ProEthica Intermediate Ontology
A mid-level ontology bridging BFO to domain-specific ethical frameworks
ProEthica AI
Entity Type
Meta-class for entity types recognized by the ProEthica system
Guideline Concept Type
A type of entity specifically extracted from ethical guidelines and standards. These are the eight core categories used for concept extraction from guideline documents.
Fundamental Ethical Principle
A universal moral foundation that serves as the highest-level abstraction in professional ethics, requiring extensive interpretation through concrete cases (BFO: generically dependent continuant)
According to McLaren (2003), fundamental principles like public welfare and respect for persons cannot be applied through formal deduction alone but require extensional definition through landmark ethics cases and professional code applications. These principles function as constitutional-like foundations (Taddeo et al. 2024) that mediate moral ideals into professional practice (Hallamaa & Kalliokoski 2022).
Examples: Public Welfare Paramount, Respect for Persons, Justice, Beneficence. These require extensive interpretation and balancing in specific contexts.
Professional Virtue Principle
A character-based principle defining professional excellence and ethical sensitivities specific to professional identity (BFO: generically dependent continuant)
Professional virtue principles guide professional identity formation and ethical sensitivities (Oakley & Cocking 2001). These principles are learned through expert examples (Anderson & Anderson 2018) and exemplified through model professional behavior cases, creating role-generated moral demands that shape professional character.
Examples: Integrity, Competence, Honesty, Professional Courage, Accountability. These shape professional character and decision-making.
Relational Principle
A principle governing professional relationships and establishing frameworks for trust and stakeholder interactions (BFO: generically dependent continuant)
Relational principles establish frameworks for managing professional relationships and stakeholder trust. Following McLaren's extensional approach, these principles gain meaning through precedents from client-professional disputes and resolutions, defining how professionals navigate competing interests and maintain trustworthy relationships.
Examples: Confidentiality, Loyalty, Fairness, Transparency, Respect for Autonomy. These govern interpersonal professional dynamics.
Domain-Specific Principle
A principle particular to professional domain contexts that bridges general ethics to specific technical practices (BFO: generically dependent continuant)
Domain-specific principles bridge general ethical guidance to particular professional contexts. As identified by Prem (2023), these principles face inherent challenges in operationalization but remain essential for contextual guidance. They are grounded through industry-specific cases and technical standards applications.
Examples: Environmental Stewardship (engineering), Patient Autonomy (medicine), Academic Freedom (education). These address domain-specific ethical challenges.
Public Welfare Principle
The fundamental principle that public safety, health, and welfare must be held paramount in professional practice (BFO: generically dependent continuant)
The public welfare principle, as articulated in NSPE Fundamental Canon 1, requires professionals to hold paramount the safety, health, and welfare of the public. This principle exemplifies McLaren's challenge of operationalizing abstract guidance - 'hold paramount' gains meaning only through NSPE case applications and precedents like the Challenger disaster.
Requires contextual interpretation to balance against client confidentiality and employer loyalty when public safety is at risk.
Integrity Principle
The professional virtue principle of maintaining honesty, truthfulness, and ethical consistency in professional practice (BFO: generically dependent continuant)
Professional integrity requires contextual interpretation through cases (Kong et al. 2020) and manifests differently across professional contexts. It encompasses honesty in professional communications, truthfulness in representations, and consistency between professional values and actions.
Central to professional identity formation and trust maintenance in professional relationships.
Competence Principle
The professional virtue principle requiring maintenance and application of professional knowledge and skill within areas of competence (BFO: generically dependent continuant)
The competence principle requires professionals to perform services only in areas of their competence and to maintain professional knowledge through continuous learning. This principle generates obligations for professional development and honest self-assessment of capabilities.
Balances professional autonomy with recognition of limitations and need for collaboration.
Confidentiality Principle
The relational principle protecting client information and maintaining trust in professional relationships (BFO: generically dependent continuant)
Confidentiality establishes trust frameworks in professional relationships by protecting client information from unauthorized disclosure. This principle requires balancing through precedents when it conflicts with public welfare or legal obligations.
Must be balanced against public safety obligations and legal disclosure requirements.
Transparency Principle
The relational principle requiring openness and disclosure in professional communications and decision-making (BFO: generically dependent continuant)
Transparency requires professionals to be open about conflicts of interest, limitations, and decision-making processes. This principle supports accountability and enables informed consent from stakeholders.
Essential for maintaining trust and enabling stakeholder participation in professional decisions.
Environmental Stewardship Principle
The domain-specific principle in engineering requiring consideration of environmental impact and sustainability (BFO: generically dependent continuant)
Environmental stewardship in engineering requires balancing technical solutions with environmental protection and sustainable development. This principle has evolved through cases addressing pollution, resource depletion, and climate change impacts.
Bridges engineering practice with broader environmental and societal responsibilities.
Condition
Legacy term for State. Use proeth-core:State instead for new concepts.
Condition Type
Legacy meta-class. Use State instead.
Resource Type
Meta-class for specific resource types recognized by the ProEthica system
Event Type
Meta-class for specific event types recognized by the ProEthica system
Action Type
Meta-class for specific action types recognized by the ProEthica system
Capability Type
Meta-class for specific capability types recognized by the ProEthica system
Communication Action
Professional actions involving disclosure, informing, notifying stakeholders, and communicating relevant information per Tolmeijer et al. (2021) explanation requirements and McLaren (2003) transparency obligations.
Actions involving disclosure, informing, and transparent communication
Prevention Action
Professional actions aimed at avoiding, preventing, minimizing, or eliminating risks and harms per Anderson & Anderson (2018) harm prevention principles and Arkin (2008) safety obligations.
Actions focused on avoiding and minimizing potential harms
Maintenance Action
Professional actions involving maintaining, upholding, preserving, and protecting professional standards and values per Oakley & Cocking (2001) role requirements and Kong et al. (2020) integrity principles.
Actions focused on maintaining standards and protecting values
Performance Action
Professional actions involving performing, executing, conducting, and implementing professional services within areas of competence per professional obligation frameworks (NSPE II.2).
Actions involving execution of professional services and duties
Evaluation Action
Professional actions involving evaluating, assessing, analyzing, reviewing, and examining professional work, conditions, or decisions per Berreby et al. (2017) assessment processes and Tolmeijer et al. (2021) situational awareness.
Actions involving assessment and analysis of professional situations
Collaboration Action
Professional actions involving consulting, collaborating, coordinating, and cooperating with colleagues, clients, and stakeholders per Dennis et al. (2016) multi-agent frameworks and professional peer obligations.
Actions involving professional cooperation and coordination
Creation Action
Professional actions involving designing, developing, creating, building, and constructing professional solutions per technical competence requirements and innovation obligations.
Actions involving design and development of professional solutions
NSPE Code of Ethics Professional Obligations
Monitoring Action
Professional actions involving monitoring, supervising, overseeing, managing, and controlling professional processes per Arkin (2008) responsibility documentation and oversight requirements.
Actions involving supervision and oversight of professional processes
Decision
A volitional choice made by an agent in response to an ethical situation, requiring deliberation between alternatives per Hooker & Kim (2018) reasoning-based action theory.
Professional choice made after ethical deliberation between alternatives
Disclosure Action
Professional action of revealing conflicts, limitations, or risks to stakeholders per NSPE requirements and transparency principles.
Action of revealing relevant conflicts or limitations
Competence Action
Professional action performed within demonstrated areas of competence per NSPE competence requirements and professional boundaries.
Action performed within established professional competence
Crisis Event
Events involving failures, accidents, emergencies, crises, and disasters that require immediate professional response and may override normal procedures per Berreby et al. (2017) automatic event modeling.
Emergency situations requiring immediate professional response
Compliance Event
Events involving violations, breaches, non-compliance, misconduct, or errors that trigger regulatory or professional review processes per Dennis et al. (2016) ethical policy frameworks.
Events involving breaches of professional or regulatory standards
Conflict Event
Events involving conflicts, disputes, disagreements, controversies, or issues between stakeholders that require professional mediation or resolution per Rao et al. (2023) context-dependent moral evaluation.
Events involving stakeholder conflicts requiring resolution
Project Event
Events involving deadlines, milestones, completions, deliveries, and launches that affect project timelines and professional obligations per Sarmiento et al. (2023) temporal reasoning.
Time-based project events affecting professional obligations
Safety Event
Events involving injuries, harm, damage, losses, threats, or risks that trigger safety obligations and public welfare protections per Anderson & Anderson (2018) harm-based ethical evaluation.
Events involving harm or risk requiring safety response
Evaluation Event
Events involving inspections, audits, reviews, assessments, and evaluations that trigger professional scrutiny and accountability requirements per Arkin (2008) responsibility documentation.
Formal review events triggering professional accountability
Discovery Event
Events involving discoveries, findings, identifications, detections, or reports of new information that may affect professional obligations per Zhang et al. (2023) moral event classification.
Events revealing new information affecting professional responsibilities
Change Event
Events involving changes, modifications, alterations, updates, or revisions to systems, procedures, or requirements that affect professional practice per Almpani et al. (2023) dynamic priority adjustment.
Events involving changes affecting professional practice requirements
Violation
An event indicating that an obligation, prohibition, or standard has been breached, requiring corrective action and potentially triggering disciplinary procedures.
Breach of professional standard requiring corrective response
Emergency Event
Critical event requiring immediate response that may override normal professional procedures and activate emergency protocols.
Critical event overriding normal professional procedures
Deadline Event
Temporal event marking project deadline or milestone that affects professional priorities and resource allocation decisions.
Time constraint event affecting professional priorities
Safety Incident
Event involving actual or potential harm triggering safety reporting obligations and corrective measures per public welfare protection requirements.
Incident triggering safety obligations and reporting requirements
triggers obligation
Relates an event to obligations it activates
caused by action
Links event to actions that caused it (Wright's NESS test)
alters priority
Indicates how events change obligation priorities
Causal Chain
A cause-to-effect linkage in the case timeline carrying a NESS responsibility analysis (Sarmiento et al. 2023). Not one of the nine disjoint D-tuple categories.
analyzes action
Links a synthesis causal-normative-link (reasoning) node to the committed Action it analyzes, so the reasoning is grounded in the graph and the action's obligation edges are reachable from it. Range Action; the subject is a non-D-tuple analysis node, so no domain restriction (and no disjointness impact).
cause
Links a causal chain to the Action or Event that is its cause.
effect
Links a causal chain to the Action or Event that is its effect or outcome.
responsible agent
Links a causal chain to the agent(s) bearing responsibility for it (NESS causal responsibility, Sarmiento et al. 2023).
temporal marker
Narrative temporal marker indicating when an action or event occurred in case time (e.g. 'During preliminary design phase', 'Several months later'). Cases use narrative rather than calendar time.
temporal sequence
Chronological position of an action or event within its case, 1-based, no gaps. Populated by an LLM ordering pass over the case's actions and events; consumed by the validation Timeline view to render entries in chronological order. Free-text temporalMarker is the human-readable signal; temporalSequence is the sortable companion.
Temporal Relation
A reified Allen interval algebra relation between two temporal entities (actions or events). Stores both the ProEthica relation name and the corresponding OWL-Time property URI.
has temporal relation
Links an action or event to a reified Allen interval relation instance.
from entity
The source entity in a temporal relation (Entity1 [relation] Entity2).
to entity
The target entity in a temporal relation (Entity1 [relation] Entity2).
Allen relation
The Allen interval algebra relation name (before, after, meets, overlaps, during, starts, finishes, equals, and their inverses). Maps to OWL-Time properties via services/allen_owl_time_mapper.py.
OWL-Time property
The corresponding OWL-Time property name (e.g. time:before, time:intervalMeets). See W3C OWL-Time ontology.
Ethical Dilemma
A situation involving a difficult ethical choice between competing moral considerations that applies across all professional domains
Ethical Principle
Legacy synonym for Principle. Use :Principle for new concepts.
Professional Obligation
A duty or responsibility arising from professional role or standards. As a directive information entity (IAO:0000033 via proeth-core:Obligation), it is a generically dependent continuant, not a realizable entity.
v2.x: Removed rdfs:subClassOf bfo:BFO_0000017 (realizable entity/SDC). Obligations are directive information entities (GDC), and SDC+GDC dual-inheritance is inconsistent in BFO.
Disclosure Obligation
Requirement to inform stakeholders about conflicts, limitations, or risks (NSPE II.3.a)
Safety Obligation
Duty to hold paramount the safety, health, and welfare of the public (NSPE I.1)
Competence Obligation
Requirement to perform services only in areas of competence (NSPE II.2)
Confidentiality Obligation
Duty to protect confidential information of clients or employers (NSPE III.4)
Reporting Obligation
Duty to report violations or unsafe conditions to appropriate authorities
Mandatory Obligation
Obligations that MUST be fulfilled (deontic force: mandatory)
Defeasible Obligation
Obligations that admit justified exceptions under specified conditions (Ganascia 2007)
Conditional Obligation
Obligations that apply only when specific conditions are met
Prima Facie Obligation
Obligations that hold at first appearance but may be overridden by stronger duties (Anderson & Anderson)
Legal Obligation
Obligations arising from legal requirements and regulations
Ethical Obligation
Obligations arising from ethical principles beyond legal requirements
Collegial Obligation
Duties toward professional peers including respect, fairness, and credit for work
Faithful Agent Obligation
Duty of an engineer to act as a faithful agent or trustee of an employer or client (NSPE Code of Ethics, Section 1 / §II.4). Defeasible under states that confirm public-safety risk.
Post-Termination Environmental Risk Reporting Obligation
Duty of an engineer to report environmental risks to a pollution-control authority after termination of the client relationship when the risk rises to a public-safety concern (NSPE Code §I.1, §II.1.a, §II.1.c). Derived from the paramount public-welfare principle.
has enforcement level
Specifies whether obligation is mandatory, strongly recommended, or recommended
v2.x: Changed from owl:ObjectProperty to owl:DatatypeProperty. Properties with rdfs:range xsd:string must be DatatypeProperties.
source text
The narrative sentence or clause from a case text that grounds a typed individual. Preserved as a string alongside each extracted State, Action, Event, or Obligation to support provenance and qualitative inspection.
obligated party
The agent label to which an obligation is attributed in a case (e.g. 'Engineer Doe'). This is a string rather than an Agent individual so that case text phrasing is preserved verbatim.
derived from principle
Links obligation to the principle(s) it operationalizes (Hallamaa & Kalliokoski 2022)
conflicts with
Indicates potential conflicts between obligations requiring resolution
Engineer Role
A professional role involving engineering practice and responsibilities. Occupational archetype head for all engineer specializations and extracted engineer-role leaves.
engineer
engineering
Professional Role
A role within a profession that entails recognized ends/goals of practice (e.g., safeguarding public safety, delivering competent technical solutions) and a coherent set of obligations codified in standards and codes (e.g., NSPE). Often associated with licensure or formal accountability. Examples: Professional Engineer, Project Manager, Public Official.
Participant Role
A role of an involved party or stakeholder that does not itself establish professional obligations (e.g., Client, The Public, Community Member).
Stakeholder Role
A participant role borne by stakeholders such as Clients, Employers, and the Public. Typically not the bearer of professional obligations, but may be linked to principles in explicit statements.
Relational Role
Head of the relational archetype axis: the duty-relationship a role establishes. Orthogonal to the occupational axis, so a relational archetype composes with any occupational archetype without crossing the ProfessionalRole/ParticipantRole disjointness.
Professional role defining relationships between service providers and their clients, creating duties of competent service delivery, confidentiality, and client welfare per Kong et al. (2020) identity role analysis.
Service delivery relationship with duties of competence and care
Professional role defining relationships between practitioners within the same professional domain, creating obligations for peer review, professional development, knowledge sharing, and standard maintenance per Kong et al. (2020).
Collegial relationship with mentoring and review obligations
Professional role defining relationships between professionals and their employing organizations, creating duties of loyalty, competent performance, and honest reporting while maintaining professional independence per Wendel (2024) moral complexity framework.
Organizational relationship balancing loyalty and independence
Professional role defining obligations to the broader public and society, creating duties of public welfare protection that can override client or employer interests per Thornton et al. (2017) collective morality framework.
Societal obligation that can override other professional duties
End/Goal
A characteristic end or goal toward which a role is directed (e.g., in engineering: protecting public safety, serving the public welfare, providing competent service).
Standard
A documented agreement containing technical specifications or criteria for professional practice
Ethical Code
A formal document that codifies ethical principles and professional conduct requirements for a profession. As a document (IAO:0000310 via Guideline), it contains principles, obligations, and constraints -- it is not itself a principle.
v2.4.2: Changed rdfs:subClassOf from proeth-core:Principle to proeth-core:Guideline. An ethical code is a document that contains principles, obligations, and constraints. Classifying it as a Principle conflated the container with its contents.
Technical Capability
A specialized technical skill or competency in a professional domain
Ethical Issue
A problematic situation involving ethical considerations or conflicts
Measurement
A quantitative or qualitative assessment or evaluation
Permission
A normative allowance indicating that an action or state is permitted under certain conditions.
Prohibition
A normative restriction indicating that an action or state is disallowed.
Justification
A rationale, argument, or evidence artifact supporting a decision or interpretation in an ethical case.
has value label
Annotation for recording the value-oriented reading of a principle (e.g., 'Integrity', 'Justice').
has role
Relates an entity to a role it bears. DEPRECATED: use proeth-core:hasRole.
v2.4.2: Deprecated in favor of proeth-core:hasRole. Added owl:equivalentProperty to bridge existing references.
has condition
Relates a process to a state that affects it
has state
Relates a process to a state that affects it. DEPRECATED: use proeth-core:hasState.
v2.4.2: Deprecated in favor of proeth-core:hasState. Added owl:equivalentProperty to bridge existing references.
has resource
Relates a process to a resource it uses
v2.4.2: Fixed range from :Resource (undefined in intermediate namespace) to proeth-core:Resource.
performs action
Relates an agent to an action they perform. DEPRECATED: use proeth-core:performsAction.
v2.4.2: Deprecated in favor of proeth-core:performsAction. Added owl:equivalentProperty to bridge existing references.
has capability
Relates an entity to a capability it possesses. DEPRECATED: use proeth-core:hasCapability.
v2.4.2: Deprecated in favor of proeth-core:hasCapability. Added owl:equivalentProperty to bridge existing references.
guided by principle
Relates an action to a principle that guides it
fulfills obligation
Relates an action to an obligation it fulfills. DEPRECATED: use proeth-core:fulfillsObligation.
v2.4.2: Deprecated in favor of proeth-core:fulfillsObligation. Added owl:equivalentProperty to bridge existing references.
violates obligation
Relates an action to an obligation it violates
raises obligation
Relates an action to an obligation it puts at stake but does not itself resolve. The fulfillment or violation occurs at a downstream action in the same chain. Distinguishes upstream choices that engage an obligation from the downstream actions that satisfy or breach it; without this third predicate, the same obligation appears as both fulfilled and violated across adjacent steps.
constrained by
Relates an action to a constraint that limits or shapes it. DEPRECATED: use proeth-core:constrainedBy.
v2.4.2: Deprecated in favor of proeth-core:constrainedBy. Added owl:equivalentProperty to bridge existing references.
has agent role
Relates an action to the role of the agent performing it
has obligation
Relates a role to the professional obligations borne by entities bearing that role. DEPRECATED: use proeth-core:hasObligation.
v2.4.2: Deprecated in favor of proeth-core:hasObligation. Added owl:equivalentProperty to bridge existing references.
adheres to principle
Relates a role to ethical principles that normatively govern that role. DEPRECATED: use proeth-core:adheresToPrinciple.
v2.4.2: Deprecated in favor of proeth-core:adheresToPrinciple. Added owl:equivalentProperty to bridge existing references.
pursues end
Relates a role to its characteristic ends/goals.
governed by code
Relates a professional role to an ethical code that formalizes its obligations and norms.
retained by
Professional retained by client or organization
retains
Client or organization that retains a professional
employed by
Professional employed by organization
employs
Organization that employs a professional
supervises
Role supervises another role in organizational hierarchy
supervised by
Role is supervised by another role
mentors
Role mentors another role in professional development
mentored by
Role is mentored by another role
collaborates with
Role collaborates with another role as peers
reports to
Role reports to another role in organizational structure
receives report from
Role receives reports from another role
establishes
Relates a code provision to the ethical concepts (Principles, Obligations, Constraints) it establishes or reinforces. For example, NSPE Canon I.1 establishes the Public Safety Principle.
established by
Inverse of establishes. Relates an ethical concept to the code provision(s) that establish it. For example, Public Safety Principle is established by NSPE Canon I.1.
Risk State
A condition of potential harm to public welfare, safety, or a protected interest. Its deontic function is to ACTIVATE the protective obligations a role exists to discharge, and to license defeat of competing obligations such as confidentiality when the harm is grave, per Berreby et al. (2017) and the dynamic priority tiers of Almpani et al. (2023).
Obligation-activating condition of potential harm (realized by activatesObligation / defeasibleUnder).
Deontic-function archetype; case-specific risk states subclass this. The salience of the risk (magnitude, probability, immediacy) is a state ATTRIBUTE (Jones 1991), not a subkind.
Emergency State
An acute, time-critical condition demanding immediate response. Its deontic function is to activate emergency-response obligations and to override or suspend constraints that normally bound action, per the emergency-priority determination of Almpani et al. (2023).
Obligation-activating, constraint-overriding acute condition.
Deontic-function archetype; distinguished from RiskState by acuteness that licenses overriding ordinary constraints.
Conflict State
A condition under which two or more role-derived obligations compete and cannot all be fully satisfied. Its deontic function is to render obligations defeasible against one another: it is the licensing context of the defeasibility relation, where an Obligation is defeasibleUnder a Conflict State.
Obligation-competing context (realized by defeasibleUnder; the prima-facie-duty conflict situation).
Deontic-function archetype; case-specific conflict states (ConflictOfInterest, CompetingDuties) subclass this. Grounds the competesWith / prevailsOver / defeasibleUnder edge family.
Competence State
A condition bearing on whether a role-bearer has the capacity -- expertise, qualification, means -- to fulfil a duty. Its deontic function is to condition an obligation on capacity: obligation presupposes capacity, so a competence shortfall renders the duty defeasible or shifts it (for example to refer or disclose), per Stenseke (2024).
Capacity-conditioning condition (ought-implies-can).
Deontic-function archetype; case-specific competence states (OutsideCompetence) subclass this.
Relationship State
A condition defining which professional relationship holds among the parties (provider-client, professional-peer, employer-employee, public trust). Its deontic function is to SCOPE which relational obligations apply, since duties are relative to the role-relationship in force.
Obligation-scoping condition (which role-relation, hence which relational duties, are active).
Deontic-function archetype; pairs with the relational role archetypes (ProviderClientRole, ProfessionalPeerRole, ...). The relationship in force selects the applicable obligations.
Information State
An epistemic condition: what is known, disclosed, uncertain, or concealed. Its deontic function is to condition obligations on the agent's knowledge state, governing disclosure, notification, informed-consent, and decision-under-uncertainty duties, per Govindarajulu & Bringsjord (2017) on the dependence of obligation on intention and knowledge.
Epistemic condition conditioning disclosure / informed obligations.
Deontic-function archetype; covers states of disclosure, notification, concealment, and uncertainty.
Regulatory State
A condition in which a code provision, standard, statute, or contractual requirement is in force for the situation. Its deontic function is to ACTIVATE a constraint or compliance obligation on the available actions (the State-to-Constraint linkage).
Constraint-activating condition (realized by activatesConstraint).
Deontic-function archetype; the state under which a regulatory constraint becomes binding for the case.
Temporal State
A condition defined by phase or timing (pre/post-termination, before/after notification, a deadline window). Its deontic function is to bound when a time-relative obligation holds: the state is the Event-Calculus fluent whose initiation and termination start and end the obligation, per Berreby et al. (2017).
Obligation-bounding condition (Event-Calculus fluent; realized by activatedByEvent / terminatedByEvent).
Deontic-function archetype; the persistence of the fluent (inertial vs non-inertial) is an orthogonal ATTRIBUTE, not a subkind.
Resource Availability State
A condition of availability or scarcity of the means to act (time, budget, personnel, safeguards, access to information). Its deontic function is to condition the FEASIBILITY of obligations and to set dynamic priorities among them when means are constrained, per Almpani et al. (2023).
Feasibility-conditioning condition of resource availability or scarcity.
Deontic-function archetype; distinct from the Resource (Rs) component, which is a knowledge artifact. This is the situational availability of the means to act.
Environmental state where a professional has personal interests that could influence their professional judgment or decision-making, requiring disclosure and management according to Dennis et al. (2016) context-aware ethical reasoning framework.
Professional situation where personal and professional interests compete
Context where multiple professional obligations conflict and cannot all be fully satisfied simultaneously, requiring prioritization based on Rao et al. (2023) context-dependent moral evaluation.
State requiring ethical prioritization between conflicting obligations
Confirmed Risk Without Adequate Safeguards State
State in which a professional has confirmed the existence of a concrete public-safety or environmental risk and adequate safeguards are known to be absent. Typical activator for post-termination reporting obligations and for defeating faithful-agent confidentiality (NSPE BER Case 72 pattern).
Environmental condition where actions or conditions pose potential harm to public health, safety, or welfare, elevating safety obligations per Berreby et al. (2017) Event Calculus state representation.
Critical state triggering heightened safety obligations
State where environmental conditions pose risks requiring professional intervention or mitigation according to Almpani et al. (2023) dynamic priority determination framework.
Environmental risk state requiring assessment and action
State where professional lacks the expertise, training, or qualification to perform requested services, limiting available actions per competence-based ethical constraints.
Competence boundary preventing service provision
Positive competence state where professional has demonstrated expertise and authorization to perform specific services within defined scope of practice.
Competence state enabling professional action
Relational state where formal professional-client relationship exists with associated fiduciary duties, confidentiality requirements, and professional boundaries.
Active professional relationship with associated obligations
Post-employment state where professional relationship has ended but residual obligations for confidentiality and non-competition may persist.
Post-employment state with continuing obligations
Information state where professional possesses data subject to confidentiality obligations, restricting disclosure per professional ethics requirements.
State triggering information protection obligations
Open information state where relevant data is publicly accessible without confidentiality restrictions, enabling unrestricted professional use.
Critical temporal state requiring immediate response that may override normal procedures, represented as non-inertial fluent per Berreby et al. (2017) Event Calculus formalism.
Urgent state overriding normal protocols
Extended emergency state of systemic disruption requiring coordinated professional response with adapted obligations and priorities.
Sustained emergency requiring coordinated response
State where specific regulatory requirements are in effect, constraining professional actions and decisions per jurisdictional requirements.
Legal compliance context constraining actions
Problematic state where applicable standards or regulations are not being met, requiring immediate corrective action.
Temporal state where time constraints intensify, potentially affecting quality-safety tradeoffs per Sarmiento et al. (2023) causal reasoning framework.
Time pressure state affecting decision priorities
Temporal state where sufficient time exists for thorough analysis and stakeholder consultation, enabling comprehensive ethical deliberation.
State where limited resources (budget, personnel, materials) constrain available options and require allocation decisions.
Resource limitation affecting available actions
State where sufficient resources exist to implement optimal solutions without significant constraints.
Resource sufficiency enabling full options
Formal codified professional ethics standards (e.g., NSPE Code, IEEE Code) that establish professional identity, create accountability, and provide deliberation frameworks beyond mere rules. As an ethics knowledge resource the code is grounded in Frankel (1989), who frames it as an enabling document and a distillation of collective professional experience, and Davis (1991), who frames it as a convention among professionals.
Distillations of collective experience that guide and justify actions
Attribution: Frankel (1989) 'Professional Codes: Why, How, and with What Impact?' and Davis (1991) 'Thinking Like an Engineer'. McLaren (2003) USES codes as extensional inputs but does not originate this resource type (the prior blanket McLaren citation was corrected).
Documented cases from ethics review boards providing precedential knowledge and analogical reasoning patterns for similar situations, grounding abstract principles in professional reality per McLaren (2003): citing past cases provides the extensional definition of the principles.
Concrete instances that exemplify principle application
Attribution: McLaren (Ashley & McLaren 1995; McLaren 2003, SIROCCO). This is McLaren's core contribution to the Resource component.
Authoritative explanations bridging principles to specific contexts, providing nuanced understanding of how principles apply in complex situations. Per McLaren (2003), the review board's explanations of how and why codes apply operationalize the abstract principles.
Professional consensus on principle application in edge cases
Attribution: McLaren (2003) -- the expert/board explanation that links codes to facts.
Industry standards and specifications defining acceptable practice (e.g., ISO, IEEE, ASME standards) that embody collective professional agreement on technical acceptability and minimum competence benchmarks.
Collective professional agreement on technical acceptability
House extension (engineering domain): technical standards treated as an ethics knowledge resource. Not directly attributable to a cited ethics-reasoning source (the prior McLaren citation was removed).
Laws, regulations, and statutes governing professional practice that establish legal boundaries and compliance requirements for professional activities.
Legal framework constraining professional practice
House extension with roots in legal case-based reasoning (Bench-Capon & Sartor 2003); treating legal materials as an ethics resource reflects the society-profession nexus (Frankel 1989).
Frameworks, methodologies, and assessment tools for ethical analysis that provide structured approaches to ethical decision-making in professional contexts.
Structured approaches for ethical analysis
House extension: decision-support and ethics-workup schemas formalized as a distinct resource type. Not directly attributable to a cited source.
Handbooks, manuals, guides, and other documentation supporting professional practice with technical and procedural knowledge.
Supporting documentation for professional practice
House extension grounded structurally in the Information Artifact Ontology: documents and manuals as Information Content Entities (iao:0000030, the parent of proeth-core:Resource). Not from a cited ethics source.
The National Society of Professional Engineers' Code of Ethics establishing fundamental canons, rules of practice, and professional obligations for engineers.
Primary ethical framework for professional engineers in the United States
Legal Constraint
Constraints arising from legal requirements and statutes that establish inviolable boundaries (Kroll 2020, Stenseke 2024)
Regulatory Constraint
Constraints from regulatory bodies and professional standards organizations (Taddeo et al. 2024)
Resource Constraint
Limitations on available time, budget, materials, or human resources (Ganascia 2007)
Competence Constraint
Boundaries defined by agent capabilities and technical limitations (Hallamaa & Kalliokoski 2022)
Jurisdictional Constraint
Boundaries of authority and geographical or organizational scope (Dennis et al. 2016)
Procedural Constraint
Requirements for following specific processes or protocols (Furbach et al. 2014)
Defeasible Constraint
Constraints that admit justified exceptions under specified conditions (Ganascia 2007)
Inviolable Constraint
Absolute constraints that cannot be overridden under any circumstances (Dennis et al. 2016)
Ethical Constraint
Professional ethical boundaries beyond legal requirements (Benzmüller et al. 2020)
Safety Constraint
Constraints ensuring safety requirements are met (Arkin 2008)
Confidentiality Constraint
Boundaries on information disclosure and privacy (Dennis et al. 2016)
Temporal Constraint
Time-based limitations and deadlines (Govindarajulu & Bringsjord 2017)
Priority Constraint
Constraints establishing precedence when multiple requirements conflict (Scheutz & Malle 2014)
has constraint type
Specifies the type of constraint (legal, regulatory, resource, etc.)
v2.x: Changed from owl:ObjectProperty to owl:DatatypeProperty. A property relating to a string literal must be a DatatypeProperty.
constrains action
Links constraint to actions it limits or prohibits
conflicts with obligation
Indicates when a constraint creates tension with an obligation
Norm Competence
Ability to store ethical rules, recognize when they apply, understand conflicts, and resolve contradictions (Tolmeijer et al. 2021)
Conflict Resolution
Capability to manage and resolve conflicts between diverse and potentially conflicting normative requirements (Dennis et al. 2016)
Situational Awareness
Ability to perceive and interpret environmental factors affecting ethical evaluation (Almpani et al. 2023, Tolmeijer et al. 2021)
Ethical Perception
Capability to recognize ethically salient features and dynamically assess environment (Anderson et al. 2006, Berreby et al. 2017)
Ethical Learning
Ability to adapt to new cases, changing standards, and novel situations while maintaining consistency (Anderson & Anderson 2018)
Principle Refinement
Capability to evolve principles as inconsistencies are resolved and new cases are added (GenEth system, Anderson & Anderson 2018)
Ethical Reasoning
Capability to process ethical information, deliberate on choices, and exercise moral judgment (Wallach & Allen 2009, Belle 2023)
Causal Reasoning
Ability to trace complex causal chains and establish responsibility relationships (Sarmiento et al. 2023, Wright's NESS test)
Temporal Reasoning
Capability to reason about temporal dynamics and event sequences in ethical evaluation (Govindarajulu & Bringsjord 2017)
Explanation Generation
Ability to provide clear explanations and justifications for ethical decisions (Langley 2019, Tolmeijer et al. 2021)
Justification Capability
Capability to trace reasoning paths connecting decisions to authoritative sources (McLaren 2003, Anderson & Anderson 2018)
Responsibility Documentation
Capability to maintain detailed logs of actions and reasoning for accountability (Arkin 2008, Kroll 2020)
Domain Expertise
Professional domain-specific knowledge and competencies (Hallamaa & Kalliokoski 2022, Doernberg & Truog 2023)
Professional Competence
Technical competencies specific to professional roles and activities (Kong et al. 2020, Stenseke 2024)
Precedent Retrieval
Capability to identify relevant precedents and apply case-based reasoning (McLaren 2003, SIROCCO system)
has capability level
Indicates the level or degree of a capability
enables action
Relates a capability to the actions it enables
requires capability
Specifies capabilities required for a professional role
Ethical Question
A question about ethical conduct posed for Board of Ethical Review consideration, representing a specific inquiry about professional ethics requiring formal determination.
Questions submitted to ethics review boards articulate specific ethical uncertainties requiring authoritative interpretation. Per McLaren (2003), these questions provide the extensional grounding for principle application, with each Board determination adding to the precedential knowledge base.
Extracted from case 'Questions' sections. Each question frames a specific ethical issue for Board determination. DEPRECATED: use proeth-cases:EthicalQuestion.
v2.4.2: Deprecated in favor of proeth-cases:EthicalQuestion. Added owl:equivalentClass to bridge existing references. Case data uses the proeth-cases: version.
Board Conclusion
The Board of Ethical Review's formal determination on an ethical question, representing authoritative professional judgment with precedential value.
Board conclusions represent the culmination of ethical deliberation, providing precedential guidance for future cases. Per McLaren (2003), these determinations give concrete meaning to abstract principles through their application to specific factual contexts.
Extracted from case 'Conclusions' sections. Each conclusion answers a specific ethical question and establishes precedent. DEPRECATED: use proeth-cases:EthicalConclusion.
v2.4.2: Deprecated in favor of proeth-cases:EthicalConclusion. Added owl:equivalentClass to bridge existing references.
Decision Point
A point in an ethics case where a professional actor must make a choice between ethically significant alternatives, representing a critical juncture in the case narrative.
Decision points mark critical junctures in ethics cases where actors face choices between alternatives with ethical implications. Per Hobbs & Moore (2005) scenario-directed decision analysis, these points structure the ethical problem space and enable systematic analysis of options, constraints, and outcomes.
Extracted during Step 4 analysis. Each decision point includes options, involved roles, applicable provisions, and the board's resolution. DEPRECATED: use proeth-cases:DecisionPoint.
v2.4.2: Deprecated in favor of proeth-cases:DecisionPoint. Added owl:equivalentClass to bridge existing references. 845 case instances reference proeth-cases:DecisionPoint.
Decision Option
A possible course of action available at a decision point, representing one alternative the actor could choose.
Decision options represent the discrete alternatives available to actors at decision points. Per scenario-directed analysis frameworks, clearly articulating options enables structured evaluation of consequences and ethical implications for each path.
Each decision point has multiple options; one is typically marked as the board's chosen resolution. DEPRECATED: use proeth-cases:DecisionOption.
v2.4.2: Deprecated in favor of proeth-cases:DecisionOption. Added owl:equivalentClass to bridge existing references.
Ethical Argument
An argument supporting or opposing a decision option, based on ethical principles, code provisions, and precedent cases.
Ethical arguments represent the pro/con reasoning for decision options. Per the IAAI 'Pros and Cons in Ethical Decisions' paper, evaluative AI presents balanced arguments citing code provisions and precedents so practitioners can make informed decisions.
Generated during Step 4 Part F. Each argument includes a claim, premises, provision citations, and strength assessment. DEPRECATED: use proeth-cases:Argument.
v2.4.2: Deprecated in favor of proeth-cases:Argument. Added owl:equivalentClass to bridge existing references.
has question
Relates a case to the ethical questions it poses for Board review
has conclusion
Relates a case to the Board's conclusions
has decision point
Relates a case to a decision point identified within it
has option
Relates a decision point to its available options
answers question
Relates a Board conclusion to the question it answers
involves role
Relates a decision point to the professional roles involved in it
applies provision
Relates a decision point to the ethical code provisions applicable to it
is board choice
Indicates whether this option was the Board's chosen resolution
has argument
Relates a decision option to an argument for or against it
argument for
Indicates this is a PRO argument supporting the decision option
v2.4.2: Removed rdfs:subPropertyOf :hasArgument. The parent property has domain DecisionOption and range EthicalArgument, but argumentFor has the inverse direction (EthicalArgument to DecisionOption). A subproperty cannot invert its parent's domain/range.
argument against
Indicates this is a CON argument opposing the decision option
v2.4.2: Removed rdfs:subPropertyOf :hasArgument. Same domain/range inversion issue as argumentFor.
cites provision
Relates an argument to the code provision it cites as support
argument type
The type of argument: 'pro' or 'con'
argument strength
The assessed strength of the argument: 'weak', 'moderate', or 'strong'
archetype axis
Role-archetype axis marker: 'occupational' or 'relational'. Drives data-driven occupational placement; see the occupational resolver.
Civil Engineer Role
Engineer specializing in infrastructure and the built environment.
Structural Engineer Role
Engineer specializing in load-bearing structure and structural integrity.
Mechanical Engineer Role
Engineer specializing in mechanical systems.
Electrical Engineer Role
Engineer specializing in electrical systems and power.
Project Manager Role
project manager
construction manager
program manager
Party responsible for planning, coordinating, and delivering a project.
Architect Role
Professional responsible for building design and construction oversight.
Consultant Role
Professional engaged for expert advice on a specific aspect of a project. Engineering consultants are classified under EngineerRole. This head covers non-engineering advisory roles.
Regulatory Authority Role
regulator
regulatory
authority
inspector
government
board of ethical
public official
public agency
Code-enforcement officials, inspectors, boards, and government agencies acting in an oversight capacity. No IFC equivalent (IFC has no regulator role).
Client Role
Party that commissions the project work. This is the occupational archetype. The duty relationship is carried separately by :ProviderClientRole.
Owner Role
Party that owns the asset, project, or building.
Public Role
public
community
citizen
resident
neighbor
society
affected party
The public, community members, and affected stakeholders. No IFC equivalent, since IFC has no public or society role. The professional duty side is :PublicResponsibilityRole.
Contractor Role
contractor
subcontractor
Party contracted to carry out construction work.
Supplier Role
supplier
manufacturer
vendor
reseller
Party that supplies materials, products, or equipment.
Employer Role
The employing organization as a participant. The duty relationship is carried separately by :EmployerRelationshipRole. No IFC equivalent.
concept category
Base nine-component category tag (Role/Principle/...); display grouping, not reasoner-visible typing.
confidence
Extraction confidence for the individual, 0..1 as a string.
text references
Verbatim source spans grounding the individual.
actor
Intended on Role: the actor/agent name the role-bearer is (also drives the Agent layer).
role category
Intended on Role: coarse role category (e.g. public_responsibility).
role class
Intended on Role: the LLM-suggested ontology role class label.
case involvement
Intended on Role: how the role-bearer is involved in this case.
interpretation
Intended on Principle: how the principle is read in this case.
concrete expression
Intended on Principle: the case-specific concrete expression.
applied to
Intended on Principle: what the principle is applied to.
balancing with
Intended on Principle: the competing consideration it is balanced against.
tension resolution
Intended on Principle: how a tension involving it is resolved.
principle class
Intended on Principle: the LLM-suggested ontology principle class label.
obligation statement
Intended on Obligation: the statement of the duty.
compliance status
Intended on Obligation: met / unmet / partial / unclear judgment.
temporal scope
Intended on Obligation/Constraint: when the duty/limit applies.
case context
Intended on Obligation/Capability/Constraint: case-specific grounding context.
obligation class
Intended on Obligation: the LLM-suggested ontology obligation class label.
subject
Intended on State: the entity the state holds of.
affected parties
Intended on State: parties the state bears on (also resolved to proeth-core:affects edges).
active period
Intended on State: the period over which the state holds.
triggering event
Intended on State: the event bringing the state into being.
terminated by
Intended on State: what removes the state.
urgency level
Intended on State/Event: urgency judgment.
principle transformation
Intended on State: state-edge annotation grounding an R->P->O derivation.
state class
Intended on State: the LLM-suggested ontology state class label.
document title
Intended on Resource: the resource/document title.
used in context
Intended on Resource: the context the resource is used in.
used by
Intended on Resource: who uses it (also resolved to proeth-core:availableTo edges).
created by
Intended on Resource: who created it.
version
Intended on Resource: resource version/edition.
resource class
Intended on Resource: the LLM-suggested ontology resource class label.
capability statement
Intended on Capability: the statement of the competence.
demonstrated through
Intended on Capability: textual evidence the capability was exercised.
proficiency level
Intended on Capability: proficiency rating (e.g. expert).
capability class
Intended on Capability: the LLM-suggested ontology capability class label.
constraint statement
Intended on Constraint: the statement of the limit.
severity
Intended on Constraint/Event: severity judgment.
source
Intended on Constraint: the source of the constraint.
constraint class
Intended on Constraint: the LLM-suggested ontology constraint class label.
has agent
Intended on Action: the acting agent name.
agent relation
Intended on Action: the joining keyword (and / or / with / in_conjunction_with) for a composite multi-actor agent (rdf_converter.decompose_agents).
event role context
Intended on Action: the per-event role context of the agent.
intended outcome
Intended on Action: the intended outcome.
has mental state
Intended on Action: the agent's mental state.
foreseen unintended effects
Intended on Action: foreseen unintended effects.
within competence
Intended on Action: whether the action was within the agent's competence.
temporal extent
Intended on Action/Event: instant or interval.
event type
Intended on Event: Event-Calculus occurrence type.
causes state change
Intended on Event: prose summary of the state change.
fulfills obligation text
Literal shadow of the fulfillsObligation edge (Action).
violates obligation text
Literal shadow of the violatesObligation edge (Action).
guided by principle text
Literal shadow of the guidedByPrinciple edge (Action).
requires capability text
Literal shadow of the requiresCapability relation (Action).
raises obligation text
Literal shadow of the raisesObligation edge (Action).
initiates text
Literal shadow of the initiates fluent edge (Action/Event).
terminates text
Literal shadow of the terminates fluent edge (Action/Event).
invoked by (literal)
Intended on Principle: literal naming who invokes it; mirrored by the proeth-core:invokedBy edge.
obligated party (literal)
Intended on Obligation: literal naming who bears it; mirrored by the proeth-core:obligatedParty edge.
possessed by (literal)
Intended on Capability: literal naming who possesses it; mirrored by the proeth-core:possessedBy edge.
constrained entity (literal)
Intended on Constraint: literal naming who/what is constrained; mirrored by the proeth-core:constrainedEntity edge.
has license
Controlled Role attribute: professional license/licensure (maps license, licensure, licenseStatus).
has specialty
Controlled Role attribute: area of specialisation (maps specialty, specialization).
experience level
Controlled Role attribute: professional experience (maps experience, yearsOfExperience).
has employer
Controlled Role attribute: employer/affiliation (maps employer, employedBy).
has jurisdiction
Controlled Role attribute: licensing/practice jurisdiction (maps jurisdiction).
registration status
Controlled Role attribute: professional registration status (maps registration).
role in organization
Controlled Role attribute: position within the organisation (maps position, roleInOrganization).
technical background
Controlled Role attribute: technical background (maps technicalBackground).
role nature
Controlled Role attribute: the kind/nature of the role-bearer, e.g. 'Affected public', 'Manufacturing corporation' (maps the recurring type, entityType attribute keys).
other attribute
Closed-vocabulary overflow for a genuinely case-specific role attribute not in the controlled set. Carries the original key and value as a 'key: value' literal, so the data is preserved while the datatype-predicate space stays finite and fully declared.