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 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
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
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
has enforcement level
Specifies whether obligation is mandatory, strongly recommended, or recommended
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
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.
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 standard that establishes ethical principles and professional conduct requirements
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.
An event indicating that an obligation, prohibition, or standard has been breached.
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
has condition
Relates a process to a state that affects it
has state
has resource
Relates a process to a resource it uses
performs action
Relates an agent to an action they perform
has capability
Relates an entity to a capability it possesses
guided by principle
Relates an action to a principle that guides it
fulfills obligation
Relates an action to an obligation it fulfills
violates obligation
Relates an action to an obligation it violates
constrained by
Relates an action to a constraint that limits or shapes it
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
adheres to principle
Relates a role to ethical principles that normatively govern that role
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.
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
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 per McLaren (2003) extensional approach.
Distillations of collective experience that guide and justify actions
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).
Concrete instances that exemplify principle application
Authoritative explanations bridging principles to specific contexts, providing nuanced understanding of how principles apply in complex situations based on professional consensus.
Professional consensus on principle application in edge cases
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
Laws, regulations, and statutes governing professional practice that establish legal boundaries and compliance requirements for professional activities.
Legal framework constraining professional practice
Frameworks, methodologies, and assessment tools for ethical analysis that provide structured approaches to ethical decision-making in professional contexts.
Structured approaches for ethical analysis
Handbooks, manuals, guides, and other documentation supporting professional practice with technical and procedural knowledge.
Supporting documentation for professional practice
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.)
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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
argument against
Indicates this is a CON argument opposing the decision option
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'