DP1
Individual
3230d1b9
http://proethica.org/ontology/case/7#DP1
Properties
Parent
Decision Point Id
DP1
Decision Question
Did Engineer A have an ethical obligation to disclose the AI's generative role in drafting the environmental report to Client W — both at submission and upon Client W's direct observation of stylistic inconsistency — and does submitting AI-generated prose with only minor wording edits under a professional seal without attribution constitute a breach of intellectual authorship integrity and candor?
Focus
Engineer A's obligation to disclose AI-generated authorship and maintain intellectual honesty when submitting the environmental report to Client W under a professional seal, particularly after Client W directly observed stylistic inconsistency suggesting dual authorship.
Option1
Disclose AI tool's generative role in the report to Client W at submission and clarify AI authorship when Client W raises the stylistic inconsistency observation
Option2
Submit the AI-generated report under professional seal without disclosing AI involvement and remain silent when Client W observes the stylistic inconsistency
Role Label
Engineer A
TTL
@prefix rdf: <http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#> .
@prefix rdfs: <http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#> .
@prefix owl: <http://www.w3.org/2002/07/owl#> .
@prefix proethica_case_7: <http://proethica.org/ontology/case/7> .
<http://proethica.org/ontology/case/7#DP1> a owl:NamedIndividual ;
rdfs:label "DP1" ;
rdfs:subClassOf <http://proethica.org/ontology/cases#DecisionPoint> .
Metadata
Ontology
Type
Individual
Content Hash
3230d1b984a61bbf...Last Updated
2026-03-08 16:29
Extraction Provenance
Generated
2026-02-24T06:49:08.780276
Generated By
ProEthica Case 7 Extraction