, Yiqi; Yu, Liuwen et al

in Liao, Beishui; Luo, Jieting; van der Torre, Leon (Eds.) Logics for New-Generation AI 2021 (2021)

In this paper, we are interested in different ways in which agents can collaborate in abstract agent argumentation. First, if arguments are accepted when they are put forward by more than one agent, then ... [more ▼]

In this paper, we are interested in different ways in which agents can collaborate in abstract agent argumentation. First, if arguments are accepted when they are put forward by more than one agent, then agents can put forward arguments from other agents of the coalition. Second, agents can put forward arguments to defend argu- ments from other agents of the coalition. For example, in expert opinion, a domain expert can put forward an argument defending an argument made by a politician, even when the politician cannot judge the correctness of the argument. Third, agents from a coalition can collectively defend an argument they share, without being able to defend the argument individually. In this paper, we formalize the different kinds of collaboration in abstract agent argumentation, and we illustrate the coalition for- mation with a case study in political debate. [less ▲]

Detailed reference viewed: 8 (0 UL)
See detailTowards AI Logic for Social Reasoning
Dong, Huimin; Markovich, Réka UL; van der Torre, Leon UL

E-print/Working paper (2021)

Artificial Intelligence (AI) logic formalizes the reasoning of intelligent agents. In this paper, we discuss how an argumentation-based AI logic could be used also to formalize important aspects of social ... [more ▼]

Artificial Intelligence (AI) logic formalizes the reasoning of intelligent agents. In this paper, we discuss how an argumentation-based AI logic could be used also to formalize important aspects of social reasoning. Besides reasoning about the knowledge and actions of individual agents, social AI logic can reason also about social dependencies among agents using the rights, obligations and permissions of the agents. We discuss four aspects of social AI logic. First, we discuss how rights represent relations between the obligations and permissions of intelligent agents. Second, we discuss how to argue about the right-to-know, a central issue in the recent discussion of privacy and ethics. Third, we discuss how a wide variety of conflicts among intelligent agents can be identified and (sometimes) resolved by comparing formal arguments. Importantly, to cover a wide range of arguments occurring in daily life, also fallacious arguments can be represented and reasoned about. Fourth, we discuss how to argue about the freedom to act for intelligent agents. Examples from social, legal and ethical reasoning highlight the challenges in developing social AI logic. The discussion of the four challenges leads to a research program for argumentation-based social AI logic, contributing towards the future development of AI logic. [less ▲]

Detailed reference viewed: 32 (0 UL)
Full Text
Peer Reviewed
See detailBase Argumentation as an Abstraction of Deductive Argumentation
Chen, Jinsheng; Liao, Beishui; van der Torre, Leon UL

in Baroni, Pietro; Benzmüller, Christoph; Wáng, Yì N. (Eds.) Logic and Argumentation - 4th International Conference, CLAR 2021, Hangzhou, China, October 20-22, 2021, Proceedings (2021)

Base argumentation is a logic-based instantiation of abstract argumentation. Each base argument is a subset of the given knowledge base. In this paper, we show that base argumentation satisfies some ... [more ▼]

Base argumentation is a logic-based instantiation of abstract argumentation. Each base argument is a subset of the given knowledge base. In this paper, we show that base argumentation satisfies some rationality postulates, and that base argumentation is equivalent to deductive argumentation under complete semantics. Due to its simplicity, base argumentation can be seen as an abstraction of deductive argumentation. [less ▲]

Detailed reference viewed: 20 (0 UL)
Full Text
Peer Reviewed
See detailNew Weak Admissibility Semantics for Abstract Argumentation
Dauphin, Jérémie UL; Rienstra, Tjitze; van der Torre, Leon UL

in International Conference on Logic and Argumentation (2021)

Baumann, Brewka and Ulbricht recently introduced weak admissibility as an alternative to Dung’s notion of admissibility, and they used it to define weakly preferred, weakly complete and weakly grounded ... [more ▼]

Baumann, Brewka and Ulbricht recently introduced weak admissibility as an alternative to Dung’s notion of admissibility, and they used it to define weakly preferred, weakly complete and weakly grounded semantics of argumentation frameworks. In earlier work, we introduced two variants of their new semantics which we called qualified and semi-qualified semantics. We analysed all known variants of weak admissibility semantics with respect to some of the principles discussed in the literature on abstract argumentation, as well as some new principles we introduced to distinguish them all. Such a principle-based analysis can be used not only for selecting a semantics for an application, or for algorithmic design, but also for further research into weak admissibility semantics. In this paper, we introduce six new kinds of semantics based on weak admissibility, and we provide an initial principle-based analysis. The analysis illustrates various ways in which the new semantics improve on existing ones. [less ▲]

Detailed reference viewed: 40 (1 UL)
Full Text
See detailNew-Generation AIs Reasoning about Norms and Values
Markovich, Réka UL; Najjar, Amro UL; van der Torre, Leon UL

in Logics for New-Generation AI 2021 (2021)

Detailed reference viewed: 44 (0 UL)
Full Text
Peer Reviewed
See detailLogiKEy Workbench: Deontic Logics, Logic Combinations and Expressive Ethical and Legal Reasoning (Isabelle/HOL Dataset)
Benzmüller, Christoph UL; Farjami, Ali UL; Fuenmajor, David et al

in Data in Brief (2020), 33

The LogiKEy workbench and dataset for ethical and legal reasoning is presented. This workbench simultaneously supports development, experimentation, assessment and deployment of formal logics and ethical ... [more ▼]

The LogiKEy workbench and dataset for ethical and legal reasoning is presented. This workbench simultaneously supports development, experimentation, assessment and deployment of formal logics and ethical and legal theories at different conceptual layers. More concretely, it comprises, in form of a dataset (Isabelle/HOL theory files), formal encodings of multiple deontic logics, logic combinations, deontic paradoxes and normative theories in the higher-order proof assistant system Isabelle/HOL. The data were acquired through application of the LogiKEy methodology, which supports experimentation with different normative theories, in different application scenarios, and which is not tied to specific logics or logic combinations. Our workbench consolidates related research contributions of the authors and it may serve as a starting point for further studies and experiments in flexible and expressive ethical and legal reasoning. It may also support hands-on teaching of non-trivial logic formalisms in lecture courses and tutorials. [less ▲]

Detailed reference viewed: 154 (5 UL)
Full Text
See detailArtificial Intelligence in Space
Long, George Anthony; Santos, Cristiana; Rapp, Lucien et al

E-print/Working paper (2020)

Detailed reference viewed: 93 (2 UL)
Full Text
Peer Reviewed
See detailDeveloping AI Logic for Social Reasoning
Dong, Huimin; Markovich, Réka UL; van der Torre, Leon UL

in Journal of Zhejiang University (2020)

Detailed reference viewed: 64 (2 UL)
Full Text
Peer Reviewed
See detailAttack-Defence Frameworks: Argumentation-Based Semantics for Attack-Defence Trees.
Gabbay, Dov M. UL; Horne, Ross James UL; Mauw, Sjouke UL et al

in Graphical Models for Security - 7th International Workshop (2020)

Detailed reference viewed: 43 (11 UL)
Full Text
Peer Reviewed
See detailDesigning normative theories for ethical and legal reasoning: LogiKEy framework, methodology, and tool support
Benzmüller, Christoph; Parent, Xavier; van der Torre, Leon UL

in Artificial Intelligence and Law (2020), 287

A framework and methodology|termed LogiKEy|for the design and engineering of ethical reasoners, normative theories and deontic logics is presented. The overall motivation is the development of suitable ... [more ▼]

A framework and methodology|termed LogiKEy|for the design and engineering of ethical reasoners, normative theories and deontic logics is presented. The overall motivation is the development of suitable means for the control and governance of intelligent autonomous systems. LogiKEy's unifying formal framework is based on semantical embeddings of deontic logics, logic combinations and ethico-legal domain theories in expressive classic higher-order logic (HOL). This meta-logical approach enables the provision of powerful tool support in LogiKEy: off-the-shelf theorem provers and model finders for HOL are assisting the LogiKEy designer of ethical intelligent agents to flexibly experiment with underlying logics and their combinations, with ethico-legal domain theories, and with concrete examples|all at the same time. Continuous improvements of these off-the-shelf provers, without further ado, leverage the reasoning performance in LogiKEy. Case studies, in which the LogiKEy framework and methodology has been applied and tested, give evidence that HOL's undecidability often does not hinder e fficient experimentation. [less ▲]

Detailed reference viewed: 51 (2 UL)
Full Text
Peer Reviewed
See detailIntention as commitment toward time
van Zee, Marc; Doder, Dragan; van der Torre, Leon UL et al

in Artificial Intelligence and Law (2020), 283

In this paper we address the interplay among intention, time, and belief in dynamic environments. The first contribution is a logic for reasoning about intention, time and belief, in which assumptions of ... [more ▼]

In this paper we address the interplay among intention, time, and belief in dynamic environments. The first contribution is a logic for reasoning about intention, time and belief, in which assumptions of intentions are represented by preconditions of intended actions. Intentions and beliefs are coherent as long as these assumptions are not violated, i.e. as long as intended actions can be performed such that their preconditions hold as well. The second contribution is the formalization of what-if scenarios: what happens with intentions and beliefs if a new (possibly conflicting) intention is adopted, or a new fact is learned? An agent is committed to its intended actions as long as its belief-intention database is coherent. We conceptualize intention as commitment toward time and we develop AGM-based postulates for the iterated revision of belief-intention databases, and we prove a Katsuno-Mendelzon-style representation theorem. [less ▲]

Detailed reference viewed: 64 (2 UL)
Full Text
Peer Reviewed
See detailPopulating legal ontologies using semantic role labeling
Humphreys, Llio; Boella, Guido; van der Torre, Leon UL et al

in Artificial Intelligence and Law (2020)

This paper is concerned with the goal of maintaining legal information and compliance systems: the ‘resource consumption bottleneck’ of creating semantic technologies manually. The use of automated ... [more ▼]

This paper is concerned with the goal of maintaining legal information and compliance systems: the ‘resource consumption bottleneck’ of creating semantic technologies manually. The use of automated information extraction techniques could significantly reduce this bottleneck. The research question of this paper is: How to address the resource bottleneck problem of creating specialist knowledge management systems? In particular, how to semi-automate the extraction of norms and their elements to populate legal ontologies? This paper shows that the acquisition paradox can be addressed by combining state-of-the-art general-purpose NLP modules with pre- and post-processing using rules based on domain knowledge. It describes a Semantic Role Labeling based information extraction system to extract norms from legislation and represent them as structured norms in legal ontologies. The output is intended to help make laws more accessible, understandable, and searchable in legal document management systems such as Eunomos (Boella et al., 2016). [less ▲]

Detailed reference viewed: 86 (4 UL)
Full Text
Peer Reviewed
See detailA bimodal simulation of defeasibility in thenormative domain
Libal, Tomer UL; van der Torre, Leon UL; Gabbay, Dov M. UL et al

in CEUR Workshop Proceedings (2020)

In the present work we illustrate how two sorts of defeasiblereasoning that are fundamental in the normative domain, that is, reasoning about exceptions and reasoning about violations, can be simulated ... [more ▼]

In the present work we illustrate how two sorts of defeasiblereasoning that are fundamental in the normative domain, that is, reasoning about exceptions and reasoning about violations, can be simulated via monotonic propositional theories based on a bimodal language with primitive operators representing knowledge and obligation. The proposed theoretical framework paves the way to using native theorem provers for multimodal logic, such as MleanCoP, in order to automate normative reasoning. [less ▲]

Detailed reference viewed: 35 (3 UL)
Full Text
Peer Reviewed
See detailA Principle-Based Analysis of Weakly Admissible Semantics
Dauphin, Jérémie UL; Rienstra, Tjitze; van der Torre, Leon UL

in Computational Models of Argument - Proceedings of COMMA 2020, Perugia Italy, September 4-11, 2020 (2020)

Baumann, Brewka and Ulbricht recently introduced weak admissibility as an alternative to Dung’s notion of admissibility, and they use it to define weakly preferred, weakly complete and weakly grounded ... [more ▼]

Baumann, Brewka and Ulbricht recently introduced weak admissibility as an alternative to Dung’s notion of admissibility, and they use it to define weakly preferred, weakly complete and weakly grounded semantics of argumentation frameworks. In this paper we analyze their new semantics with respect to the principles discussed in the literature on abstract argumentation. Moreover, we introduce two variants of their new semantics, which we call qualified and semiqualified semantics, and we check which principles they satisfy as well. Since the existing principles do not distinguish our new semantics from the ones of Baumann et al., we also introduce some new principles to distinguish them. Besides selecting a semantics for an application, or for algorithmic design, our new principle-based analysis can also be used for the further search for weak admissibility semantics. [less ▲]

Detailed reference viewed: 62 (8 UL)
Full Text
Peer Reviewed
See detailInterpretation of Support among Arguments
Yu, Liuwen; Markovich, Réka UL; van der Torre, Leon UL

in Legal Knowledge and Information Systems – Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence and Application Series (2020)

Detailed reference viewed: 59 (4 UL)
Full Text
See detailA geometrical view of I/O logic
Gabbay, Dov M. UL; Parent, Xavier UL; van der Torre, Leon UL

Report (2019)

Detailed reference viewed: 65 (9 UL)
Full Text
Peer Reviewed
See detailA dynamic approach for combining abstract argumentation semantics
Dauphin, Jérémie UL; Cramer, Marcos; van der Torre, Leon UL

in Dynamics, Uncertainty and Reasoning (2019)

Abstract argumentation semantics provide a direct relation from an argumentation framework to corresponding sets of acceptable arguments, or equivalently to labeling functions. Instead, we study step-wise ... [more ▼]

Abstract argumentation semantics provide a direct relation from an argumentation framework to corresponding sets of acceptable arguments, or equivalently to labeling functions. Instead, we study step-wise update relations on argumentation frameworks whose fixpoints represent the labeling functions on the arguments. We make use of this dynamic approach in order to study novel ways of combining abstract argumentation semantics. In particular, we introduce the notion of a merge of two argumentation semantics, which is defined in such a way that the merge of the preferred and the grounded semantics is the complete semantics. Finally we consider how to define new semantics using the merge operator, in particular how meaningfully combine features of naive-based and complete-based semantics. [less ▲]

Detailed reference viewed: 83 (11 UL)