A Formal Analysis of a Business Contract Language

This paper presents a formal system for reasoning about violations of obligations in contracts. The system is based on the formalism for the representation of contrary-to-duty obligations. These are the obligations that take place when other obligations are violated as typically applied to penalties in contracts. The paper shows how this formalism can be mapped onto the key policy concepts of a contract specification language, called Business Contract Language (BCL), previously developed to express contract conditions for run time contract monitoring. The aim of this mapping is to establish a formal underpinning for this key subset of BCL.

[1]  Guido Governatori,et al.  An approach for validating BCL contract specifications , 2005 .

[2]  Guido Governatori,et al.  Representing business contracts in RuleML , 2005, Int. J. Cooperative Inf. Syst..

[3]  Andrew J. I. Jones,et al.  Deontic Logic and Contrary-to-Duties , 2002 .

[4]  Zoran Milosevic,et al.  On expressing and monitoring behaviour in contracts , 2002, Proceedings. Sixth International Enterprise Distributed Object Computing.

[5]  Andrew Berry,et al.  Extending choreography with business contract constraints , 2005, Int. J. Cooperative Inf. Syst..

[6]  James B. Cole,et al.  A unified behavioural model and a contract language for extended enterprise , 2004, Data & Knowledge Engineering.

[7]  Guido Governatori,et al.  Normative autonomy and normative co-ordination: Declarative power, representation, and mandate , 2004, Artificial Intelligence and Law.

[8]  Benjamin Grosof,et al.  Sweetdeal: Representing Agent Contracts with Exceptions Using Xml Rules, Ontologies, and Process Descriptions , 2002 .

[9]  Ronald M. Lee,et al.  A logic model for electronic contracting , 1988, Decis. Support Syst..

[10]  Andrew Hiles.  Service Level Agreements , 1994 .

[11]  Benjamin N. Grosof,et al.  SweetDeal : Represen with Exceptions using and Process , 2003 .

[12]  Christen Krogh,et al.  Obligations directed from bearers to counterparts , 1995, ICAIL '95.

[13]  Zoran Milosevic,et al.  Policies in communities: extending the ODP enterprise viewpoint , 1998, Proceedings Second International Enterprise Distributed Object Computing (Cat. No.98EX244).

[14]  Michael J. Maher,et al.  Representation results for defeasible logic , 2000, TOCL.

[15]  Dov M. Gabbay,et al.  Handbook of Philosophical Logic , 2002 .

[16]  Guido Governatori,et al.  Logic of Violations: A gentzen systems for reasoning with contrary-to-duty obligations , 2006 .

[17]  D. Luckham.  The Power of Events , 2002 .

[18]  Guido Governatori,et al.  Dealing with contract violations: formalism and domain specific language , 2005, Ninth IEEE International EDOC Enterprise Computing Conference (EDOC'05).

[19]  A.D.H. Farrell,et al.  Performance monitoring of service-level agreements for utility computing using the event calculus , 2004, Proceedings. First IEEE International Workshop on Electronic Contracting, 2004..

[20]  J. Cole,et al.  On design and implementation of a contract monitoring facility , 2004, Proceedings. First IEEE International Workshop on Electronic Contracting, 2004..