Hybrid Artificial Intelligence to Extract Patterns and Rules from Argumentative and Legal Texts

This Thesis is composed of a collection of works written in the period 2019-2022, whose aim is to find methodologies of Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Machine Learning to detect and classify patterns and rules in argumentative and legal texts. We define our approach “hybrid”, since we aimed at designing hybrid combinations of symbolic and sub-symbolic AI, involving both “top-down” structured knowledge and “bottom-up” data-driven knowledge. A first group of works is dedicated to the classification of argumentative patterns. Following the Waltonian model of argument and the related theory of Argumentation Schemes, these works focused on the detection of argumentative support and opposition, showing that argumentative evidences can be classified at fine-grained levels without resorting to highly engineered features. To show this, our methods involved not only traditional approaches such as TFIDF, but also some novel methods based on Tree Kernel algorithms. After the encouraging results of this first phase, we explored the use of a some emerging methodologies promoted by actors like Google, which have deeply changed NLP since 2018-19 — i.e., Transfer Learning and language models. These new methodologies markedly improved our previous results, providing us with best-performing NLP tools. Using Transfer Learning, we also performed a Sequence Labelling task to recognize the exact span of argumentative components (i.e., claims and premises), thus connecting portions of natural language to portions of arguments (i.e., to the logical-inferential dimension). The last part of our work was finally dedicated to the employment of Transfer Learning methods for the detection of rules and deontic modalities. In this case, we explored a hybrid approach which combines structured knowledge coming from two LegalXML formats (i.e., Akoma Ntoso and LegalRuleML) with sub-symbolic knowledge coming from pre-trained (and then fine-tuned) neural architectures.

Specification, execution and verification of interaction protocols: an approach based on computational logic

Interaction protocols establish how different computational entities can interact with each other. The interaction can be finalized to the exchange of data, as in 'communication protocols', or can be oriented to achieve some result, as in 'application protocols'. Moreover, with the increasing complexity of modern distributed systems, protocols are used also to control such a complexity, and to ensure that the system as a whole evolves with certain features. However, the extensive use of protocols has raised some issues, from the language for specifying them to the several verification aspects. Computational Logic provides models, languages and tools that can be effectively adopted to address such issues: its declarative nature can be exploited for a protocol specification language, while its operational counterpart can be used to reason upon such specifications. In this thesis we propose a proof-theoretic framework, called SCIFF, together with its extensions. SCIFF is based on Abductive Logic Programming, and provides a formal specification language with a clear declarative semantics (based on abduction). The operational counterpart is given by a proof procedure, that allows to reason upon the specifications and to test the conformance of given interactions w.r.t. a defined protocol. Moreover, by suitably adapting the SCIFF Framework, we propose solutions for addressing (1) the protocol properties verification (g-SCIFF Framework), and (2) the a-priori conformance verification of peers w.r.t. the given protocol (AlLoWS Framework). We introduce also an agent based architecture, the SCIFF Agent Platform, where the same protocol specification can be used to program and to ease the implementation task of the interacting peers.

Design, implementation and evaluation of a virtual laboratory for Computer Engineering Education

Broad consensus has been reached within the Education and Cognitive Psychology research communities on the need to center the learning process on experimentation and concrete application of knowledge, rather than on a bare transfer of notions. Several advantages arise from this educational approach, ranging from the reinforce of students learning, to the increased opportunity for a student to gain greater insight into the studied topics, up to the possibility for learners to acquire practical skills and long-lasting proficiency. This is especially true in Engineering education, where integrating conceptual knowledge and practical skills assumes a strategic importance. In this scenario, learners are called to play a primary role. They are actively involved in the construction of their own knowledge, instead of passively receiving it. As a result, traditional, teacher-centered learning environments should be replaced by novel learner-centered solutions. Information and Communication Technologies enable the development of innovative solutions that provide suitable answers to the need for the availability of experimentation supports in educational context. Virtual Laboratories, Adaptive Web-Based Educational Systems and Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning environments can significantly foster different learner-centered instructional strategies, offering the opportunity to enhance personalization, individualization and cooperation. More specifically, they allow students to explore different kinds of materials, to access and compare several information sources, to face real or realistic problems and to work on authentic and multi-facet case studies. In addition, they encourage cooperation among peers and provide support through coached and scaffolded activities aimed at fostering reflection and meta-cognitive reasoning. This dissertation will guide readers within this research field, presenting both the theoretical and applicative results of a research aimed at designing an open, flexible, learner-centered virtual lab for supporting students in learning Information Security.

Regulating FinTech: The perspectives of law, economics, and technology

FinTech (financial technology, ‘‘FinTech’’) is a double-edged sword as it brings both benefits and risks. This study appraised FinTech’s technological nature that brings changes in complexity in modern financial markets to identify the information deficits and its undesirable outcomes. Besides, as FinTech is still developing, the information regarding, for instance, whether and how to apply regulation may be insufficient for both regulators and those regulated. More one-size-fits-all regulation might accordingly be adopted, thereby resulting in the adverse selection. Through the lens of both law and economics and law and technology, this study suggested AFR (adaptive financial regulation, ‘‘AFR’’) of FinTech to solve the underlying pacing issue. AFR is dynamic, enabling regulatory adjustments and learning. Exploring and collecting information through experiments and learning from experiments are the core of AFR. FinTech regulatory sandboxes epitomize AFR. This study chose Taiwan as a case study. This study found several barriers to adaptive and effective FinTech regulation. Unduly emphasizing consumer protection and the innovation entry criterion by improperly imposing limits on the entry into sandboxes, ignoring post-sandbox mechanisms, and relying on detailed, specific and prescriptive rules to formulate sandboxes are examples. To solve these barriers, this study proposed several solutions by looking into the experiences in other jurisdictions and analyzing. First, striking a balance between encouraging innovation and ensuring financial stability and consumer protection is indispensable. Second, entry to sandboxes should be facilitated by improving the selection criteria. Third, adhering to realizing regulatory adjustment and learning to adapt regulation to technology, this study argued that systematic post-sandbox mechanisms should be established. Fourth, this study recommended “more principles-based sandboxes”. Principles rather than rules should be the base on which sandboxes or FinTech regulation are established. Having principles could provide more flexibility, being easier to adjust and adapt, and better at avoiding.