Cost Allocation Bias Prohibition Principle
Class
http://proethica.org/ontology/intermediate#CostAllocationBiasProhibitionPrinciple
Class Hierarchy
- Thing
- ↳ entity (bfo)
- ↳ continuant (bfo)
- ↳ generically dependent continuant (bfo)
- ↳ information content entity (iao)
- ↳ directive information entity (iao)
- ↳ Principle (proethica-core)
- ↳ Professional Virtue Principle (proethica-intermediate)
- ↳ CostAllocationBiasProhibitionPrinciple
Definition
Professional integrity principle prohibiting engineers from allowing assumptions about which party will bear the financial consequences of deficient work to influence the decision to submit incomplete or inadequate work product. An engineer may not rationalize delivering deficient deliverables on the basis that remediation costs will fall on a third-party funder rather than the client.
Case Provenance
Discovered in
- Case 85: Incomplete Plans and Specifications – Engineer, Government, and Contractor Responsibilities
This class was discovered during extraction of the case(s) above; the supporting verbatim quotes are in Source Evidence.
Properties
Abstract Nature
Requires engineers to maintain the same standard of completeness and adequacy in their deliverables regardless of who will ultimately pay for deficiencies, recognizing that cost-shifting reasoning corrupts professional judgment.
Confidence
0.85
Derived Obligations
Deliver complete and adequate drawings and specifications regardless of funding source
Refrain from rationalizing deficient work on the basis that a third-party funder will absorb the cost
Treat public grant funds with the same fiduciary care as client funds
Extensional Examples
Engineer delivers deficient specifications reasoning that change orders will be funded by a third party
Engineer submits incomplete dam design reasoning that federal grant funds will cover cost overruns, insulating the local client from financial harm
Operationalization
Engineers must evaluate the adequacy of their work product against objective professional standards, not against assumptions about who will pay if the work is deficient. The source of project funding does not alter the engineer's obligation to deliver complete and adequate work.
Potential Conflicts
Client cost minimization interests
Schedule pressure
Principle Category
professional_virtue
Value Basis
Professional standards of completeness and adequacy are not contingent on the identity of the party who bears remediation costs. Allowing cost-allocation assumptions to lower the standard of care undermines the integrity of the profession and misuses public funds.
Property Structure
1 · Object and Data Properties
rdfs:domain on this class or ancestor
| Property | Range | Description |
|---|---|---|
| establishedBy inherited | CodeProvision | Indicates which code provision establishes this ethical concept. |
| invokedBy inherited | Agent | Relates a Principle to the Agent(s) that invoke it in the case scenario (the parties who appeal to the principle to justify or evaluate conduct). May name several agents. |
2 · Definitional Attributes
SHACL definitional shape
| Attribute | Property (sh:path) | Description |
|---|---|---|
| principle kind | principleCategory | The controlled principle kind, which drives the four-kind subClassOf typing: FundamentalEthicalPrinciple, ProfessionalVirtuePrinciple, RelationalPrinciple, DomainSpecificPrinciple. The canonical leaf label becomes the rdf:type; the category is a routing input, not stored as a literal. |
| extensional cases | extensionalCases | Class-level prior cases that instantiate the principle (McLaren extensional grounding); an optional class-mint field. |
3 · Bearer Attributes
SHACL property shape
individual data
| Attribute | Property (sh:path) | Description |
|---|---|---|
| interpretation | interpretation | Per-case reading of what the principle requires in this situation (a defeasibility-pipeline source field). |
| concrete expression | concreteExpression | How the principle is concretely expressed in the case (a defeasibility-pipeline source field). |
| applied to | appliedTo | What the principle is applied to in the case (the situation or party it bears on). |
| balancing with | balancingWith | The competing principle or value this principle is balanced against in the case, recorded as a literal; extraction records the tension but asserts no defeat or precedence, and the defeasibility edges are materialized by a separate pass from this field. |
| tension resolution | tensionResolution | How the case resolves the tension involving this principle (a defeasibility-pipeline source field). |
| invoked by | invokedBy | The agent who invokes the principle, via the P->Agent invokedBy edge (resolved to a case Agent by embedding shortlist + LLM select; a Board-pattern invoking party resolves deterministically to the case-scoped NSPE Board of Ethical Review Agent). Range: Agent. |
4 · Referenced By
rdfs:range on this class or ancestor
| From | Property | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Action | guidedByPrinciple inherited | Relates an action to a principle that directs it. The principle supplies the value the action is taken to serve. |
| Code Provision | establishes inherited | Relates a code provision to the ethical concepts (principles, obligations, constraints) it establishes or defines. |
| Obligation | derivedFromPrinciple inherited | Relates an obligation to the principle or principles it operationalizes. The obligation gives concrete directive force to the more abstract value the principle expresses (Dennis et al. 2016). |
| Role | adheresToPrinciple inherited | Relates a role to principles that guide its conduct; the role-relative applicability edge of the R->P->O chain (the role determines which principles apply to conduct in that standing). |
Source Evidence
Text references
While much of the information was missing from the drawings and specifications, Engineer A was confident that sufficient federal funds (and not local funding) would cover any potential increased costs.
Source text
While much of the information was missing from the drawings and specifications, Engineer A was confident that sufficient federal funds (and not local funding) would cover any potential increased costs.
Used in cases 1
Case ontologies that instantiate this class or one of its base-ontology descendants. Computed from each individual's type, so the list stays current as cases are extracted. The originating case is shown under Extraction details.
Case 85@prefix core: <http://proethica.org/ontology/core#> .
@prefix owl: <http://www.w3.org/2002/07/owl#> .
@prefix pcsh: <http://proethica.org/shapes/core#> .
@prefix proeth: <http://proethica.org/ontology/intermediate#> .
@prefix proeth-prov: <http://proethica.org/provenance#> .
@prefix prov: <http://www.w3.org/ns/prov#> .
@prefix rdfs: <http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#> .
@prefix sh: <http://www.w3.org/ns/shacl#> .
@prefix skos: <http://www.w3.org/2004/02/skos/core#> .
@prefix xsd: <http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#> .
proeth:CostAllocationBiasProhibitionPrinciple a owl:Class ;
rdfs:label "Cost Allocation Bias Prohibition Principle" ;
proeth:abstractNature "Requires engineers to maintain the same standard of completeness and adequacy in their deliverables regardless of who will ultimately pay for deficiencies, recognizing that cost-shifting reasoning corrupts professional judgment." ;
proeth:confidence "0.85" ;
proeth:derivedObligations "Deliver complete and adequate drawings and specifications regardless of funding source",
"Refrain from rationalizing deficient work on the basis that a third-party funder will absorb the cost",
"Treat public grant funds with the same fiduciary care as client funds" ;
proeth:extensionalExamples "Engineer delivers deficient specifications reasoning that change orders will be funded by a third party",
"Engineer submits incomplete dam design reasoning that federal grant funds will cover cost overruns, insulating the local client from financial harm" ;
proeth:operationalization "Engineers must evaluate the adequacy of their work product against objective professional standards, not against assumptions about who will pay if the work is deficient. The source of project funding does not alter the engineer's obligation to deliver complete and adequate work." ;
proeth:potentialConflicts "Client cost minimization interests",
"Schedule pressure" ;
proeth:principleCategory "professional_virtue" ;
proeth:textReferences "While much of the information was missing from the drawings and specifications, Engineer A was confident that sufficient federal funds (and not local funding) would cover any potential increased costs." ;
proeth:valueBasis "Professional standards of completeness and adequacy are not contingent on the identity of the party who bears remediation costs. Allowing cost-allocation assumptions to lower the standard of care undermines the integrity of the profession and misuses public funds." ;
proeth-prov:discoveredInCase 85 ;
proeth-prov:discoveredInPass 2 ;
proeth-prov:discoveredInSection "facts" ;
proeth-prov:firstDiscoveredAt "2026-06-04T16:49:05.036482+00:00"^^xsd:dateTime ;
proeth-prov:firstDiscoveredInCase 85 ;
proeth-prov:matchConfidence 0.0 ;
proeth-prov:matchesExisting false ;
proeth-prov:sourceText "While much of the information was missing from the drawings and specifications, Engineer A was confident that sufficient federal funds (and not local funding) would cover any potential increased costs." ;
rdfs:comment "Professional integrity principle prohibiting engineers from allowing assumptions about which party will bear the financial consequences of deficient work to influence the decision to submit incomplete or inadequate work product. An engineer may not rationalize delivering deficient deliverables on the basis that remediation costs will fall on a third-party funder rather than the client." ;
rdfs:subClassOf proeth:ProfessionalVirtuePrinciple ;
skos:definition "Professional integrity principle prohibiting engineers from allowing assumptions about which party will bear the financial consequences of deficient work to influence the decision to submit incomplete or inadequate work product. An engineer may not rationalize delivering deficient deliverables on the basis that remediation costs will fall on a third-party funder rather than the client." ;
prov:generatedAtTime "2026-06-04T16:49:05.036482+00:00"^^xsd:dateTime ;
prov:wasAttributedTo "Case 85 Extraction",
"claude-sonnet-4-6" .
pcsh:CaseAnnotationShape a sh:NodeShape ;
rdfs:label "Shared per-case annotation schema (all nine components)"@en ;
rdfs:comment "The cross-component annotation fields on committed case individuals: proeth:confidence (extraction confidence, decimal; all components except Action, whose Step-3 contract carries no confidence field), proeth:textReferences (verbatim supporting quotes, universal), proeth-prov sourceText (the source snippet, on the Step-1/2 provenance layers; Step-3 A/E individuals ground via textReferences only), and the involvement gloss (proeth:caseInvolvement on role individuals, proeth:caseContext on obligation, capability, and constraint individuals). Values are per-individual; the fields do not individuate any type."@en ;
sh:property [ sh:description "Extraction confidence for this individual (0 to 1)." ;
sh:name "confidence" ;
sh:order 1 ;
sh:path proeth:confidence ],
[ sh:description "Verbatim case quotes supporting this individual." ;
sh:name "text references" ;
sh:order 2 ;
sh:path proeth:textReferences ],
[ sh:description "How this individual figures in the case narrative (role individuals; the same text is routed into rdfs:comment)." ;
sh:name "case involvement" ;
sh:order 3 ;
sh:path proeth:caseInvolvement ],
[ sh:description "Grounding context in this case (obligation, capability, and constraint individuals)." ;
sh:name "case context" ;
sh:order 4 ;
sh:path proeth:caseContext ] ;
sh:targetClass core:Action,
core:Capability,
core:Constraint,
core:Event,
core:Obligation,
core:Principle,
core:Resource,
core:Role,
core:State .
pcsh:PrincipleDefinitionShape a sh:NodeShape ;
rdfs:label "Principle definition schema (type-level, descriptive, field contract)"@en ;
rdfs:comment "What individuates a principle TYPE: its canonical kind (drives the four-kind subClassOf typing; the canonical leaf becomes the rdf:type) and the extensional cases that ground it (McLaren). The five per-case narrative literals and the invokedBy edge are per-individual and now declared on PrinciplePropertyShape, mirroring the RoleDefinitionShape/ProfessionalRolePropertyShape split so the {{ principle_schema }} prompt separates the type judgment from what the case supplies. Descriptive only (no validation result); principle_category is a routing input, not stored as a literal."@en ;
sh:property [ sh:description "The controlled principle kind, which drives the four-kind subClassOf typing: FundamentalEthicalPrinciple, ProfessionalVirtuePrinciple, RelationalPrinciple, DomainSpecificPrinciple. The canonical leaf label becomes the rdf:type; the category is a routing input, not stored as a literal." ;
sh:name "principle kind" ;
sh:order 1 ;
sh:path proeth:principleCategory ],
[ sh:description "Class-level prior cases that instantiate the principle (McLaren extensional grounding); an optional class-mint field." ;
sh:name "extensional cases" ;
sh:order 2 ;
sh:path proeth:extensionalCases ] ;
sh:targetClass core:Principle .
pcsh:PrinciplePropertyShape a sh:NodeShape ;
rdfs:label "Principle per-case schema (individual data, non-definitional)"@en ;
rdfs:comment "What a principle INDIVIDUAL is described by in a specific case: the five narrative literals the defeasibility pipeline consumes and the agent that invokes it. These do NOT individuate the principle TYPE (that is PrincipleDefinitionShape); their values are per-case, asserted on the individual. Descriptive only."@en ;
sh:property [ sh:description "Per-case reading of what the principle requires in this situation (a defeasibility-pipeline source field)." ;
sh:name "interpretation" ;
sh:order 1 ;
sh:path proeth:interpretation ],
[ sh:description "How the principle is concretely expressed in the case (a defeasibility-pipeline source field)." ;
sh:name "concrete expression" ;
sh:order 2 ;
sh:path proeth:concreteExpression ],
[ sh:description "What the principle is applied to in the case (the situation or party it bears on)." ;
sh:name "applied to" ;
sh:order 3 ;
sh:path proeth:appliedTo ],
[ sh:description "The competing principle or value this principle is balanced against in the case, recorded as a literal; extraction records the tension but asserts no defeat or precedence, and the defeasibility edges are materialized by a separate pass from this field." ;
sh:name "balancing with" ;
sh:order 4 ;
sh:path proeth:balancingWith ],
[ sh:description "How the case resolves the tension involving this principle (a defeasibility-pipeline source field)." ;
sh:name "tension resolution" ;
sh:order 5 ;
sh:path proeth:tensionResolution ],
[ sh:description "The agent who invokes the principle, via the P->Agent invokedBy edge (resolved to a case Agent by embedding shortlist + LLM select; a Board-pattern invoking party resolves deterministically to the case-scoped NSPE Board of Ethical Review Agent). Range: Agent." ;
sh:name "invoked by" ;
sh:order 6 ;
sh:path core:invokedBy ] ;
sh:targetClass core:Principle .
Metadata
Extraction details
Discovered in case
85
Discovered in pass
2
Discovered in section
facts
First discovered
2026-06-04T16:49:05.036482+00:00
First case
85
Match Confidence
0.0
Matches Existing
false
Generated
2026-06-04T16:49:05.036482+00:00
Attributed to
['Case 85 Extraction', 'claude-sonnet-4-6']