AKE project stems from an analysis of the complicated situation of public administration, which is often faced with the changes of legal framework of its activities. The dynamic environment of the public sector is easily recognisable in areas like politics and policies, economic conditions etc. The basic conclusion is that the governments of all levels deal toughly with the evolutions and revolutions of their surroundings day by day.
Public administration’s activities are in this particular regard for the most part confronted with the constant modifications of the systems and processes employed in the everyday routine of the governments. The SAKE project takes into the special consideration the fact that the eGovernment systems are change-sensitive and therefore there is a particular need to deal with the evaluating environment in systematic method, which will first of all ensure the reliability of processes and workflow.
Here comes the SAKE project, specifying, developing and deploying a holistic framework and supporting tools for an agile knowledge-based e-government that will be sufficiently flexible to adapt to changing and diverse environments and needs. The key word of the SAKE project is agile which describes the project’s approach the problems it is dealing with.
The realisation of the SAKE project may happen to be especially important in the New Member States since their full integration profoundly depends on the possibility to adapt their public administrations to the existing EU regulations in a considerably short period of time.
The LKIF core legal ontology consists of 15 modules, each of which describes a set of closely related concepts from both legal and commonsense domains. In that sense, the LKIF core ontology is rather a library of ontologies relevant for the legal domain than a monolithic body of definitions.
The most abstract concepts are defined in five closely related modules: top, place, mereology, time and spacetime.
top The LKIF top ontology is largely based on the top-level of LRI-Core but has less ontological commitment in the sense that it imposes less restrictions on subclasses of the top categories.
place The place module partially implements the theory of relative places (Donnelly, 2005) in OWL DL.
mereology The mereology module defines mereological concepts such as parts and wholes, and typical mereological relations such as part of, component of, containment, membership etc.
time The time module provides an OWL DL implementation of the theory of time by Allen (1984).
spacetime The space-time module is a placeholder for the place and time modules.
Basic-level concepts are distributed across four modules: process, role, action and expression.
process The process module extends the LKIF top ontology module with a definition of changes, processes (being causal changes) and physical objects. It introduces a limited set of properties for describing participant roles of processes.
role The role module defines a typology of roles (epistemic roles, functions, person roles, organisation roles) and the plays-property for relating a role filler to a role.
action The action module describes the vocabulary for representing actions in general. Actions are processes which are performed by some agent (the actor of the action). This module does not commit itself to a particular theory on thematic roles.
expression The expression module describes a vocabulary for describing, propositions and propositional attitudes (belief, intention), qualifications, statements and media. It furthermore extends the role module with a number or epistemic roles, and is the basis for the definition of norms.
These basic clusters are extended by three modules that form the legal ontology: legal action, legal role and norm.
legal-action The legal action module extends the action module with a number of legal concepts related to action and agent, such as public acts, public bodies, legal person, natural person etc.
legal-role The legal role module extends the role module with a small number of legal concepts related to roles, legal professions etc.
norm The norm module is an extension primarily on the expression module where norms are defined as qualifications. Please refer to Deliverable 1.1 for a more in-depth description of the underlying theory. It furthermore defines a number of legal sources, e.g. legal documents, customary law etc., and a typology of rights and powers, cf. Sartor (2006), Rubino et al. (2006)
In addition to these legal clusters, two modules are provided that cover the basic vocabulary of two frameworks: modification and rules.
modification The modification module is both an extension of the time module and the legal action module. The time module is extended with numerous intervals and moments describing the efficacy and being in force of legal documents. The action module is extended with a typology of modifications. These concepts are described in further detail in Deliverable 3.2 of the ESTRELLA project.
rules The rules & argumentation module defines roles central to argumentation, and describes the vocabulary for LKIF rules as defined in Deliverable 1.1, chapter 5. The module leaves room for further extension to complex argumentation frameworks.
The Legal Knowledge Interchange Format (LKIF), is a Semantic Web based language for representing legal knowledge in order to support modeling of legal domains and to facilitate interchange between legal knowledge-based systems.
LKIF has been designed as a knowledge interchange format targeted particularly for applications in legal domains. Its architecture is a resulting compromise between a range of objectives and requirements, which in many cases could not have been satisﬁed simultaneously. The dominant trade-oﬀ underlying the design process concerned conﬂicting demands for an increased expressiveness of the language on the one hand, and its tractability and compatibility with established standards on the other. In this section we present a brief overview of the structure of LKIF and specify its fragments, which will be addressed in the following sections. In general, LKIF provides a direct support for representing three types of knowledge, which have been identiﬁed as most indispensable to law and legal reasoning: terminological knowledge, legal rules and normative statements.
Following the adopted requirements, LKIF complies with the Semantic Web and Knowledge Representation philosophy of a layered representational structure. Predominantly, we can distinguish between terminological and rule layer of the language, which constitute its two expressive dimensions. Furthermore, LKIF vocabulary reserves a special set of deontic concepts aimed for modeling normative statements.
Terminological Knowledge: The layer of terminological knowledge is supported in LKIF through the Web Ontology Language (OWL), one of the recommended XML-based standards for Semantic Web. OWL allows for explicit and formal representation of meaning of terms and relations between them, thus enabling construction of machine-accessible models of ontologies underlying particular domains of knowledge. Ontologies speciﬁed in OWL can be stored as OWL ﬁles. The terminological support provided by LKIF is extended with the LKIF-Core ontology of basic legal concepts, designed as another part of the work package.
Legal Rules: Whereas terminological layer has easily ﬁt into the recommended Semantic Web standards, representation of legal rules has required more sophisticated formalism. Initially, one serious candidate language has been considered: SWRL, put forward as a proposal for Semantic Web rules-language, combining sublanguages of the OWL Web Ontology Language (OWL DL and Lite) with those of the Rule Markup Language (Unary/Binary Datalog)
SWRL has turned out insuﬃciently expressive to capture some of the essential peculiarities of legal reasoning. For that reason, a partly novel rule formalism, called LKIF rules, has been developed and incorporated in LKIF.
LKIF rules extend SWRL with support for negation and defeasible reasoning. The rule layer provides a language expressive enough to model legal rules in a way which comes much closer to the ideal of isomorphic modeling, i.e. in a way which reﬂects the structure of the rules in a legislation. The rules layer supports rules with exceptions, assumptions, and exclusionary conditions, and enables meta-level information about rules to be represented, such as date of enactment, which is used in other rules, such as lex posterior, to reason about rule priorities.
The argumentation module in LKIF provides a conceptual framework, underpinned by an argumentation-theoretic semantics, for representing rule constructs as OWL objects. Rules can be hence embedded in OWL ﬁles alongside terminologies. It has to be noted that after completion of D1.1, W3C announced a proposal for the Rule Interchange Format, a new Semantic Web standard for combining rules with ontologies. This formalism, though not originally considered, should be taken into account and assessed from the perspective of a possible reorientation of the LKIF rule layer in the future.
Normative Statements: Normative statements are given a direct support via the Norm module included in LKIF-Core ontology. No particular deontic logic is imposed on LKIF representation. Such an approach is justiﬁed by both theoretical and practical reasons. On the one hand there is a little convergence in the ﬁeld of deontic logic to the standard system of reasoning, on the other — industrial applications do not typically require a reference to any concrete deontic logic. Instead, the module contains minimally restricted deﬁnitions of deontic concepts and properties, based on the notion of subjunctive betterness, which are intended as basic constructs for modeling various deontic settings. Nevertheless, there exists a preferable mapping of normative statements into OWL representation, which preserves some essential properties of the modal frames semantics, associated with deontic logics.
To summarize, the Legal Knowledge Interchange Format is an OWL ontology of legal concepts allowing legal knowledge bases, encompassing speciﬁc terminologies, LKIF rules, and normative statements, to be represented in OWL and stored as OWL ﬁles. Let us ﬁnally introduce the notion of an LKIF reasoner, an LKIF ﬁle and of using LKIF:
Deﬁnition 1 (Using LKIF) To use LKIF is to refer to an entity in the LKIF namespace.
Deﬁnition 2 (LKIF File) An LKIF ﬁle is a ﬁle which uses one of the concrete syntaxes described in this section, is limited to one of the expressive fragments identiﬁed in this section, and refers to an entity in the LKIF namespace.
Deﬁnition 3 (LKIF Reasoner) An LKIF reasoner is a reasoner that interprets a set of RDF triples that refer to an LKIF entity, and that is limited to one or more of the identiﬁed expressive fragments, in accordance with LKIF semantics.
The interested reader is referred to Deliverable 1.1 “Specification of the Legal Knowledge Interchange Format” and Deliverable 4.1 “The Legal Knowledge Interchange Format” (a revision) for an in-depth description of the LKIF language, or the “Summary of D1.1″ .