From policy-making statements to first-order logic

From AcaWiki
Jump to: navigation, search

Citation: Wyner, Adam, Engers, Tom Van, Bahreini, Kiavash (2010) From policy-making statements to first-order logic. Electronic Government and Electronic Participation (Volume 6267) (RSS)
Internet Archive Scholar (search for fulltext): From policy-making statements to first-order logic
Download: http://wyner.info/research/Papers/WynerVanEngersBahreini2010.pdf
Tagged: Computer Science (RSS) e-government (RSS), argumentation (RSS), online argumentation (RSS), e-participation (RSS), controlled natural language (RSS), IMPACT Project (RSS)

Summary

This paper uses the same running example, derived from a BBC Have Your Say discussion ``Should people be paid to recycle?", as A framework for enriched, controlled on-line discussion forums for e-government policy-making.

The main work of the paper is to translate these statements into a controlled natural language, ACE. Subsequently, such statements can be reasoned with, i.e. in order to create the maximal consistent sets which represent policies (see Towards Web-based mass argumentation in natural language).

After ACE translation

(1) Every household should pay some tax for the household’s garbage. 
(2) No household should pay some tax for the household’s garbage. 
(3) Every household which pays some tax for the household’s garbage increases
an amount of the household’s garbage which the household recycles. 
(4) If a household increases an amount of the household’s garbage which the
household recycles then the household benefits the household’s society. 
(5) If a household pays a tax for the household’s garbage then the tax is unfair
to the household. 
(6) Every household should pay an equal portion of the sum of the tax for the
household’s garbage. 
(7) No household which receives a benefit which is paid by a council recycles the
household’s garbage. 
(8) Every household which does not receive a benefit which is paid by a council
supports a household which receives a benefit which is paid by a council. 
(9) Tom says that every household which recycles the household’s garbage re-
duces a need of a new dump which is for the garbage.
(10) Every household which reduces a need of a new dump benefits the house-
hold’s society.
(11) Tom is not objective. 
(12) Tom owns a company that recycles some garbage. 
(13) Every person who owns a company that recycles some garbage earns some
money from the garbage which is recycled. 
(14) Every supermarket creates some garbage. 
(15) Every supermarket should pay a tax for the garbage that the supermarket
creates. 
(16) Every tax which is for some garbage which the supermarket creates is passed
by the supermarket onto a household.

Translation guidelines

  • Simplify lexicon & syntax.
  • Avoid gerunds, participles, complex nouns.
  • Avoid noun-noun combinations ('garbage dump'); they must be in the lexicon (hyphenated forms e.g. 'garbage-dump') or written as relative clauses ('a dump which is for some garbage').
  • Use determiners--'some', 'a', 'every', 'the'--for nouns (except mass noun phrases).
  • Use possessive nouns, not pronouns.
  • Be careful with word order and propositions.
  • Make implicit knowledge explicit.
  • State all relevant participants.
  • Use a parsimonious vocabulary, choosing synonyms to avoid adding to the ACE lexicon where possible.
  • Be careful with quantifiers, modals, and negation: these can cause syntax or interpretation issues.

The "discussion of sentences" section contains some useful information about translation issues that did arise.

Logical issues

The modelling is not complete, in that it lacks some depth: While 11 and 7 are semantically incompatible this is not indicated by the depth of these representations.


Retrieved from "https://acawiki.org/index.php?title=From_policy-making_statements_to_first-order_logic&oldid=7126"