Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

On the Specification and Monitoring of Timed Normative Systems

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Runtime Verification (RV 2021)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNPSE,volume 12974))

Included in the following conference series:

Abstract

In this article we explore different issues and design choices that arise when considering how to fully embrace timed aspects in the formalisation of normative systems, e.g., by using deontic modalities, looking primarily through the lens of monitoring. We primarily focus on expressivity and computational aspects, discussing issues such as duration, superposition, conflicts, attempts, discharge, and complexity, while identifying semantic choices which arise and the challenges these pose for full monitoring of legal contracts.

Partially supported by UBACyT 20020130200032BA and PICT-2016 201-0112, the Swedish Research Council (Vetenskapsrådet) under grant Nr. 2019-04951 (X-LEGAL: Smart Legal Contracts), and the ERC Consolidator grant DSynMA (No. 772459).

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

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 64.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 84.99
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

Notes

  1. 1.

    In this paper we will use the notation O[b, e](a) to denote the obligation to perform action a between time b and e. We use the same notation but with P to denote permission and F to denote prohibition. Note that despite the formal syntax, we are not committed to a formal semantics, since the paper is dedicated to explore the family of such semantics one can choose to adopt.

  2. 2.

    It is worth noting that different interpretations of normative statements go far beyond the assignment of a formal semantics. Such differing views frequently correspond to views different parties may have of a normative text, e.g., a contract, including possibly in court.

  3. 3.

    From this point onwards, we will use the notation \(C \oplus C'\) to denote both C and \(C'\) being enacted. We avoid the use of symbols typically used for conjunction e.g., \(\wedge \) or & in order to avoid implicit assumptions of idempotency of the operator.

References

  1. Alur, R., Henzinger, T.A.: Logics and models of real time: a survey. In: de Bakker, J.W., Huizing, C., de Roever, W.P., Rozenberg, G. (eds.) REX 1991. LNCS, vol. 600, pp. 74–106. Springer, Heidelberg (1992). https://doi.org/10.1007/BFb0031988

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  2. Alvarez-Napagao, S., Aldewereld, H., Vázquez-Salceda, J., Dignum, F.: Normative monitoring: semantics and implementation. In: De Vos, M., Fornara, N., Pitt, J.V., Vouros, G. (eds.) COIN -2010. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 6541, pp. 321–336. Springer, Heidelberg (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-21268-0_18

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  3. Azzopardi, S.: Extending contract automata with reparation, hypothetical and conditional clauses. Technical report, University of Malta, May 2014

    Google Scholar 

  4. Azzopardi, S., Colombo, C., Ebejer, J.-P., Mallia, E., Pace, G.J.: Runtime verification using VALOUR. In: RV-CuBES 2017. Kalpa Publications in Computing, vol. 3, pp. 10–18 (2017)

    Google Scholar 

  5. Azzopardi, S., Gatt, A., Pace, G.J.: Reasoning about partial contracts. In: JURIX 2016, pp. 23–32 (2016)

    Google Scholar 

  6. Azzopardi, S., Pace, G.J., Schapachnik, F.: Contract automata with reparations. In: JURIX 2014, pp. 49–54 (2014)

    Google Scholar 

  7. Azzopardi, S., Pace, G.J., Schapachnik, F.: On observing contracts: deontic contracts meet smart contracts. In: JURIX 2018, pp. 21–30 (2018)

    Google Scholar 

  8. Azzopardi, S., Pace, G.J., Schapachnik, F., Schneider, G.: Contract automata - an operational view of contracts between interactive parties. Artif. Intell. Law 24(3), 203–243 (2016)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Bauer, A., Leucker, M., Schallhart, C.: Runtime verification for LTL and TLTL. ACM Trans. Softw. Eng. Methodol. 20(4) (2011)

    Google Scholar 

  10. Bouyer, P., Laroussinie, F.: Model checking timed automata. In: Modeling and Verification of Real-Time Systems: Formalisms and Software Tools, pp. 111–140 (2010)

    Google Scholar 

  11. Cambronero, M., Llana, L., Pace, G.J.: Timed contract compliance under event timing uncertainty (2019, submitted for publication)

    Google Scholar 

  12. Camilleri, J.J., Haghshenas, M.R., Schneider, G.: A web-based tool for analysing normative documents in English. In: SAC-SVT 2018, pp. 1865–1872. ACM (2018)

    Google Scholar 

  13. Camilleri, J.J., Schneider, G.: Modelling and analysis of normative documents. Logical Algebraic Methods Program. 91, 33–59 (2017)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  14. Chaochen, Z., Hoare, C.A.R., Ravn, A.P.: A calculus of durations. Inf. Process. Lett. 40(5), 269–276 (1991)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  15. Colombo, C., Pace, G.J., Schneider, G.: Dynamic event-based runtime monitoring of real-time and contextual properties. In: Cofer, D., Fantechi, A. (eds.) FMICS 2008. LNCS, vol. 5596, pp. 135–149. Springer, Heidelberg (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-03240-0_13

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  16. Díaz, G., Cambronero, M.-E., Martínez, E., Schneider, G.: Specification and verification of normative texts using C-O Diagrams. Trans. Softw. Eng. 40(8), 795–817 (2014)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Farrell, A.D.H., Sergot, M.J., Sallé, M., Bartolini, C.: Using the event calculus for tracking the normative state of contracts. Int. J. Cooperative Inf. Syst. 14(2–3), 99–129 (2005)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Fenech, S., Okika, J., Pace, G.J., Ravn, A.P., Schneider, G.: On the specification of full contracts. In: FESCA 2009. ENTCS, vol. 253(1), pp. 39–55 (2009)

    Google Scholar 

  19. Fenech, S., Pace, G.J., Schneider, G.: Automatic conflict detection on contracts. In: Leucker, M., Morgan, C. (eds.) ICTAC 2009. LNCS, vol. 5684, pp. 200–214. Springer, Heidelberg (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-03466-4_13

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  20. Gabbay, D., van der Meyden, R., Horty, J., Parent, X., van der Torre, L.: The Handbook of Deontic Logic. College Publications (2013)

    Google Scholar 

  21. Aranda García, A., Cambronero, M.-E., Colombo, C., Llana, L., Pace, G.J.: Runtime verification of contracts with Themulus. In: de Boer, F., Cerone, A. (eds.) SEFM 2020. LNCS, vol. 12310, pp. 231–246. Springer, Cham (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-58768-0_13

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  22. Wright, G.H.V.: Deontic logic. Mind 60(237), 1–15 (1951)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Wright, G.H.V.: Deontic logic: a personal view. Ratio Juris 12, 26–38 (1999)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Gorín, D., Mera, S., Schapachnik, F.: A software tool for legal drafting. In: FLACOS 2011, pp. 1–15. Elsevier (2011)

    Google Scholar 

  25. Governatori, G., Hulstijn, J., Riveret, R., Rotolo, A.: Characterising deadlines in temporal modal defeasible logic. In: Orgun, M.A., Thornton, J. (eds.) AI 2007. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 4830, pp. 486–496. Springer, Heidelberg (2007). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-76928-6_50

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  26. Governatori, G., Rotolo, A.: Justice delayed is justice denied: logics for a temporal account of reparations and legal compliance. In: Leite, J., Torroni, P., Ågotnes, T., Boella, G., van der Torre, L. (eds.) CLIMA 2011. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 6814, pp. 364–382. Springer, Heidelberg (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-22359-4_25

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  27. Governatori, G., Rotolo, A., Sartor, G.: Temporalised normative positions in defeasible logic. In: ICAIL 2005, pp. 25–34 (2005)

    Google Scholar 

  28. Hansen, J.: The paradoxes of deontic logic: alive and kicking. Theoria 72(3), 221–232 (2006)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  29. Hashmi, M., Governatori, G., Wynn, M.T.: Modeling obligations with event-calculus. In: Bikakis, A., Fodor, P., Roman, D. (eds.) RuleML 2014. LNCS, vol. 8620, pp. 296–310. Springer, Cham (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-09870-8_22

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  30. Hashmi, M., Governatori, G., Wynn, M.T.: Normative requirements for regulatory compliance: an abstract formal framework. Inf. Syst. Front. 18(3), 429–455 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10796-015-9558-1

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Henzinger, T.A.: It’s about time: real-time logics reviewed. In: Sangiorgi, D., de Simone, R. (eds.) CONCUR 1998. LNCS, vol. 1466, pp. 439–454. Springer, Heidelberg (1998). https://doi.org/10.1007/BFb0055640

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  32. Ho, H.-M., Ouaknine, J., Worrell, J.: Online monitoring of metric temporal logic. In: Bonakdarpour, B., Smolka, S.A. (eds.) RV 2014. LNCS, vol. 8734, pp. 178–192. Springer, Cham (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-11164-3_15

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  33. Ho, H.-M., Ouaknine, J., Worrell, J.: On the expressiveness and monitoring of metric temporal logic. CoRR, abs/1803.02653 (2018)

    Google Scholar 

  34. Kanger, S., Kanger, H.: Rights and parliamentarism. Theoria 32(2), 85–115 (1966)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Konur, S.: Real-time and probabilistic temporal logics: an overview. CoRR, abs/1005.3200 (2010)

    Google Scholar 

  36. Lamport, L.: Specifying Systems: The TLA+ Language and Tools for Hardware and Software Engineers. Addison-Wesley Longman Publishing Co., Inc. (2002)

    Google Scholar 

  37. Larsen, K.G., Pettersson, P., Yi, W.: UPPAAL in a nutshell. Softw. Tools Technol. Transfer 1(1), 134–152 (1997)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Martínez, E., Díaz, G., Cambronero, M.-E., Schneider, G.: A model for visual specification of E-contracts. In: IEEE SCC 2010, pp. 1–8. IEEE Computer Society (2010)

    Google Scholar 

  39. McNamara, P.: Deontic logic. In: Gabbay, D.M., Woods, J., (eds.) Handbook of the History of Logic, vol. 7, pp. 197–289. North-Holland Publishing (2006)

    Google Scholar 

  40. Meyer, J.-J., Dignum, F., Johannes, R.: The Paradoxes of Deontic Logic Revisited: A Computer Science Perspective. Technical report UU-CS-1994-38, EWI-IS: Department of Computer Science, University of Utrecht, Utrecht, September 1994

    Google Scholar 

  41. Moszkowski, B., Manna, Z.: Reasoning in interval temporal logic. In: Clarke, E., Kozen, D. (eds.) Logic of Programs 1983. LNCS, vol. 164, pp. 371–382. Springer, Heidelberg (1984). https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-12896-4_374

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  42. Ničković, D., Piterman, N.: From Mtl to deterministic timed automata. In: Chatterjee, K., Henzinger, T.A. (eds.) FORMATS 2010. LNCS, vol. 6246, pp. 152–167. Springer, Heidelberg (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-15297-9_13

    Chapter  MATH  Google Scholar 

  43. Pace, G.J., Schneider, G.: Challenges in the specification of full contracts. In: Leuschel, M., Wehrheim, H. (eds.) IFM 2009. LNCS, vol. 5423, pp. 292–306. Springer, Heidelberg (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-00255-7_20

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  44. Prisacariu, C., Schneider, G.: A formal language for electronic contracts. In: Bonsangue, M.M., Johnsen, E.B. (eds.) FMOODS 2007. LNCS, vol. 4468, pp. 174–189. Springer, Heidelberg (2007). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-72952-5_11

    Chapter  MATH  Google Scholar 

  45. Prisacariu, C., Schneider, G.: A dynamic deontic logic for complex contracts. J. Logic Algebraic Program. 81(4), 458–490 (2012)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  46. Stucki, S., Sánchez, C., Schneider, G., Bonakdarpour, B.: Gray-box monitoring of hyperproperties. In: ter Beek, M.H., McIver, A., Oliveira, J.N. (eds.) FM 2019. LNCS, vol. 11800, pp. 406–424. Springer, Cham (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-30942-8_25

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. University of Gothenburg, Gothenburg, Sweden

    Shaun Azzopardi & Gerardo Schneider

  2. University of Malta, Msida, Malta

    Gordon Pace

  3. ICC and Departamento de Computación, FCEyN, Universidad de Buenos Aires, Buenos Aires, Argentina

    Fernando Schapachnik

Authors
  1. Shaun Azzopardi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Gordon Pace
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Fernando Schapachnik
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Gerardo Schneider
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Shaun Azzopardi .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. University of Virginia, Charlottesville, VA, USA

    Lu Feng

  2. Ben-Gurion University of the Negev, Be'er Sheva, Israel

    Dana Fisman

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2021 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this paper

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this paper

Azzopardi, S., Pace, G., Schapachnik, F., Schneider, G. (2021). On the Specification and Monitoring of Timed Normative Systems. In: Feng, L., Fisman, D. (eds) Runtime Verification. RV 2021. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 12974. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-88494-9_5

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-88494-9_5

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-030-88493-2

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-030-88494-9

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation