Abstract
Many software systems can be viewed as organizational systems, where the different components are seen as autonomous entities, interacting with each other, collaborating toward system’s aims.In such systems we may not have full control over the behavior of all its components. Normative specification of an organizational system, provides a way of describing the norms that regulate the behavior of a system and of its components, stating how they are expected to behave, assuming however, that they may deviate from that ideal behavior. In this paper we use an action and deontic modal logic for the normative specification of organizational systems. This logical framework allows us to describe expected behavior of agents, detect non-ideal behavior and identify the agents that, direct or indirectly, are responsible for it. We argue that normative specification can be an useful tool to increase trust and security in complex computational systems and propose a responsibility-based trust concept.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
Belnap, N., Perloff, M.: Seeing To It That: A Canonical Form for Agentives. Theoria 54, 175–199 (1989)
Bertino, E., Ferrari, E., Atluri, V.: A Flexible Model for the Specification and Enforcement of Authorizations in Workflow Management Systems. In: Proceedings of 2nd ACM Workshop on Role Based Access Control, pp. 1–12 (1997)
Carmo, J., Jones, A.: Deontic Logic and Contrary-to-Duties. In: Gabbay, D., Guenthner, F. (eds.) Handbook of Philosophical Logic, 2nd edn., vol. 8, pp. 265–343. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht (2002)
Carmo, J., Pacheco, O.: Deontic and action logics for organized collective agency, modeled through institutionalized agents and roles. Fundamenta Informaticae 48(2,3), 129–163 (2001)
Chellas, B.J.: Modal Logic - an Introduction. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (1980)
Cuppens, F.: Roles and Deontic Logic. In: Jones, A.J.I., Sergot, M. (eds.) Proceedings of Second International Workshop on Deontic Logic in Computer Science (DEON 1994), NRCCL, Oslo, Complex 1/94, pp. 86–106 (1994)
Elgesem, D.: Action Theory and Modal Logic, PhD thesis, Department of Philosophy, University of Oslo (1993)
Governatori, G., Gelati, J., Rotolo, A., Sartor, G.: Actions, Institutions, Powers. Preliminary Notes. In: RASTA 2002,Fachbereich Informatik, Universität Hamburg, pp. 131–147 (2002)
Hilpinen, R. (ed.): Deontic Logic: Introductory and Sistematic Readings. D.Reidel, Dordrecht (1971)
Jones, A.J.I., Sergot, M.J.: A Formal Characterization of Institutionalized Power. Journal of the IGPL 4(3), 429–445 1996); Garzón Valdés, E., Krawietz,W., von Wright, G.H., and Zimmerling,R., (eds.): Normative Systems in Legal and Moral Theory (Festschrift for Carlos E. Alchourrón and Eugenio Bulygin). Duncker & Humblot, Berlin. pp.349-369 (1996) (Reprinted)
Kanger, S.: Law and Logic. Theoria 38 (1972)
Lindahl, L.: Position and Change - A Study in Law and Logic. In: Synthese Library, vol. 112. D. Reidel, Dordrecht (1977)
Massacci, F.: Reasoning about Security: a Logic and a Decision Method for Role- Based Access Control. In: Nonnengart, A., Kruse, R., Ohlbach, H.J., Gabbay, D.M. (eds.) FAPR 1997 and ECSQARU 1997. LNCS(LNAI), vol. 1244, pp. 421–435. Springer, Heidelberg (1997)
Meyer, J.J.C., Wieringa, R.J.: Deontic Logic: A Concise Overview. In: Meyer, J.J.C., Wieringa, R.J. (eds.) Deontic Logic in Computer Science: Normative System Specification, pp. 3–16. John Wiley & Sons, Chichester (1993)
Minsky, N., Ungureanu, V.: Law-Governed Interaction: A Coordination and Control Mechanism for Heterogeneous Distributed Systems. ACM Transactions on Software Engineering and Methodology (TOSEM) 9(3), 273–305 (2000)
Pacheco, O., Carmo, J.: Collective Agents: from Law to AI. In: Proceedings of 2nd French-American Conference on Law and Artificial Intelligence, Nice (1998)
Pacheco, O., Carmo, J.: A Role Based Model for the Normative Specification of Organized Collective Agency and Agents Interaction. Journal of Autonomous Agents and Multi-Agent Systems 6(2), 145–184 (2003)
Pörn, I.: Action Theory and Social Science: Some Formal Models. Synthese Library, vol. 120. D. Reidel, Dordrecht (1977)
Santos, F., Jones, A.J.I., Carmo, J.: Responsibility for Action in Organizations: a Formal Model. In: Holmstrom-Hintikka, G., Tuomela, R. (eds.) Contemporary Action Theory, II (Social Action), Synthese Library, vol. 267, pp. 333–350. Kluwer, Dordrecht (1997)
Santos, F., Carmo, J.: Indirect Action, Influence and Responsibility. In: Brown, M., Carmo, J. (eds.) Deontic Logic, Agency and Normative Systems. Workshops in Computing Series, pp. 194–215. Springer, Heidelberg (1996)
Sergot, M.: Modelling unreliable and untrustworthy agent behavior. In: Proc.Workshop on Monitoring, Security and Rescue Techniques in Multiagent Systems (MSRAS 2004), Poland. Advances in Soft Computing. Springer, Heidelberg (2004)
Skarmeas, N.: Modeling Organizations using Roles and Agents. In: Proceedings of 5h Hellenic Conference on Informatics, Athens (1995)
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2006 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg
About this paper
Cite this paper
Pacheco, O. (2006). Normative Specification: A Tool for Trust and Security. In: Dimitrakos, T., Martinelli, F., Ryan, P.Y.A., Schneider, S. (eds) Formal Aspects in Security and Trust. FAST 2005. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 3866. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/11679219_14
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/11679219_14
Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg
Print ISBN: 978-3-540-32628-1
Online ISBN: 978-3-540-32629-8
eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)