A Tool for DILIGENT Argumentation: Experiences, Requirements and Design

http://www.sekt-project.com

A Tool for DILIGENT Argumentation:A Tool for DILIGENT Argumentation:Experiences, Requirements and DesignExperiences, Requirements and Design

Michael Engler Michael Engler British Telecom plc.British Telecom plc.

Research & VenturingResearch & Venturing

Denny Vrandecic,Denny Vrandecic,York SureYork Sure

AIFBAIFB


Motivation: Legal Domain• Problem:

• New Judges have theoretical knowledge, but little practical knowledge

• On Duty:• When they are confronted with situations in which they are not

sure what to do• “Disturb” experienced judges with typical questions.

• Solution:• Design an intelligent system to help new judges with their

typical problems.• Extended FAQ system using Semantic Web technologies• Connect the FAQ system with the exiting jurisprudence.

• Search Jurisprudence using Semantic Web technologies.

Building a new ontology


First Approach

+ Based on 800 competency questions

+ Questions were clustered

+ Middle-out strategy

– Usage of ontology not considered

– Repetitive discussions

– Long discussions


Improvements

• Usage of DILIGENT• Speedier discussions

• Restriction of arguments

• Usage of a wiki• Tracking of arguments• Access from geographical dispersed locations


DILIGENT

1. Build

2. Local adaption

3. Analysis

4. Revision

5. Local update


Diligent Argumentation Ontology

• Argumentation ontology defined

• Based on Case Studies to identify the most effective types of arguments

• Argument type recognition based on RST


Improvements, but…

• Visualisation in wiki not supported• Lacking tool cooperation

• Management of sources harder• Argument classification harder• No tight integration in an ontology editor• No notification• (No voting)


Design of DILIGENT-Tool

• Visualisation: Idea sets• Allows exploring alternative modelling

• Sources• URIs, e.g. competency questions

• Arguments need to be classified• Notification by IM or E-Mail• Voting

• Quick way of expressing opinion• Threshold?• Final decision?


Connection to DILIGENT

• Supports the steps build, analysis, revision


Workmodel


Perspective of user JustinePerspective of user Justine


Issue

C

Tasks

Issues

Sources Ideas

Visualization

CQ315

CQ220

CQ237

guardianship

File Edit View Search Window Help

Common law

Common law

C RR I

agree

disagree


Issue

C

Tasks

Issues

Sources Ideas

Visualization

CQ315

CQ220

CQ237

guardianship


Common law

Common law

C RR I

agree

disagree

Task CQ315

Task:

Text:

Sources:

ok cancel

Status:Issues:

CQ315

Create concepts, relations and instances from the competency question CQ315

CQ315Assigned to: Justine

open

done

postponed


C

Tasks

Issues

Sources Ideas

Visualization

CQ220

CQ237

guardianship


Common law

Common law

C RR I

agree

disagreeCQ315

How are foreign marriages approved?

Issue

CQ315


C

Tasks

Issues

Sources Ideas

Visualization

CQ220

CQ237

guardianship


Common law

Common law

C RR I

agree

disagreeCQ315


Issue

New Issue

Issue:

Text:

CQ315

ok cancel

Sources:

Status: open

postponed

Modeling primitives:

CQ315


C

Tasks

Issues

Sources Ideas

Visualization

CQ220

CQ237

guardianship


Common law

Common law

C RR I

agree

disagreeCQ315


Issue

New Issue

Issue:

Text:

CQ315

ok cancel

Sources:

Status: open

postponed

Modeling primitives:

Partnership

We need to model partnership, and relations between men and women in a partnership.

CQ315


C

Tasks

Issues

Sources Ideas

Visualization

CQ315

CQ220

CQ237

guardianship


Common law

Common law

C RR I

CQ315


Partnership

Issue: Partnership

[Issue] Justine: We need to model partnership, and relations between men and women with partnership.

agree

disagree

Status: under discussion

Pro: Justine


[Issue] Justine: We need to model partnership, and relations

between men and women with partnership.

C

Tasks

Issues

Sources Ideas

Visualization

CQ315

CQ220

CQ237

guardianship


Common law

Common law

C RR I

agree

disagreeCQ315


Issue

Label:

Synonyms:

ok cancel

URI:

Argumentation:

Comment:

New Concept

Example

Pro: Justine

Partnership


[Issue] Justine: We need to model partnership, and relations

between men and women with partnership.

C

Tasks

Issues

Sources Ideas

Visualization

CQ315

CQ220

CQ237

guardianship


Common law

Common law

C RR I

agree

disagreeCQ315


Issue

Label:

Synonyms:

ok cancel

URI:

Argumentation:

Comment:

New Concept

Example

Partnership

http://www.law_ontology.de/#Partnership

We need P as a more general concept because of same-sex partnerships. They are not marriages.

Pro: Justine

Partnership


C

Tasks

Issues

Sources Ideas

Visualization

CQ315

CQ220

CQ237

guardianship


Common law

Common law

C RR I

agree

disagreeCQ315


Issue: Partnership C: Partnership

C: Partnership

[pro] Justine: We need P as a general concept because of same-sex unions. They cannot be marriages.

Pro: Justine

Partnership


Perspective of user JackPerspective of user Jack


Issue

C

Tasks

Sources Ideas

Visualization

Review Partnership

Review Citzenship

CQ819


Common law

C RR I

agree

disagree

Issues

guardianship

Common law

Partnership


Issue

C

Sources Ideas

Visualization


C RR I

agree

disagree

Issues

guardianship

Common law

Partnership

Task Review Partnership

Task:

Text:

Sources:

ok cancel

Status:Issues:

Review Partnership

Review issue and ideas.

CQ217Assigned to: Justine

open

done

postponed

Partnership

Tasks

Review Partnership

Review Citzenship

Common law

CQ819


Issue

C

Sources Ideas

Visualization


C RR I

agree

disagree

Issues

guardianship

Common law

Tasks

Review Partnership

Review Citzenship

CQ819

Common law

Partnership


C

Issues

Sources

Visualization

guardianship


Common law

C RR I

CQ315


Partnership

Ideas

C: Partnership

C: Marriage is-a Partnersh…

C: Human

C: Man is-a Human

C: Woman is-a Human

R: isMarriedIn

C: RegistredPartnership

R: isPartnerIn

Tasks

Review Partnership

Review Citzenship

CQ819

Common law

Issue: Partnership


agree

disagree


Pro: Justine


C

Issues

Sources

Visualization

guardianship


Common law

C RR I

CQ315


Partnership

Ideas

C: Partnership


C: Human

C: Man is-a Human

C: Woman is-a Human

R: isMarriedIn


R: isPartnerIn

Tasks

Review Partnership

Review Citzenship

CQ819

Common law

Issue: Partnership


agree

disagree


Pro: Justine


C

Issues

Sources

Visualization

guardianship


Common law

C RR I

CQ315


Partnership

Ideas

C: Partnership


C: Human

C: Man is-a Human

C: Woman is-a Human

R: isMarriedIn


R: isPartnerIn

Tasks

Review Partnership

Review Citzenship

CQ819

Common law

Issue: Partnership

agree

disagree


Pro: Justine

New Argument

ok cancel

Classification: Pro

Contra

Example

Argument: Was already modeled in CQ801.



C

Issues

Sources

Visualization

guardianship


Common law

C RR I

CQ315


Partnership

Ideas

C: Partnership


C: Human

C: Man is-a Human

C: Woman is-a Human

R: isMarriedIn


R: isPartnerIn

Tasks

Review Partnership

Review Citzenship

CQ819

Common law

Issue: Partnership

agree

disagree


Pro: JustineCon: Jack

[Issue] Justine: We need to model partnership, and relations between men and women with partnership. [con] Jack: Was already modeled in CQ801.


Conclusion

• We found no off-the-shelf solution sufficient

• Design for a collaborative ontology engineering tool

using DILIGENT

using the DILIGENT argumentation model


Future Work

• Automatic classification of arguments

• Automatic clustering of sources

• Agent participation in discussion

• Evaluate voting

Date post:	20-Jan-2016
Category:	Documents
Upload:	adsila
View:	35 times
Download:	0 times

A Tool for DILIGENT Argumentation: Experiences, Requirements and Design

Documents