Summary of Explaining Non-monotonic Normative Reasoning Using Argumentation Theory with Deontic Logic, by Zhe Yu et al.
Explaining Non-monotonic Normative Reasoning using Argumentation Theory with Deontic Logic
by Zhe Yu, Yiwei Lu
First submitted to arxiv on: 18 Sep 2024
Categories
- Main: Artificial Intelligence (cs.AI)
- Secondary: None
GrooveSquid.com Paper Summaries
GrooveSquid.com’s goal is to make artificial intelligence research accessible by summarizing AI papers in simpler terms. Each summary below covers the same AI paper, written at different levels of difficulty. The medium difficulty and low difficulty versions are original summaries written by GrooveSquid.com, while the high difficulty version is the paper’s original abstract. Feel free to learn from the version that suits you best!
| Summary difficulty | Written by | Summary |
|---|---|---|
| High | Paper authors | High Difficulty Summary Read the original abstract here |
| Medium | GrooveSquid.com (original content) | Medium Difficulty Summary A novel reasoning system, LeSAC, is extended in this paper to provide designers with effective explanations for their legally relevant design decisions. Building on previous work, a first-order deontic logic system is adopted to model normative contexts and justify actions under LeSAC. The advantages of using deontic logic are illustrated through two case studies in the context of autonomous driving. The updated LeSAC is designed to guarantee rationality, ensuring coherent and legally valid explanations for complex design decisions. |
| Low | GrooveSquid.com (original content) | Low Difficulty Summary This paper builds on previous research that provided a reasoning system called LeSAC to support designers during the design process. Now, it explores how to give designers good reasons for their legal design choices. The system is extended by using special rules and principles to justify actions in situations where norms are important. A new way of thinking about logical rules is used to model situations where autonomous cars make decisions. This paper shows that using this new logic helps explain complex design decisions in a way that is both rational and legally valid. |
