Guido Governatori and Duy Hoang Pham.
DR-CONTRACT: An Architecture for e-Contracts in Defeasible Logic<. International Journal of Business Process Integration and Management, 5(4), 2009.
Abstract: We introduce the DR-CONTRACT architecture to represent and reason on e-Contracts. The architecture extends the DR-device architecture by a deontic defeasible logic of violation. We motivate the choice for the logic and we show how to extend RuleML to capture the notions relevant to describe e-contracts for a monitoring perspective in Defeasible Logic.
 
Jörg Hoffmann, Ingo Weber, and Guido Governatori.
On compliance checking for clausal constraints in annotated process models. Information Systems Frontieres, 2009.
Abstract: Compliance management is important in several industry sectors where there is a high incidence of regulatory control. It must be ensured that business practices, as reflected in business processes, comply with the rules. Such compliance checks are challenging due to (1) the different life cycles of rules and processes, and (2) their disparate representations. (1) requires retrospective checking of process models. To address (2), we herein devise a framework where processes are annotated to capture the semantics of task execution, and compliance is checked against a set of constraints posing restrictions on the desirable process states. Each constraint is a clause, i.e., a disjunction of literals. If a process can reach a state that falsifies all literals of one of the constraints, then that constraint is violated in that state, and indicates non-compliance. Naively, such compliance can be checked by enumerating all reachable states. Since long waiting times are undesirable, it is important to develop efficient (low-order polynomial time) algorithms that (a) perform exact compliance checking for restricted cases, or (b) perform approximate compliance checking for more general cases. Herein, we observe that methods of both kinds can be defined as a natural extension of our earlier work on semantic business process validation. We devise one method of type (a), and we devise two methods of type (b); both are based on similar restrictions to the processes, where the restrictions made by methods (b) are a subset of those made by method (a). The approximate methods each guarantee either of soundness (finding only non-compliance instances) or completeness (finding all non-compiant states). We describe how one can trace the state evolution back to the process activities which caused the (potential) non-compliant states, and hence provide the user with an error diagnosis.
 
Guido Governatori, Vineet Padmanabhan, Antonino Rotolo, and Abdul Sattar.
A defeasible logic for modelling policy-based intentions and motivational attitudes. Logic Journal of the IGPL, 17(3), 2009. Copyrigth © 2009 Oxford University Press.
Abstract: In this paper we show how defeasible logic could formally account for the non-monotonic properties involved in motivational attitudes like intention and obligation. Usually, normal modal operators are used to represent such attitudes wherein classical logical consequence and the rule of necessitation comes into play i.e., $\vdash A / \vdash \Box A$, that is from $\vdash A$ derive $\vdash\Box A$. This means that such formalisms are affected by the Logical Omniscience problem. We show that policy-based intentions exhibit non-monotonic behaviour which could be captured through a non-monotonic system like defeasible logic. To this end we outline a defeasible logic of intention that specifies how modalities can be introduced and manipulated in a non-monotonic setting without giving rise to the problem of logical omniscience. In a similar way we show how to add deontic modalities defeasibly and how to integrate them with other motivational attitudes like beliefs and goals. Finally we show that the basic aspect of the BOID architecture is captured by this extended framework.
 
Guido Governatori and Shazia Sadiq.
The journey to business process compliance. In Jorge Cardoso and Wil van der Aalst, editors, Handbook of Research on BPM, IGI Global, 2009.
Abstract: It is a typical scenario that many organisations have their business processes specified independently of their business obligations (which includes contractual obligations to business partners, as well as obligations a business has to fulfil against regulations and industry standards). This is because of the lack of guidelines and tools that facilitate derivation of processes from contracts but also because of the traditional mindset of treating contracts separately from business processes. This chapter will provide a solution to one specific problem that arises from this situation, namely the lack of mechanisms to check whether business processes are compliant with business contracts. The chapter begins by defining the space for business process compliance and the eco-system for ensuring that process are compliant. The key point is that compliance is a relationship between two sets of specifications: the specifications for executing a business process and the specifications regulating a business. The central part of the chapter focuses on a logic based formalism for describing both the semantics of normative specifications and the semantics of compliance checking procedures.
 
Shazia Sadiq and Guido Governatori.
A methodological framework for aligning business processes and regulatory compliance. In Jan van Brocke and Michael Rosemann, editors, Handbook of Business Process Management, Springer, 2009.
Abstract: The ever increasing obligations of regulatory compliance are presenting a new breed of challenges for organizations across several industry sectors. Aligning control objectives that stem from regulations and legislation, with business objectives devised for improved business performance, is a foremost challenge. The organizational as well as IT structures for the two classes of objectives are often distinct and potentially in conflict. In this chapter, we present an overarching methodology for aligning business and control objectives. The various phases of the methodology are then used as a basis for discussing state of the art in compliance management. Contributions from research and academia as well as industry solutions are discussed. The chapter concludes with a discussion on the role of BPM as a driver for regulatory compliance and a presentation of open questions and challenges.
 
Ruopeng Lu, Shazia Sadiq, and Guido Governatori.
On managing business processes variants. Data and Knowledge Engineering, 2009.
Abstract: Variance in business process execution can be the result of several situations, such as disconnection between documented models and business operations, workarounds in spite of process execution engines, dynamic change and exception handling, flexible and ad-hoc requirements, and collaborative and/or knowledge intensive work. It is imperative that effective support for managing process variances be extended to organizations mature in their BPM (Business Process Management) uptake so that they can ensure organization wide consistency, promote reuse and capitalize on their BPM investments. This paper presents an approach for managing business processes that is conducive to dynamic change and the need for flexibility in execution. The approach is based on the notion of process constraints. It further provides a technique for effective utilization of the adaptations manifested in process variants. In particular, we will present a facility for discovery of preferred variants through effective search and retrieval based on the notion of process similarity, where multiple aspects of the process variants are compared according to specific query requirements. The advantage of this approach is the ability to provide a quantitative measure for the similarity between process variants, which further facilitates various BPM activities such as process reuse, analysis and discovery.
 
Ruopeng Lu, Shazia Sadiq, Guido Governatori, and Xiaoping Yang.
Defining adaptation constraints for business process variants. In 12th International Conference on Business Information Systems, Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing 7. Springer, 2009, Copyrigth © 2009 Springer.
Abstract: In current dynamic business environment, it has been argued that certain characteristics of ad-hocism in business processes are desirable. Such business processes typically have a very large number of instances, where design decisions for each process instance may be made at runtime. In these cases, predictability and repetitiveness cannot be counted upon, as the complete process knowledge used to define the process model only becomes available at the time after a specific process instance has been instantiated. The basic premise is that for a class of business processes it is possible to specify a small number of essential constraints at design time, but allow for a large number of execution possibilities at runtime. The objective of this paper is to conceptualise a set of constraints for process adaptation at instance level. Based on a comprehensive modelling framework, business requirements can be transformed to a set of minimal constraints, and the support for specification of process constraints and techniques to ensure constraint quality are developed.
 
Guido Governatori and Antonino Rotolo.
An algorithm for business process compliance. In Enrico Francesconi, Giovani Sartor, and Daniela Tiscornia, editors, Legal Knowledge and Information Systems (Jurix 2008), Frontieres in Artificial Intelligence and Applications 189, pages 186-191. IOS Press, 2008.
Abstract: This paper provides a novel mechanism to check whether business processes are compliant with business rules regulating them. The key point is that compliance is a relationship between two sets of specifications: the specifications for executing a business process and the specifications regulating it.
 
Guido Governatori, Subhasis Thakur, and Duy Hoang Pham.
A compliance model of trust. In Enrico Francesconi, Giovani Sartor, and Daniela Tiscornia, editors, Legal Knowledge and Information Systems (Jurix 2008), Frontieres in Artificial Intelligence and Applications 189, pages 118-127. IOS Press, 2008.
Abstract: We present a model of past interaction trust model based on compliance of expected behaviours.
 
Jeff Blee, David Billington, Guido Governatori, and Abdul Sattar.
Levels of modalities for BDI logic. In 2008 IEEE/WIC/ACM International Conference on Web Intelligence and Intelligent Agent Technology, pages 647-650. IEEE Press, 2008. Copyrigth © 2008 IEEE.
Abstract: The use of rational agents for modelling real world problems has both been heavily investigated and become well accepted, with BDI Logic being a widely used architecture to represent and reason about rational agency. However, in the real world, we often have to deal with different levels of confidence in our beliefs, desires, and intentions. This paper extends our previous framework that integrated qualitative levels into BDI Logic. We describe an expanded set of axioms and properties of the extended logic and also define a detailed non-normal Kripke type semantics.
 
Guido Boella, Guido Governatori, Joris Hulstijn, Régis Riveret, Antonino Rotolo, and Leendert van der Torre.
Time and defeasibility in FIPA ACL semantics. In 2008 IEEE/WIC/ACM International Conference on Web Intelligence and Intelligent Agent Technology, pages 634-637. IEEE Press, 2008. Copyrigth © 2008 IEEE.
Abstract: Inferences about communicative actions are often conditional, non-monotonic, and involve the issue of time. Most agent communication languages, however, ignore these issues, due to the difficulty to combine them in a single formalism. This paper addresses such issues in defeasible logic, and illustrates how to express a semantics for ACLs in order to make non-monotonic inferences on the basis of communicative actions.
 
Efsrations Kontopoulos, Nick Bassiliades, Guido Governatori, and Grigoris Antoniou.
Extending a defeasible reasoner with modal and deontic logic operators. In 2008 IEEE/WIC/ACM International Conference on Web Intelligence and Intelligent Agent Technology, pages 626-629. IEEE Press, 2008. Copyrigth © 2008 IEEE.
Abstract: Defeasible logic is a non-monotonic formalism that deals with incomplete and conflicting information. Modal logic deals with necessity and possibility, exhibiting defeasibility; thus, it is possible to combine defeasible logic with modal operators. This paper reports on the extension of the DR-DEVICE defeasible reasoner with modal and deontic logic operators. The aim is a practical defeasible reasoner that will take advantage of the expressiveness of modal logics and the flexibility to define diverse agent types and behaviors.