Academia.eduAcademia.edu

Outline

Title
Abstract
Introduction
Background: Compliance Checking on RDF Data
The Use Case
Formalizing the Use Case in Shacl
Formalizing the Use Case in DLV2
Conclusions
References
All Topics
Philosophy
Philosophy of Religion

Efficient compliance checking of RDF data

Profile image of Francesco CalimeriFrancesco Calimeri

Journal of Logic and Computation

https://doi.org/10.1093/LOGCOM/EXAD034
visibility

…

description

24 pages

link

1 file

Abstract

Automated compliance checking, i.e. the task of automatically assessing whether states of affairs comply with normative systems, has recently received a lot of attention from the scientific community, also as a consequence of the increasing investments in Artificial Intelligence technologies for the legal domain (LegalTech). The authors of this paper deem as crucial the research and implementation of compliance checkers that can directly process data in RDF format, as nowadays more and more (big) data in this format are becoming available worldwide, across a multitude of different domains. Among the automated technologies that have been used in recent literature, to the best of our knowledge, only two of them have been evaluated with input states of affairs encoded in RDF format. This paper formalizes a selected use case in these two technologies and compares the implementations, also in terms of simulations with respect to shared synthetic datasets.

Related papers

Query-Driven Verification of Data Integration in the RDF Data Model
Sergey Stupnikov

Lobachevskii Journal of Mathematics

Methods and tools for data integration are very important for problem solving in research infrastructures supporting the FAIR data management principles which are findability, accessibility, interoperability, and reuse of data. Data integration processes are usually implemented in specific information systems and can be very complicated. An essential issue of the development of such systems is the formal checking of the correctness (verification) of data integration. This paper considers data integration using the RDF data model that is positioned as the unifying data model of the FAIR reference implementation. A query-driven method for verification of the correctness of data integration in the RDF data model is proposed. The method applies formal specification language based on first-order logic and set theory.

View PDFchevron_right
RDF Validation Requirements-Evaluation and Logical Underpinning
Erman Acar

There are many case studies for which the formulation of RDF constraints and the validation of RDF data conforming to these constraint is very important. As a part of the collaboration with the W3C and the DCMI working groups on RDF validation, we identified major RDF validation requirements and initiated an RDF validation requirements database which is available to contribute at http://purl.org/net/rdf-validation. The purpose of this database is to collaboratively collect case studies, use cases, requirements, and solutions regarding RDF validation. Although, there are multiple constraint languages which can be used to formulate RDF constraints (associated with these requirements), there is no standard way to formulate them. This paper serves to evaluate to which extend each requirement is satisfied by each of these constraint languages. We take reasoning into account as an important pre-validation step and therefore map constraints to DL in order to show that each constraint can be mapped to an ontology describing RDF constraints generically.

View PDFchevron_right
Modelling Legal Knowledge for GDPR Compliance Checking
Guido Governatori

2018

In the last fifteen years, Semantic Web technologies have been successfully applied to the legal domain. By composing all those techniques and theoretical methods, we propose an integrated framework for modelling legal documents and legal knowledge to support legal reasoning, in particular checking compliance. This paper presents a proof-of-concept applied to the GDPR domain, with the aim to detect infringements of privacy compulsory norms or to prevent possible violations using BPMN and Regorous engine.

View PDFchevron_right
Validating statistical index data represented in RDF using SPARQL queries
Jose Emilio Labra Gayo
View PDFchevron_right
Fast Compliance Checking with General Vocabularies
Iliana Petrova

ArXiv, 2020

We address the problem of complying with the GDPR while processing and transferring personal data on the web. For this purpose we introduce an extensible profile of OWL2 for representing data protection policies. With this language, a company's data usage policy can be checked for compliance with data subjects' consent and with a formalized fragment of the GDPR by means of subsumption queries. The outer structure of the policies is restricted in order to make compliance checking highly scalable, as required when processing high-frequency data streams or large data volumes. However, the vocabularies for specifying policy properties can be chosen rather freely from expressive Horn fragments of OWL2. We exploit IBQ reasoning to integrate specialized reasoners for the policy language and the vocabulary's language. Our experiments show that this approach significantly improves performance.

View PDFchevron_right
Semantic Business Process Regulatory Compliance Checking Using LegalRuleML
Guido Governatori

Lecture Notes in Computer Science, 2016

Legal documents are the source of norms, guidelines, and rules that often feed into different applications. In this perspective, to foster the need of development and deployment of different applications, it is important to have a sufficiently expressive conceptual framework such that various heterogeneous aspects of norms can be modeled and reasoned with. In this paper, we investigate how to exploit Semantic Web technologies and languages, such as LegalRuleML, to model a legal document. We show how the semantic annotations can be used to empower a business process (regulatory) compliance system and discuss the challenges of adapting a semantic approach to legal domain. Supported by EU H2020 research and innovation programme under the Marie Sk lodowska-Curie grant agreement No. 690974 for the project MIREL: MIning and REasoning with Legal texts.

View PDFchevron_right
Requirements on RDF Constraint Formulation and Validation
Kai Eckert

International Conference on Dublin Core and Metadata Applications, 2014

For many RDF applications, the formulation of constraints and the automatic validation of data according to these constraints is a much sought-after feature. In 2013, the W3C invited experts from industry, government and academia to the RDF Validation Workshop, where first use cases have been presented and discussed. In collaboration with the W3C, a working group on RDF Application Profiles (RDF-AP) is currently established in the Dublin Core Metadata Initiative that follows up on this workshop and addresses among others RDF constraint formulation and validation. In this paper, we present a database of requirements obtained from various sources, including the use cases presented at the workshop as well as in the RDF-AP WG. The database, which is openly available and extendible, is used to evaluate and compare several existing approaches for constraint formulation and validation. We present a classification and analysis of the requirements, show that none of the approaches satisfy all requirements and aim at laying the ground for future work, as well as fostering discussions how to close existing gaps.

View PDFchevron_right
Logical Detection of Invalid SameAs Statements in RDF Data
Laura Papaleo

Lecture Notes in Computer Science, 2014

In the last years, thanks to the standardization of Semantic Web technologies, we are experiencing an unprecedented production of data, published online as Linked Data. In this context, when a typed link is instantiated between two different resources referring to the same real world entity, the usage of owl:sameAs is generally predominant. However, recent research discussions have shown issues in the use of owl:sameAs. Problems arise both in cases in which sameAs is automatically discovered by a data linking tool erroneously, or when users declare it but meaning something less 'strict' than the semantics defined by OWL. In this work, we discuss further this issue and we present a method for logically detect invalid sameAs statements under specific circumstances. We report our experimental results, performed on OAEI datasets, to prove that the approach is promising.

View PDFchevron_right
Validating RDF Data Quality Using Constraints to Direct the Development of Constraint Languages
Kai Eckert

2016 IEEE Tenth International Conference on Semantic Computing (ICSC), 2016

For research institutes, data libraries, and data archives, RDF data validation according to predefined constraints is a much sought-after feature, particularly as this is taken for granted in the XML world. Based on our work in the DCMI RDF Application Profiles Task Group and in cooperation with the W3C Data Shapes Working Group, we identified and published by today 81 types of constraints that are required by various stakeholders for data applications. In this paper, in collaboration with several domain experts we formulate 115 constraints on three different vocabularies (DDI-RDF, QB, and SKOS) and classify them according to (1) the severity of an occurring violation and (2) the complexity of the constraint expression in common constraint languages. We evaluate the data quality of 15,694 data sets (4.26 billion triples) of research data for the social, behavioral, and economic sciences obtained from 33 SPARQL endpoints. Based on the results, we formulate several findings to direct the further development of constraint languages.

View PDFchevron_right
Using RDF for policy specification and enforcement
Barbara Carminati

2004

Abstract Security issues for the resource description framework (RDF)[RDF] are today crucial due to the key role played by RDF for the semantic Web [Berners-Lee, T. et al.(2001)]. However, despite its importance, RDF security is still a novel area and very little work has been done so far. We make a first step in this direction by proposing an approach for using RDF for policy specification and enforcement.

View PDFchevron_right

References (46)

  1. M. Alviano, F. Calimeri, C. Dodaro, D. Fuscà, N. Leone, S. Perri, F. Ricca, P. Veltri and J. Zangari. The ASP system DLV2. In LPNMR. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 10377, pp. 215-221. Springer, 2017.
  2. T. Athan, H. Boley, G. Governatori, M. Palmirani, A. Paschke and A. Wyner. LegalRuleML: from Metamodel to use cases. In Theory, Practice, and Applications of Rules on the Web, L. Morgenstern, P. Stefaneas, F. Lévy, A. Wyner and A. Paschke., eds. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg, 2013.
  3. T. Athan, G. Governatori, M. Palmirani, A. Paschke and A. Wyner. LegalRuleML: Design Principles and Foundations. Springer International Publishing, 2015.
  4. A. Bibal, M. Lognoul, A. De Streel and B. Frénay. Legal requirements on explainability in machine learning. Artificial Intelligence and Law, 29, 149-169, 2021.
  5. G. Boella, L. Di Caro, L. Humphreys, L. Robaldo, P. Rossi and L. van der Torre. Eunomos, a legal document and knowledge management system for the web to provide relevant, reliable and up-to-date information on the law. Artificial Intelligence and Law, 24, 245-283, 2016.
  6. G. Boella, L. Di Caro, L. Humphreys, L. Robaldo and L. van der Torre. NLP challenges for Eunomos a tool to build and manage legal knowledge. In Proceedings of the Eighth International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation, LREC 2012, N. Calzolari, K. Choukri, T. Declerck, M. U. Dogan, B. Maegaard, J. Mariani, J. Odijk and S. Piperidis., eds. European Language Resources Association (ELRA), 2012.
  7. G. Boella, L. Di Caro, D. Rispoli and L. Robaldo. A system for classifying multi-label text into eurovoc. In Proceedings of 14th International Conference for Artificial Intelligence and Law (ICAIL). ACM, 2013.
  8. P. A. Bonatti, L. Ioffredo, I. M. Petrova, L. Sauro and I. S. R. Siahaan. Real-time reasoning in OWL2 for GDPR compliance. Artificial Intelligence, 289, 103389, 2020.
  9. F. Calimeri, W. Faber, M. Gebser, G. Ianni, R. Kaminski, T. Krennwallner, N. Leone, M. Maratea, F. Ricca and T. Schaub. ASP-Core-2 input language format. Theory and Practice of Logic Programming, 20, 294-309, 2020.
  10. F. Calimeri, D. Fuscà, S. Perri and J. Zangari. External computations and interoperability in the new DLV grounder. In AI*IA. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 10640. Springer, 2017.
  11. F. Calimeri, M. Gebser, M. Maratea and F. Ricca. Design and results of the fifth answer set programming competition. Artificial Intelligence, 231, 151-181, 2016.
  12. G. Casini, T. Meyer, K. Moodley, U. Sattler and I. Varzinczak. Introducing defeasibility into OWL ontologies. In Proceedings of International Semantic Web Conference (ISWC), R. Meersman, P. Herrero and T. Dillon., eds, 2015.
  13. M. Ceci. Representing judicial argumentation in the semantic web. In AI Approaches to the Complexity of Legal Systems (AICOL 2013). Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 8929, P. Casanovas, U. Pagallo, M. Palmirani and G. Sartor., eds. Springer, 2013.
  14. I. Chalkidis and D. Kampas. Deep learning in law: early adaptation and legal word embeddings trained on large corpora. Artificial Intelligence and Law, 27, 171-198, 2019.
  15. R. David, S. Ahmetaj, M. Šimkus and A. Polleres. Repairing SHACL constraint violations using answer set programming. In Proceedings of the 21st International Semantic Web Conference (ISWC), 2022.
  16. M. De Vos, S. Kirrane, J. A. Padget and K. Satoh. ODRL policy modelling and compliance checking. In Rules and Reasoning-Third International Joint Conference, RuleML+RR, P. Fodor, M. Montali, D. Calvanese and D. Roman., eds, 2019.
  17. E. Francesconi and G. Governatori. Patterns for legal compliance checking in a decidable framework of linked open data. Artificial Intelligence and Law (in press), 2022.
  18. D. Gabbay, J. Horty, X. Parent, R. van der Meyden and L. van der Torre. Handbook of Deontic Logic and Normative Systems. College Publications, 2013.
  19. F. Gandon, G. Governatori and S. Villata. Normative requirements as linked data. In Legal Knowledge and Information Systems, A. Z. Wyner and G. Casini., eds, vol. 302. IOS Press, 2017.
  20. B. Glimm, I. Horrocks, B. Motik, G. Stoilos and Z. Wang. HermiT: An OWL 2 reasoner. Journal of Automated Reasoning, 53, 245-269, 2014.
  21. T. F. Gordon. Combining rules and ontologies with Carneades. In Proceedings of the 5th International RuleML2011@BRF Challenge, S. Bragaglia, C. V. Damásio, M. Montali, A. D. Preece, C. J. Petrie, M. Proctor and U. Straccia., eds, 2011.
  22. T. F. Gordon. Constructing legal arguments with rules in the legal knowledge interchange format (LKIF). In Computable Models of the Law, P. Casanovas, G. Sartor, N. Casellas and R. Rubino., eds. Springer, 2008.
  23. G. Governatori. The regorous approach to process compliance. In 19th IEEE International Enterprise Distributed Object Computing Workshop, J. Kolb, B. Weber, S. Hallé, W. Mayer, A. K. Ghose and G. Grossmann., eds. IEEE Computer Society, 2015.
  24. G. Governatori and A. Rotolo. Logic of violations: a Gentzen system for reasoning with contrary-to-duty obligations. Australasian Journal of Logic, 4, 2006.
  25. G. Governatori and A. Rotolo. Time and compensation mechanisms in checking legal compliance. Journal of Applied Logics-IfCoLog Journal, 6, 815-846, 2019.
  26. L. Humphreys, G. Boella, L. van der Torre, L. Robaldo, L. Di Caro, S. Ghanavati and R. Muthuri. Populating legal ontologies using semantic role labeling. Artificial Intelligence & Law, 29, 171-211, 2021.
  27. M. B. Islam and G. Governatori. RuleRS: a rule-based architecture for decision support systems. Artificial Intelligence and Law, 26, 315-344, 2018.
  28. H.-P. Lam and G. Governatori. The making of SPINdle. In A. Paschke, G. Governatori and J. Hall., eds, Proceedings of International Symposium on Rule Interchange and Applications (RuleML 2009), Available online athttp://spindle.data61.csiro.au/spindle, 2009. Springer.
  29. H.-P. Lam, M. Hashmi and B. Scofield. In Enabling Reasoning with LegalRuleML, Rule Technologies. Research, Tools, and Applications-10th International Symposium, RuleML 2016, Stony Brook, NY, USA, July 6-9, 2016. Proceedings. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 9718, J. J. Alferes, L. E. Bertossi, G. Governatori, P. Fodor and D. Roman., eds, pp. 241-257. Springer, 2016.
  30. V. Leone, L. Di Caro and S. Villata. Taking stock of legal ontologies: a feature-based comparative analysis. Artificial Intelligence and Law, 28, 207-235, 2020.
  31. R. Nanda, L. Di Caro, G. Boella, H. Konstantinov, T. Tyankov, D. Traykov, H. Hristov, F. Costamagna, L. Humphreys, L. Robaldo and M. Romano. A unifying similarity measure for automated identification of national implementations of European union directives. In Proceedings of the 16th International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Law (ICAIL).
  32. A. Nazarenko, F. Lévy and A. Wyner. An annotation language for semantic search of legal sources. In Proceedings of 11th International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation (LREC). European Language Resources Association (ELRA), 2018.
  33. M. Palmirani and G. Governatori. Modelling legal knowledge for GDPR compliance checking. In Legal Knowledge and Information Systems-JURIX . Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence and Applications, vol. 313, M. Palmirani., ed., pp. 101-110. IOS Press, 2018.
  34. H. J. Pandit, D. O'Sullivan and D. Lewis. Exploring GDPR compliance over provenance graphs using SHACL. In Proceedings of the Conference on Semantic Systems (SEMANTiCS 2018), A. Khalili and M. Koutraki., eds, 2018.
  35. P. Pareti, G. Konstantinidis, F. Mogavero and T. J. Norman. SHACL satisfiability and containment. In Proceedings of 19th International Semantic Web Conference (ISWC), , et al. J. Z. Pan., eds. Springer, 2020.
  36. P. Pareti, G. Konstantinidis, T. J. Norman and M. Sensoy. SHACL constraints with inference rules. In Proceedings of 18th International Semantic Web Conference (ISWC), C. Ghidini, O. Hartig, M. Maleshkova, V. Svátek, I. F. Cruz, A. Hogan, J. Song, M. Lefrançois and F. Gandon., eds. Springer, 2019.
  37. A. Paschke. Reaction RuleML 1.0 for rules, events and actions in semantic complex event processing. In Rules on the Web. From Theory to Applications, A. Bikakis, P. Fodor and D. Roman., eds. Springer International Publishing, 2014.
  38. L. Robaldo. Towards compliance checking in reified I/O logic via SHACL. In Proceedings of 18th International Conference for Artificial Intelligence and Law (ICAIL), J. Maranhão and A. Z. Wyner., eds. ACM, 2021.
  39. L. Robaldo, C. Bartolini, M. Palmirani, A. Rossi, M. Martoni and G. Lenzini. Formalizing GDPR provisions in reified I/O logic: the DAPRECO knowledge base. The Journal of Logic, Language, and Information, 29, 401-449, 2020.
  40. L. Robaldo, S. Batsakis, R. Calegari, F. Calimeri, M. Fujita, G. Governatori, M. Morelli, F. Pacenza, G. Pisano, K. Satoh, I. Tachmazidis and J. Zangari. Compliance checking on first- order knowledge with conf licting and compensatory norms-a comparison among currently available technologies. Artificial Intelligence and Law, in press, 2023.
  41. L. Robaldo and X. Sun. Reified input/output logic: combining input/output logic and reification to represent norms coming from existing legislation. The Journal of Logic and Computation, 27, 2471-2503, 2017.
  42. L. Robaldo, S. Villata, A. Wyner and M. Grabmair. Introduction for artificial intelligence and law: special issue "natural language processing for legal texts". Artificial Intelligence and Law, 27, 113-115, 2019.
  43. G. Sartor. Legal concepts as inferential nodes and ontological categories. Artificial Intelligence and Law, 17, 217-251, 2009.
  44. X. Sun and L. Robaldo. On the complexity of input/output logic. The Journal of Applied Logic, 25, 69-88, 2017.
  45. B. Waltl and R. Vogl. Explainable artificial intelligence-the new frontier in legal informatics. Jusletter IT, 22, 2018.
  46. XAILA Manifesto Workshop "Explainable and Responsible AI and Law". http://xaila.geist.re, 2022. Received 1 May 2023 Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/logcom/advance-article/doi/10.1093/logcom/exad034/7190757 by guest on 09 June 2023

Related papers

Validating RDF Data
Jose Emilio Labra Gayo

Synthesis Lectures on the Semantic Web: Theory and Technology, 2017

Whether you call it the Semantic Web, Linked Data, or Web 3.0, a new generation of Web technologies is offering major advances in the evolution of the World Wide Web. As the first generation of this technology transitions out of the laboratory, new research is exploring how the growing Web of Data will change our world. While topics such as ontology-building and logics remain vital, new areas such as the use of semantics in Web search, the linking and use of open data on the Web, and future applications that will be supported by these technologies are becoming important research areas in their own right. Whether they be scientists, engineers or practitioners, Web users increasingly need to understand not just the new technologies of the Semantic Web, but to understand the principles by which those technologies work, and the best practices for assembling systems that integrate the different languages, resources, and functionalities that will be important in keeping the Web the rapidly expanding, and constantly changing, information space that has changed our lives. Topics to be included:

View PDFchevron_right
Using Rule-Based Reasoning for RDF Validation
Ben De Meester

Rules and Reasoning, 2017

The success of the Semantic Web highly depends on its ingredients. If we want to fully realize the vision of a machine-readable Web, it is crucial that Linked Data are actually useful for machines consuming them. On this background it is not surprising that (Linked) Data validation is an ongoing research topic in the community. However, most approaches so far either do not consider reasoning, and thereby miss the chance of detecting implicit constraint violations, or they base themselves on a combination of dierent formalisms, eg Description Logics combined with SPARQL. In this paper, we propose using Rule-Based Web Logics for RDF validation focusing on the concepts needed to support the most common validation constraints, such as Scoped Negation As Failure (SNAF), and the predicates dened in the Rule Interchange Format (RIF). We prove the feasibility of the approach by providing an implementation in Notation3 Logic. As such, we show that rule logic can cover both validation and reasoning if it is expressive enough.

View PDFchevron_right
Patterns for legal compliance checking in a decidable framework of linked open data
Enrico Francesconi

Artificial Intelligence and Law

This paper presents an approach for legal compliance checking in the Semantic Web which can be effectively applied for applications in the Linked Open Data environment. It is based on modeling deontic norms in terms of ontology classes and ontology property restrictions. It is also shown how this approach can handle norm defeasibility. Such methodology is implemented by decidable fragments of OWL 2, while legal reasoning is carried out by available decidable reasoners. The approach is generalised by presenting patterns for modeling deontic norms and norms compliance checking.

View PDFchevron_right
Directing the Development of Constraint Languages by Checking Constraints on RDF Data
Kai Eckert

International Journal of Semantic Computing, 2016

For research institutes, data libraries, and data archives, validating RDF data according to predefined constraints is a much sought-after feature, particularly as this is taken for granted in the XML world. Based on our work in two international working groups on RDF validation and jointly identified requirements to formulate constraints and validate RDF data, we have published 81 types of constraints that are required by various stakeholders for data applications. In this paper, we evaluate the usability of identified constraint types for assessing RDF data quality by (1) collecting and classifying 115 constraints on vocabularies commonly used in the social, behavioral, and economic sciences, either from the vocabularies themselves or from domain experts, and (2) validating 15,694 data sets (4.26 billion triples) of research data against these constraints. We classify each constraint according to (1) the severity of occurring violations and (2) based on which types of constraint l...

View PDFchevron_right
The Role of Reasoning for RDF Validation
Kai Eckert

For data practitioners embracing the world of RDF and Linked Data, the openness and flexibility is a mixed blessing. For them, data validation according to predefined constraints is a much sought-after feature, particularly as this is taken for granted in the XML world. Based on our work in the DCMI RDF Application Profiles Task Group and in cooperation with the W3C Data Shapes Working Group, we published by today 81 types of constraints that are required by various stakeholders for data applications. These constraint types form the basis to investigate the role that reasoning and different semantics play in practical data validation, why reasoning is beneficial for RDF validation, and how to overcome the major shortcomings when validating RDF data by performing reasoning prior to validation. For each constraint type, we examine (1) if reasoning may im- prove data quality, (2) how efficient in terms of runtime val- idation is performed with and without reasoning, and (3) if validation results depend on underlying semantics which differs between reasoning and validation. Using these findings, we determine for the most common constraint languages which constraint types they enable to express and give di- rections for the further development of constraint languages.

View PDFchevron_right

Related topics

  • Computer Science
  • Philosophy and Religious Studies
    • 580 California St., Suite 400
    San Francisco, CA, 94104
    © 2025 Academia. All rights reserved