Step 2: Normative Requirements Pass (Facts Section)

Extract principles, obligations, constraints, and capabilities from the facts section

Community Engagement for Infrastructure Projects
Step 2 of 5

Facts Section

Section Content:
Facts:
Engineer M is retained by the City as the lead engineer on a major public infrastructure project to upgrade a highway system that runs through Community P, a historically underserved, underrepresented, and overburdened neighborhood.
During the planning phase, the City requires a series of public engagement sessions to gather input from the affected community.
Engineer M’s firm partners with an engineering consultant, Firm DBA, to coordinate public outreach and conduct these sessions.
Firm DBA has a department within its corporate structure that specializes in communications and public relations.
It is this department that is directly charged with providing these services on behalf of Firm DBA.
Firm DBA has licensed professional engineers in charge or in supervisory roles of all departments in the firm as well as in Firm DBA ownership.
Firm DBA organizes meetings at times and locations that are difficult for Community P residents to attend, such as during work hours at venues far from the area and not easily accessible via public transit.
Further, Firm DBA’s outreach and notices do not provide for a method for community members to submit written comments.
Finally, no virtual meetings are held to gather feedback from interested persons.
The area in which Firm DBA holds the public outreach sessions, Community Q, is an alternate route for the major public infrastructure project.
Few Community P members participate, and those who do express concerns about the project’s potential to displace residents and disrupt local businesses.
Many comments are received that support the upgrade through the historically underserved, underrepresented, and overburdened neighborhood (Community P) and not through Community Q.
Engineer M expresses concern to Firm DBA about the public outreach and session locations, but Firm DBA states that these practices are consistent with prior projects undertaken for the City.
Further, Firm DBA states that City leaders, citing economic, political, and social considerations, specifically instructed Firm DBA to perform the public engagement sessions in the way that Firm DBA completed them.
Despite Engineer M’s concerns, Firm DBA prepares a carefully-framed report, omitting details about where the sessions were held and at what time of day the sessions were held, including not identifying that written comments were not accepted.
Firm DBA submits a report claiming Community P’s support for the project, citing a lack of significant opposition and comments in support of the project.
Principles Extraction
LLM Prompt
DUAL PRINCIPLE EXTRACTION - Ethical Principles Analysis THEORETICAL CONTEXT (Chapter 2.2.2): - Principles are ABSTRACT ethical foundations requiring extensional definition through cases - They function like constitutional principles - open-textured and requiring interpretation - Principles mediate moral ideals into concrete reality through context-specific application - They cannot be applied deductively but require balancing and interpretation EXISTING PRINCIPLE CLASSES IN ONTOLOGY: - Competence Principle: Balances professional autonomy with recognition of limitations and need for collaboration. - Confidentiality Principle: Must be balanced against public safety obligations and legal disclosure requirements. - Domain-Specific Principle: Examples: Environmental Stewardship (engineering), Patient Autonomy (medicine), Academic Freedom (education). These address domain-specific ethical ch - Environmental Stewardship Principle: Bridges engineering practice with broader environmental and societal responsibilities. - Ethical Principle: Legacy synonym for Principle. Use :Principle for new concepts. - Fundamental Ethical Principle: Examples: Public Welfare Paramount, Respect for Persons, Justice, Beneficence. These require extensive interpretation and balancing in specific contex - Integrity Principle: Central to professional identity formation and trust maintenance in professional relationships. - Principle: An information content entity representing ethical values and guidelines for conduct. This is the P component of the formal specification D=(R,P,O,S,R - Principle Argument: An argument based on fundamental ethical principles or values. - Principle Refinement: Capability to evolve principles as inconsistencies are resolved and new cases are added (GenEth system, Anderson & Anderson 2018) - Professional Virtue Principle: Examples: Integrity, Competence, Honesty, Professional Courage, Accountability. These shape professional character and decision-making. - Public Welfare Principle: Requires contextual interpretation to balance against client confidentiality and employer loyalty when public safety is at risk. - Relational Principle: Examples: Confidentiality, Loyalty, Fairness, Transparency, Respect for Autonomy. These govern interpersonal professional dynamics. - Transparency Principle: Essential for maintaining trust and enabling stakeholder participation in professional decisions. === TASK === From the following case text (facts section), extract information at TWO levels: LEVEL 1 - NEW PRINCIPLE CLASSES: Identify ethical principles that appear to be NEW types not covered by existing classes above. Look for: - Fundamental ethical values being invoked - Abstract moral ideals guiding decisions - Constitutional-like principles requiring interpretation - Values that transcend specific rules or obligations For each NEW principle class, provide: - label: Clear principle name (e.g., "Environmental Stewardship", "Professional Autonomy") - definition: What moral ideal this principle represents - abstract_nature: The abstract ethical foundation (justice, welfare, autonomy, etc.) - extensional_examples: Concrete cases/situations where this principle applies - value_basis: Core moral value underlying the principle - application_context: Professional domains or situations where relevant - operationalization: How this abstract principle becomes concrete in practice - balancing_requirements: What other principles it typically must be balanced against - examples_from_case: How this principle appears in the case text LEVEL 2 - PRINCIPLE INDIVIDUALS: Identify specific instances where principles are invoked or applied. For each instance: - identifier: Unique identifier for this principle instance (e.g., "PublicSafety_Case8_Discussion") - principle_class: Which principle class it instantiates (use existing classes when possible) - concrete_expression: EXACT text showing how the principle is expressed - invoked_by: Who invokes or appeals to this principle - applied_to: What decision/situation/dilemma it applies to - interpretation: How the principle is interpreted in this specific context - balancing_with: Other principles that must be balanced against it - tension_resolution: How conflicts between principles are resolved - case_relevance: Why this principle matters in this specific case IMPORTANT: - Focus on ABSTRACT ethical foundations, not specific rules or procedures - Principles are broader than obligations - they generate obligations in context - Use EXACT quotes from case text where principles are expressed - Distinguish between the abstract principle CLASS and its concrete APPLICATION CASE TEXT: Engineer M is retained by the City as the lead engineer on a major public infrastructure project to upgrade a highway system that runs through Community P, a historically underserved, underrepresented, and overburdened neighborhood. During the planning phase, the City requires a series of public engagement sessions to gather input from the affected community. Engineer M’s firm partners with an engineering consultant, Firm DBA, to coordinate public outreach and conduct these sessions. Firm DBA has a department within its corporate structure that specializes in communications and public relations. It is this department that is directly charged with providing these services on behalf of Firm DBA. Firm DBA has licensed professional engineers in charge or in supervisory roles of all departments in the firm as well as in Firm DBA ownership. Firm DBA organizes meetings at times and locations that are difficult for Community P residents to attend, such as during work hours at venues far from the area and not easily accessible via public transit. Further, Firm DBA’s outreach and notices do not provide for a method for community members to submit written comments. Finally, no virtual meetings are held to gather feedback from interested persons. The area in which Firm DBA holds the public outreach sessions, Community Q, is an alternate route for the major public infrastructure project. Few Community P members participate, and those who do express concerns about the project’s potential to displace residents and disrupt local businesses. Many comments are received that support the upgrade through the historically underserved, underrepresented, and overburdened neighborhood (Community P) and not through Community Q. Engineer M expresses concern to Firm DBA about the public outreach and session locations, but Firm DBA states that these practices are consistent with prior projects undertaken for the City. Further, Firm DBA states that City leaders, citing economic, political, and social considerations, specifically instructed Firm DBA to perform the public engagement sessions in the way that Firm DBA completed them. Despite Engineer M’s concerns, Firm DBA prepares a carefully-framed report, omitting details about where the sessions were held and at what time of day the sessions were held, including not identifying that written comments were not accepted. Firm DBA submits a report claiming Community P’s support for the project, citing a lack of significant opposition and comments in support of the project. Respond with valid JSON in this format: { "new_principle_classes": [ { "label": "Sustainable Development", "definition": "Principle that engineering solutions must balance current needs with long-term environmental and societal impacts", "abstract_nature": "Intergenerational justice and environmental stewardship", "extensional_examples": ["Green building design", "Renewable energy projects", "Resource conservation"], "value_basis": "Responsibility to future generations", "application_context": ["Infrastructure projects", "Environmental engineering", "Urban planning"], "operationalization": "Through environmental impact assessments, lifecycle analysis, sustainable design criteria", "balancing_requirements": ["Economic feasibility", "Immediate safety needs", "Client requirements"], "examples_from_case": ["Engineer considered long-term environmental impacts", "balanced immediate needs with sustainability"], "source_text": "Engineer considered long-term environmental impacts and balanced immediate needs with sustainability" } ], "principle_individuals": [ { "identifier": "PublicSafety_Case8_Facts", "principle_class": "Public Safety", "concrete_expression": "the safety of the public must be held paramount", "invoked_by": ["Engineer L"], "applied_to": ["stormwater management system design"], "interpretation": "Safety considerations override cost savings in drainage design", "source_text": "the safety of the public must be held paramount", "balancing_with": ["Cost Efficiency", "Client Interests"], "tension_resolution": "Safety takes precedence even if it increases project costs", "case_relevance": "Critical for evaluating adequacy of proposed drainage solution" } ] }
Saved: 2025-12-19 18:57
LLM Response
```json
{
    "new_principle_classes": [
        {
            "label": "Procedural Justice",
            "definition": "Principle that decision-making processes must be fair, inclusive, and provide meaningful opportunities for affected parties to participate",
            "abstract_nature": "Justice through fair process and equal access to participation",
            "extensional_examples": ["Public hearings with accessible venues", "Multiple channels for input", "Transparent reporting of stakeholder views"],
            "value_basis": "Democratic participation and equal treatment",
            "application_context": ["Public infrastructure projects", "Community engagement", "Environmental justice contexts"],
            "operationalization": "Through accessible meeting times/locations, multiple input methods, accurate representation of community feedback",
            "balancing_requirements": ["Project efficiency", "Political pressures", "Client preferences"],
            "examples_from_case": ["meetings at times and locations that are difficult for Community P residents to attend", "no method for community members to submit written comments", "No virtual meetings were held"],
            "source_text": "meetings at times and locations that are difficult for Community P residents to attend, such as during work hours at venues far from the area and not easily accessible via public transit"
        },
        {
            "label": "Environmental Justice",
            "definition": "Principle that environmental benefits and burdens should be equitably distributed, with special attention to historically marginalized communities",
            "abstract_nature": "Distributive justice in environmental and infrastructure decisions",
            "extensional_examples": ["Avoiding disproportionate impacts on minority communities", "Ensuring equal access to environmental benefits", "Preventing infrastructure discrimination"],
            "value_basis": "Equity and non-discrimination",
            "application_context": ["Infrastructure planning", "Environmental engineering", "Urban development"],
            "operationalization": "Through community impact assessments, equitable siting decisions, meaningful engagement with affected populations",
            "balancing_requirements": ["Economic efficiency", "Political feasibility", "Technical optimization"],
            "examples_from_case": ["highway system that runs through Community P, a historically underserved, underrepresented, and overburdened neighborhood", "potential to displace residents and disrupt local businesses"],
            "source_text": "highway system that runs through Community P, a historically underserved, underrepresented, and overburdened neighborhood"
        },
        {
            "label": "Truthful Representation",
            "definition": "Principle that professional communications must accurately and completely represent facts, data, and stakeholder input",
            "abstract_nature": "Honesty and completeness in professional reporting",
            "extensional_examples": ["Complete disclosure of methodology", "Accurate representation of dissenting views", "Transparent reporting of limitations"],
            "value_basis": "Truth and professional honesty",
            "application_context": ["Professional reporting", "Public engagement documentation", "Technical communications"],
            "operationalization": "Through complete disclosure of methods, accurate representation of all feedback, transparent reporting of process limitations",
            "balancing_requirements": ["Client preferences", "Political pressures", "Project advancement"],
            "examples_from_case": ["carefully-framed report, omitting details", "not identifying that written comments were not accepted", "claiming Community P's support for the project"],
            "source_text": "Firm DBA prepares a carefully-framed report, omitting details about where the sessions were held and at what time of day the sessions were held, including not identifying that written comments were not accepted"
        }
    ],
    "principle_individuals": [
        {
            "identifier": "ProceduralJustice_CommunityP_Access",
            "principle_class": "Procedural Justice",
            "concrete_expression": "meetings at times and locations that are difficult for Community P residents to attend, such as during work hours at venues far from the area and not easily accessible via public transit",
            "invoked_by": ["Engineer M (implicitly through concerns)"],
            "applied_to": ["Public engagement process for infrastructure project"],
            "interpretation": "Fair process requires accessible meeting times and locations for affected community",
            "source_text": "meetings at times and locations that are difficult for Community P residents to attend, such as during work hours at venues far from the area and not easily accessible via public transit",
            "balancing_with": ["Client Instructions", "Past Practice"],
            "tension_resolution": "Unresolved - Engineer M expresses concern but process continues",
            "case_relevance": "Central to evaluating fairness of public engagement process"
        },
        {
            "identifier": "EnvironmentalJustice_CommunityP_Burden",
            "principle_class": "Environmental Justice",
            "concrete_expression": "highway system that runs through Community P, a historically underserved, underrepresented, and overburdened neighborhood",
            "invoked_by": ["Case narrator (implicit ethical concern)"],
            "applied_to": ["Infrastructure routing decision"],
            "interpretation": "Already burdened communities should not bear additional environmental burdens",
            "source_text": "highway system that runs through Community P, a historically underserved, underrepresented, and overburdened neighborhood",
            "balancing_with": ["Economic Considerations", "Political Considerations"],
            "tension_resolution": "Appears to be overridden by political and economic factors",
            "case_relevance": "Establishes ethical context for evaluating project impacts"
        },
        {
            "identifier": "TruthfulRepresentation_FirmDBA_Report",
            "principle_class": "Truthful Representation",
            "concrete_expression": "Firm DBA prepares a carefully-framed report, omitting details about where the sessions were held and at what time of day the sessions were held",
            "invoked_by": ["Violated by Firm DBA"],
            "applied_to": ["Public engagement report to City"],
            "interpretation": "Professional reports should fully disclose methodology and limitations",
            "source_text": "Firm DBA prepares a carefully-framed report, omitting details about where the sessions were held and at what time of day the sessions were held",
            "balancing_with": ["Client Preferences", "Project Advancement"],
            "tension_resolution": "Principle violated in favor of presenting favorable outcome",
            "case_relevance": "Key ethical violation in misrepresenting community engagement"
        },
        {
            "identifier": "PublicWelfare_CommunityP_Concerns",
            "principle_class": "Public Welfare Principle",
            "concrete_expression": "concerns about the project's potential to displace residents and disrupt local businesses",
            "invoked_by": ["Community P residents who participated"],
            "applied_to": ["Highway upgrade project impacts"],
            "interpretation": "Public welfare includes preventing displacement and business disruption",
            "source_text": "those who do express concerns about the project's potential to displace residents and disrupt local businesses",
            "balancing_with": ["Infrastructure Improvement", "Economic Development"],
            "tension_resolution": "Concerns expressed but apparently not adequately addressed",
            "case_relevance": "Highlights tension between infrastructure benefits and community impacts"
        },
        {
            "identifier": "Transparency_EngineerM_Concern",
            "principle_class": "Transparency Principle",
            "concrete_expression": "Engineer M expresses concern to Firm DBA about the public outreach and session locations",
            "invoked_by": ["Engineer M"],
            "applied_to": ["Public engagement process"],
            "interpretation": "Process transparency requires appropriate outreach methods and locations",
            "source_text": "Engineer M expresses concern to Firm DBA about the public outreach and session locations",
            "balancing_with": ["Past Practice", "Client Instructions"],
            "tension_resolution": "Concern raised but overruled by appeal to precedent and client direction",
            "case_relevance": "Shows professional attempt to uphold transparency despite resistance"
        }
    ]
}
```
Obligations Extraction
LLM Prompt
You are an expert in professional ethics analyzing a case for obligations (professional duties and requirements). Based on the literature: - Obligations are CONCRETE PROFESSIONAL DUTIES derived from abstract principles (Hallamaa & Kalliokoski 2022) - They specify what professionals MUST, SHOULD, or MUST NOT do (Dennis et al. 2016) - Obligations have deontic force and are enforceable (Wooldridge & Jennings 1995) - They operationalize principles in specific contexts (Kong et al. 2020) Your task is to: 1. Identify NEW OBLIGATION CLASSES not in the existing ontology 2. Extract SPECIFIC OBLIGATION INDIVIDUALS from the case EXISTING OBLIGATIONS IN ONTOLOGY (check if your identified obligations match these before creating new classes): - Attribution Obligation: Duty to properly cite and acknowledge all sources, tools, and methods used in creating professional deliverables - Collegial Obligation: Duties toward professional peers including respect, fairness, and credit for work - Competence Obligation: Requirement to perform services only in areas of competence (NSPE II.2) - Conditional Obligation: Obligations that apply only when specific conditions are met - Confidentiality Obligation: Duty to protect confidential information of clients or employers (NSPE III.4) - Defeasible Obligation: Obligations that admit justified exceptions under specified conditions (Ganascia 2007) - Disclosure Obligation: Requirement to inform stakeholders about conflicts, limitations, or risks (NSPE II.3.a) - Ethical Obligation: Obligations arising from ethical principles beyond legal requirements - Legal Obligation: Obligations arising from legal requirements and regulations - Mandatory Obligation: Obligations that MUST be fulfilled (deontic force: mandatory) - Obligation: An information content entity expressing required actions or behaviors in professional contexts. This is the O component of the formal specification D=(R,P,O,S,Rs,A,E,Ca,Cs). - Prima Facie Obligation: Obligations that hold at first appearance but may be overridden by stronger duties (Anderson & Anderson) - Professional Obligation: A duty or responsibility arising from professional role or standards - Quality Assurance Obligation: Requirement to implement appropriate review and verification processes for all professional deliverables before submission - Reporting Obligation: Duty to report violations or unsafe conditions to appropriate authorities - Responsible Charge Obligation: Duty to maintain active engagement and personal decision-making authority throughout engineering process from conception to completion - Safety Obligation: Duty to hold paramount the safety, health, and welfare of the public (NSPE I.1) - Technology Competence Obligation: Requirement to understand and verify the capabilities, limitations, and risks of technological tools used in professional practice - Technology Verification Obligation: Requirement to thoroughly verify and validate outputs from technological tools including AI before incorporating them into professional work Analyze this facts section: Engineer M is retained by the City as the lead engineer on a major public infrastructure project to upgrade a highway system that runs through Community P, a historically underserved, underrepresented, and overburdened neighborhood. During the planning phase, the City requires a series of public engagement sessions to gather input from the affected community. Engineer M’s firm partners with an engineering consultant, Firm DBA, to coordinate public outreach and conduct these sessions. Firm DBA has a department within its corporate structure that specializes in communications and public relations. It is this department that is directly charged with providing these services on behalf of Firm DBA. Firm DBA has licensed professional engineers in charge or in supervisory roles of all departments in the firm as well as in Firm DBA ownership. Firm DBA organizes meetings at times and locations that are difficult for Community P residents to attend, such as during work hours at venues far from the area and not easily accessible via public transit. Further, Firm DBA’s outreach and notices do not provide for a method for community members to submit written comments. Finally, no virtual meetings are held to gather feedback from interested persons. The area in which Firm DBA holds the public outreach sessions, Community Q, is an alternate route for the major public infrastructure project. Few Community P members participate, and those who do express concerns about the project’s potential to displace residents and disrupt local businesses. Many comments are received that support the upgrade through the historically underserved, underrepresented, and overburdened neighborhood (Community P) and not through Community Q. Engineer M expresses concern to Firm DBA about the public outreach and session locations, but Firm DBA states that these practices are consistent with prior projects undertaken for the City. Further, Firm DBA states that City leaders, citing economic, political, and social considerations, specifically instructed Firm DBA to perform the public engagement sessions in the way that Firm DBA completed them. Despite Engineer M’s concerns, Firm DBA prepares a carefully-framed report, omitting details about where the sessions were held and at what time of day the sessions were held, including not identifying that written comments were not accepted. Firm DBA submits a report claiming Community P’s support for the project, citing a lack of significant opposition and comments in support of the project. Extract obligations following this JSON structure: { "new_obligation_classes": [ { "label": "Clear, specific obligation class name", "definition": "What this type of obligation requires professionals to do", "derived_from_principle": "Which principle this operationalizes (e.g., 'Public Safety', 'Honesty')", "duty_type": "professional|legal|ethical|societal", "enforcement_mechanism": "How this obligation is typically enforced", "violation_consequences": "What happens when this obligation is violated", "examples_from_case": ["Example 1 from the case", "Example 2"], "source_text": "EXACT text snippet from case where this obligation is identified (max 200 characters)", "confidence": 0.0-1.0, "reasoning": "Why this is a new class not in existing ontology" } ], "obligation_individuals": [ { "identifier": "Unique name for this specific obligation instance", "obligation_class": "Name of the obligation class (new or existing)", "obligated_party": "Who has this obligation (e.g., 'Engineer L', 'All Licensed PEs')", "obligation_statement": "The specific duty statement (e.g., 'Report safety risks to authorities')", "derived_from": "Source principle or law (e.g., 'NSPE Code', 'State Law')", "enforcement_context": "How enforced in this case", "temporal_scope": "When this obligation applies", "compliance_status": "met|unmet|unclear|pending", "case_context": "How this obligation manifests in the specific case", "source_text": "EXACT text snippet from case where this obligation is mentioned (max 200 characters)", "is_existing_class": true/false, "confidence": 0.0-1.0 } ] } Focus on: 1. NEW obligation types that represent novel professional duties 2. Specific obligation instances showing how duties apply in this case 3. The relationship between obligations and the principles they operationalize 4. Enforcement mechanisms and compliance status Return ONLY the JSON structure, no additional text.
Saved: 2025-12-19 18:58
LLM Response
```json
{
  "new_obligation_classes": [
    {
      "label": "Community Engagement Obligation",
      "definition": "Duty to ensure meaningful, accessible, and inclusive participation of affected communities in infrastructure projects, particularly historically underserved populations",
      "derived_from_principle": "Public Welfare and Environmental Justice",
      "duty_type": "professional",
      "enforcement_mechanism": "Professional board review, public accountability mechanisms, project approval processes",
      "violation_consequences": "Project delays, loss of public trust, potential legal challenges, professional sanctions",
      "examples_from_case": ["Holding meetings at accessible times and locations", "Providing multiple methods for community input including written comments"],
      "source_text": "meetings at times and locations that are difficult for Community P residents to attend, such as during work hours at venues far from the area",
      "confidence": 0.9,
      "reasoning": "This represents a specific duty to ensure equitable public participation that goes beyond general disclosure obligations and addresses environmental justice concerns"
    },
    {
      "label": "Accurate Representation Obligation",
      "definition": "Duty to accurately and completely represent stakeholder input, data collection methods, and findings without omission or mischaracterization",
      "derived_from_principle": "Honesty and Truthfulness",
      "duty_type": "professional",
      "enforcement_mechanism": "Professional ethics boards, client review, public records requests",
      "violation_consequences": "Loss of professional license, legal liability, contract termination",
      "examples_from_case": ["Including details about session locations and times", "Accurately representing level of community opposition"],
      "source_text": "prepares a carefully-framed report, omitting details about where the sessions were held and at what time of day the sessions were held",
      "confidence": 0.85,
      "reasoning": "While related to disclosure, this specifically addresses the duty to not misrepresent or selectively omit material facts in professional reports"
    }
  ],
  "obligation_individuals": [
    {
      "identifier": "EngineerM_Safety_Community_P",
      "obligation_class": "Safety Obligation",
      "obligated_party": "Engineer M",
      "obligation_statement": "Hold paramount the safety, health, and welfare of Community P residents",
      "derived_from": "NSPE I.1",
      "enforcement_context": "Professional engineering board oversight",
      "temporal_scope": "Throughout project duration",
      "compliance_status": "unclear",
      "case_context": "Engineer M must ensure the project considers impacts on Community P's safety and welfare",
      "source_text": "Engineer M is retained by the City as the lead engineer on a major public infrastructure project",
      "is_existing_class": true,
      "confidence": 0.95
    },
    {
      "identifier": "FirmDBA_Community_Engagement",
      "obligation_class": "Community Engagement Obligation",
      "obligated_party": "Firm DBA",
      "obligation_statement": "Conduct accessible and inclusive public engagement sessions for Community P residents",
      "derived_from": "Public participation requirements and environmental justice principles",
      "enforcement_context": "City contract requirements and professional standards",
      "temporal_scope": "During planning phase",
      "compliance_status": "unmet",
      "case_context": "Firm DBA failed to hold meetings at accessible times and locations for Community P",
      "source_text": "organizes meetings at times and locations that are difficult for Community P residents to attend",
      "is_existing_class": false,
      "confidence": 0.9
    },
    {
      "identifier": "FirmDBA_Accurate_Reporting",
      "obligation_class": "Accurate Representation Obligation",
      "obligated_party": "Firm DBA",
      "obligation_statement": "Accurately report public engagement process details and community feedback",
      "derived_from": "Professional integrity and honesty principles",
      "enforcement_context": "Professional ethics standards and client contract",
      "temporal_scope": "At report submission",
      "compliance_status": "unmet",
      "case_context": "Firm DBA omitted critical details and misrepresented community support",
      "source_text": "omitting details about where the sessions were held and at what time of day the sessions were held",
      "is_existing_class": false,
      "confidence": 0.95
    },
    {
      "identifier": "EngineerM_Disclosure_Concerns",
      "obligation_class": "Disclosure Obligation",
      "obligated_party": "Engineer M",
      "obligation_statement": "Disclose concerns about inadequate public engagement to appropriate authorities",
      "derived_from": "NSPE II.3.a",
      "enforcement_context": "Professional responsibility to client and public",
      "temporal_scope": "Upon discovering inadequate engagement practices",
      "compliance_status": "met",
      "case_context": "Engineer M expressed concerns to Firm DBA about the public outreach",
      "source_text": "Engineer M expresses concern to Firm DBA about the public outreach and session locations",
      "is_existing_class": true,
      "confidence": 0.85
    },
    {
      "identifier": "FirmDBA_Professional_Independence",
      "obligation_class": "Professional Obligation",
      "obligated_party": "Firm DBA licensed engineers",
      "obligation_statement": "Maintain professional independence despite client pressure",
      "derived_from": "Professional engineering standards",
      "enforcement_context": "Professional licensing board",
      "temporal_scope": "Throughout engagement",
      "compliance_status": "unmet",
      "case_context": "Firm DBA followed City instructions despite professional concerns",
      "source_text": "City leaders, citing economic, political, and social considerations, specifically instructed Firm DBA",
      "is_existing_class": true,
      "confidence": 0.8
    }
  ]
}
```
Constraints Extraction
LLM Prompt
You are an expert in professional ethics analyzing a case for constraints (boundaries, limitations, and restrictions). Based on the literature: - Constraints are INVIOLABLE BOUNDARIES that limit acceptable actions (Dennis et al. 2016) - They differ from obligations by being restrictions rather than requirements - Constraints can be legal, physical, resource-based, or procedural - They define the space within which ethical decisions must be made Your task is to: 1. Identify NEW CONSTRAINT CLASSES not in the existing ontology 2. Extract SPECIFIC CONSTRAINT INDIVIDUALS from the case EXISTING CONSTRAINTS IN ONTOLOGY (check if your identified constraints match these before creating new classes): - Attribution Constraint: Requirements and limitations regarding the disclosure and citation of tools, methods, or sources used in professional work products - Competence Constraint: Boundaries defined by agent capabilities and technical limitations (Hallamaa & Kalliokoski 2022) - Confidentiality Constraint: Boundaries on information disclosure and privacy (Dennis et al. 2016) - Constraint: An information content entity expressing limitations or restrictions on professional actions or decisions. This is the Cs component of the formal specification D=(R,P,O,S,Rs,A,E,Ca,Cs). - Defeasible Constraint: Constraints that admit justified exceptions under specified conditions (Ganascia 2007) - Ethical Constraint: Professional ethical boundaries beyond legal requirements (Benzmüller et al. 2020) - Inviolable Constraint: Absolute constraints that cannot be overridden under any circumstances (Dennis et al. 2016) - Jurisdictional Constraint: Boundaries of authority and geographical or organizational scope (Dennis et al. 2016) - Legal Constraint: Constraints arising from legal requirements and statutes that establish inviolable boundaries (Kroll 2020, Stenseke 2024) - Priority Constraint: Constraints establishing precedence when multiple requirements conflict (Scheutz & Malle 2014) - Procedural Constraint: Requirements for following specific processes or protocols (Furbach et al. 2014) - 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) - Safety Constraint: Constraints ensuring safety requirements are met (Arkin 2008) - Technology Substitution Constraint: Boundaries preventing technology from replacing professional judgment and human oversight in critical decision-making Analyze this facts section: Engineer M is retained by the City as the lead engineer on a major public infrastructure project to upgrade a highway system that runs through Community P, a historically underserved, underrepresented, and overburdened neighborhood. During the planning phase, the City requires a series of public engagement sessions to gather input from the affected community. Engineer M’s firm partners with an engineering consultant, Firm DBA, to coordinate public outreach and conduct these sessions. Firm DBA has a department within its corporate structure that specializes in communications and public relations. It is this department that is directly charged with providing these services on behalf of Firm DBA. Firm DBA has licensed professional engineers in charge or in supervisory roles of all departments in the firm as well as in Firm DBA ownership. Firm DBA organizes meetings at times and locations that are difficult for Community P residents to attend, such as during work hours at venues far from the area and not easily accessible via public transit. Further, Firm DBA’s outreach and notices do not provide for a method for community members to submit written comments. Finally, no virtual meetings are held to gather feedback from interested persons. The area in which Firm DBA holds the public outreach sessions, Community Q, is an alternate route for the major public infrastructure project. Few Community P members participate, and those who do express concerns about the project’s potential to displace residents and disrupt local businesses. Many comments are received that support the upgrade through the historically underserved, underrepresented, and overburdened neighborhood (Community P) and not through Community Q. Engineer M expresses concern to Firm DBA about the public outreach and session locations, but Firm DBA states that these practices are consistent with prior projects undertaken for the City. Further, Firm DBA states that City leaders, citing economic, political, and social considerations, specifically instructed Firm DBA to perform the public engagement sessions in the way that Firm DBA completed them. Despite Engineer M’s concerns, Firm DBA prepares a carefully-framed report, omitting details about where the sessions were held and at what time of day the sessions were held, including not identifying that written comments were not accepted. Firm DBA submits a report claiming Community P’s support for the project, citing a lack of significant opposition and comments in support of the project. Extract constraints following this JSON structure: { "new_constraint_classes": [ { "label": "Clear, specific constraint class name", "definition": "What this type of constraint limits or restricts", "constraint_type": "legal|physical|resource|temporal|procedural", "flexibility": "hard|soft|negotiable", "violation_impact": "What happens if this constraint is violated", "mitigation_possible": "Whether and how this constraint can be mitigated", "examples_from_case": ["Example 1 from the case", "Example 2"], "source_text": "EXACT text snippet from case where this constraint is identified (max 200 characters)", "confidence": 0.0-1.0, "reasoning": "Why this is a new class not in existing ontology" } ], "constraint_individuals": [ { "identifier": "Unique name for this specific constraint instance", "constraint_class": "Name of the constraint class (new or existing)", "constrained_entity": "What or who is constrained (e.g., 'Engineer L', 'Project')", "constraint_statement": "The specific limitation (e.g., 'Cannot exceed budget of $X')", "source": "Origin of constraint (e.g., 'Client budget', 'Environmental law')", "enforcement_mechanism": "How this constraint is enforced", "temporal_scope": "When this constraint applies", "severity": "critical|major|minor", "case_context": "How this constraint manifests in the specific case", "source_text": "EXACT text snippet from case where this constraint is mentioned (max 200 characters)", "is_existing_class": true/false, "confidence": 0.0-1.0 } ] } Focus on: 1. NEW constraint types that represent novel limitations or boundaries 2. Specific constraint instances showing how limitations apply in this case 3. The difference between constraints (boundaries) and obligations (duties) 4. Impact and severity of constraints on decision-making Return ONLY the JSON structure, no additional text.
Saved: 2025-12-19 18:59
LLM Response
```json
{
  "new_constraint_classes": [
    {
      "label": "Public Engagement Constraint",
      "definition": "Limitations on how public consultation and community engagement must be conducted to ensure meaningful participation and representation",
      "constraint_type": "procedural",
      "flexibility": "soft",
      "violation_impact": "Undermines legitimacy of public input process, may lead to legal challenges or project delays",
      "mitigation_possible": "Can be mitigated through supplementary engagement methods, extended timelines, or revised procedures",
      "examples_from_case": ["Sessions held during work hours", "Venues far from affected area", "No written comment submission method"],
      "source_text": "meetings at times and locations that are difficult for Community P residents to attend, such as during work hours at venues far from the area",
      "confidence": 0.85,
      "reasoning": "Distinct from Procedural Constraint as it specifically addresses public participation requirements and accessibility boundaries in democratic processes"
    },
    {
      "label": "Political Directive Constraint",
      "definition": "Boundaries imposed by political authorities that may conflict with professional standards or ethical obligations",
      "constraint_type": "procedural",
      "flexibility": "negotiable",
      "violation_impact": "May result in loss of contract, political consequences, or professional conflict",
      "mitigation_possible": "Can be documented and escalated through proper channels or professional ethics boards",
      "examples_from_case": ["City leaders instructed specific engagement approach", "Economic and political considerations override technical concerns"],
      "source_text": "City leaders, citing economic, political, and social considerations, specifically instructed Firm DBA to perform the public engagement sessions",
      "confidence": 0.9,
      "reasoning": "Different from Jurisdictional or Legal Constraints as it represents political pressure that may not have legal backing but creates practical boundaries"
    }
  ],
  "constraint_individuals": [
    {
      "identifier": "Public_Transit_Accessibility_Constraint",
      "constraint_class": "Public Engagement Constraint",
      "constrained_entity": "Community P residents",
      "constraint_statement": "Cannot easily attend meetings due to venues not accessible via public transit",
      "source": "Firm DBA's meeting location selection",
      "enforcement_mechanism": "Physical distance and lack of transportation options",
      "temporal_scope": "During public engagement phase",
      "severity": "major",
      "case_context": "Prevents meaningful participation from affected community members",
      "source_text": "venues far from the area and not easily accessible via public transit",
      "is_existing_class": false,
      "confidence": 0.9
    },
    {
      "identifier": "Work_Hours_Scheduling_Constraint",
      "constraint_class": "Public Engagement Constraint",
      "constrained_entity": "Community P residents",
      "constraint_statement": "Cannot attend meetings scheduled during work hours",
      "source": "Firm DBA's scheduling decisions",
      "enforcement_mechanism": "Employment obligations of residents",
      "temporal_scope": "During public engagement sessions",
      "severity": "major",
      "case_context": "Systematically excludes working community members from participation",
      "source_text": "meetings at times and locations that are difficult for Community P residents to attend, such as during work hours",
      "is_existing_class": false,
      "confidence": 0.95
    },
    {
      "identifier": "Written_Comment_Submission_Constraint",
      "constraint_class": "Procedural Constraint",
      "constrained_entity": "Community members",
      "constraint_statement": "Cannot submit written comments as no method provided",
      "source": "Firm DBA's outreach design",
      "enforcement_mechanism": "Absence of submission mechanism",
      "temporal_scope": "Throughout public engagement period",
      "severity": "critical",
      "case_context": "Eliminates alternative participation methods for those unable to attend",
      "source_text": "Firm DBA's outreach and notices do not provide for a method for community members to submit written comments",
      "is_existing_class": true,
      "confidence": 0.95
    },
    {
      "identifier": "City_Political_Directive_Constraint",
      "constraint_class": "Political Directive Constraint",
      "constrained_entity": "Firm DBA",
      "constraint_statement": "Must conduct engagement sessions according to City leaders' specific instructions",
      "source": "City leadership directive",
      "enforcement_mechanism": "Contract compliance and political pressure",
      "temporal_scope": "Throughout project engagement phase",
      "severity": "major",
      "case_context": "Overrides professional judgment about appropriate public engagement",
      "source_text": "City leaders, citing economic, political, and social considerations, specifically instructed Firm DBA",
      "is_existing_class": false,
      "confidence": 0.85
    },
    {
      "identifier": "Virtual_Meeting_Absence_Constraint",
      "constraint_class": "Technology Substitution Constraint",
      "constrained_entity": "Community members",
      "constraint_statement": "Cannot participate virtually as no online meetings held",
      "source": "Firm DBA's engagement methodology",
      "enforcement_mechanism": "Absence of virtual infrastructure",
      "temporal_scope": "During public engagement phase",
      "severity": "major",
      "case_context": "Prevents remote participation despite available technology",
      "source_text": "no virtual meetings are held to gather feedback from interested persons",
      "is_existing_class": true,
      "confidence": 0.9
    },
    {
      "identifier": "Report_Transparency_Constraint",
      "constraint_class": "Ethical Constraint",
      "constrained_entity": "Firm DBA",
      "constraint_statement": "Should not omit material details about engagement process in reporting",
      "source": "Professional ethics standards",
      "enforcement_mechanism": "Professional ethics review and potential sanctions",
      "temporal_scope": "During report preparation and submission",
      "severity": "critical",
      "case_context": "Report omits session locations, times, and lack of written comment option",
      "source_text": "carefully-framed report, omitting details about where the sessions were held and at what time of day",
      "is_existing_class": true,
      "confidence": 0.95
    }
  ]
}
```
Capabilities Extraction
LLM Prompt
You are an expert in professional ethics analyzing a case for capabilities (competencies and skills required for professional practice). Based on the literature: - Capabilities are COMPETENCIES that enable norm compliance (Hallamaa & Kalliokoski 2022) - They represent the skills needed to fulfill professional obligations (Dennis et al. 2016) - Capabilities include technical, ethical, communicative, and analytical competencies - They constitute "norm competence" - the ability to act ethically (Kong et al. 2020) Your task is to: 1. Identify NEW CAPABILITY CLASSES not in the existing ontology 2. Extract SPECIFIC CAPABILITY INDIVIDUALS from the case EXISTING CAPABILITIES IN ONTOLOGY (check if your identified capabilities match these before creating new classes): - AI Tool Evaluation Capability: The competency to assess, validate, and appropriately use AI-generated content in professional work - Capability: A realizable entity that can be realized by specific types of actions or processes in professional contexts. This is the Ca component of the formal specification D=(R,P,O,S,Rs,A,E,Ca,Cs). - Capability Type: Meta-class for specific capability types recognized by the ProEthica system - Data Privacy Protection Capability: The competency to safeguard confidential client information when using digital tools and platforms - Justification Capability: Capability to trace reasoning paths connecting decisions to authoritative sources (McLaren 2003, Anderson & Anderson 2018) - Regulatory Compliance Capability: The competency to ensure designs and documents meet local regulations and safety standards - Responsible Charge Capability: The competency to maintain active engagement and supervisory control from conception to completion of engineering work - Technical Capability: A specialized technical skill or competency in a professional domain - Technical Writing Capability: The competency to produce clear, accurate, and professional technical documentation and reports - Technology Integration Capability: The competency to appropriately integrate new technologies while maintaining professional judgment Analyze this facts section: Engineer M is retained by the City as the lead engineer on a major public infrastructure project to upgrade a highway system that runs through Community P, a historically underserved, underrepresented, and overburdened neighborhood. During the planning phase, the City requires a series of public engagement sessions to gather input from the affected community. Engineer M’s firm partners with an engineering consultant, Firm DBA, to coordinate public outreach and conduct these sessions. Firm DBA has a department within its corporate structure that specializes in communications and public relations. It is this department that is directly charged with providing these services on behalf of Firm DBA. Firm DBA has licensed professional engineers in charge or in supervisory roles of all departments in the firm as well as in Firm DBA ownership. Firm DBA organizes meetings at times and locations that are difficult for Community P residents to attend, such as during work hours at venues far from the area and not easily accessible via public transit. Further, Firm DBA’s outreach and notices do not provide for a method for community members to submit written comments. Finally, no virtual meetings are held to gather feedback from interested persons. The area in which Firm DBA holds the public outreach sessions, Community Q, is an alternate route for the major public infrastructure project. Few Community P members participate, and those who do express concerns about the project’s potential to displace residents and disrupt local businesses. Many comments are received that support the upgrade through the historically underserved, underrepresented, and overburdened neighborhood (Community P) and not through Community Q. Engineer M expresses concern to Firm DBA about the public outreach and session locations, but Firm DBA states that these practices are consistent with prior projects undertaken for the City. Further, Firm DBA states that City leaders, citing economic, political, and social considerations, specifically instructed Firm DBA to perform the public engagement sessions in the way that Firm DBA completed them. Despite Engineer M’s concerns, Firm DBA prepares a carefully-framed report, omitting details about where the sessions were held and at what time of day the sessions were held, including not identifying that written comments were not accepted. Firm DBA submits a report claiming Community P’s support for the project, citing a lack of significant opposition and comments in support of the project. Extract capabilities following this JSON structure: { "new_capability_classes": [ { "label": "Clear, specific capability class name", "definition": "What competency or skill this capability represents", "capability_type": "technical|ethical|communicative|analytical", "norm_competence_related": "Which professional obligations this capability enables", "skill_level": "basic|intermediate|advanced|expert", "acquisition_method": "How this capability is typically acquired (education, training, experience)", "examples_from_case": ["Example 1 from the case", "Example 2"], "source_text": "EXACT text snippet from case where this capability is identified (max 200 characters)", "confidence": 0.0-1.0, "reasoning": "Why this is a new class not in existing ontology" } ], "capability_individuals": [ { "identifier": "Unique name for this specific capability instance", "capability_class": "Name of the capability class (new or existing)", "possessed_by": "Who has this capability (e.g., 'Engineer L', 'All Licensed PEs')", "capability_statement": "The specific competency (e.g., 'Design stormwater systems')", "demonstrated_through": "How shown in the case (e.g., 'Years of experience', 'Professional license')", "proficiency_level": "basic|intermediate|advanced|expert", "enables_obligations": "Which obligations this capability enables", "temporal_aspect": "When this capability is relevant", "case_context": "How this capability manifests in the specific case", "source_text": "EXACT text snippet from case where this capability is mentioned (max 200 characters)", "is_existing_class": true/false, "confidence": 0.0-1.0 } ] } Focus on: 1. NEW capability types that represent novel competencies 2. Specific capability instances showing professional competencies in this case 3. The relationship between capabilities and norm competence 4. How capabilities enable fulfillment of professional obligations Return ONLY the JSON structure, no additional text.
Saved: 2025-12-19 18:59
LLM Response
```json
{
  "new_capability_classes": [
    {
      "label": "Community Engagement Capability",
      "definition": "The competency to design and implement inclusive, accessible, and equitable public participation processes that genuinely capture diverse stakeholder perspectives",
      "capability_type": "communicative",
      "norm_competence_related": "Enables fulfillment of obligations to serve public welfare and ensure equitable treatment of all stakeholders",
      "skill_level": "advanced",
      "acquisition_method": "Training in public participation methods, cultural competency education, experience with diverse communities",
      "examples_from_case": ["Organizing accessible meeting times and locations", "Providing multiple feedback channels including written comments"],
      "source_text": "organizes meetings at times and locations that are difficult for Community P residents to attend, such as during work hours at venues far from the area",
      "confidence": 0.9,
      "reasoning": "Distinct from general communication capabilities - specifically addresses inclusive public engagement processes not covered in existing ontology"
    },
    {
      "label": "Ethical Reporting Capability",
      "definition": "The competency to prepare transparent, complete, and unbiased reports that accurately represent all relevant data and stakeholder input",
      "capability_type": "ethical",
      "norm_competence_related": "Enables fulfillment of obligations to truthfulness, transparency, and honest representation of facts",
      "skill_level": "intermediate",
      "acquisition_method": "Ethics training, professional development in documentation standards, mentorship",
      "examples_from_case": ["Including all relevant details about engagement sessions", "Accurately representing community opposition"],
      "source_text": "prepares a carefully-framed report, omitting details about where the sessions were held and at what time of day the sessions were held",
      "confidence": 0.85,
      "reasoning": "Goes beyond Technical Writing Capability to specifically address ethical dimensions of complete and unbiased reporting"
    }
  ],
  "capability_individuals": [
    {
      "identifier": "EngineerM_ResponsibleCharge_Highway",
      "capability_class": "Responsible Charge Capability",
      "possessed_by": "Engineer M",
      "capability_statement": "Lead engineering oversight on major public infrastructure highway project",
      "demonstrated_through": "Retained by City as lead engineer",
      "proficiency_level": "expert",
      "enables_obligations": "Maintaining supervisory control and professional judgment over project execution",
      "temporal_aspect": "Throughout project planning and execution phases",
      "case_context": "Expressed concerns about public outreach methods despite pressure",
      "source_text": "Engineer M is retained by the City as the lead engineer on a major public infrastructure project",
      "is_existing_class": true,
      "confidence": 0.95
    },
    {
      "identifier": "FirmDBA_CommunityEngagement_Deficient",
      "capability_class": "Community Engagement Capability",
      "possessed_by": "Firm DBA Communications Department",
      "capability_statement": "Coordinate public outreach and conduct engagement sessions",
      "demonstrated_through": "Department specializing in communications and public relations",
      "proficiency_level": "basic",
      "enables_obligations": "Should enable equitable stakeholder participation but fails to do so adequately",
      "temporal_aspect": "During project planning phase",
      "case_context": "Organized inaccessible meetings, excluded written comments, avoided virtual options",
      "source_text": "department within its corporate structure that specializes in communications and public relations",
      "is_existing_class": false,
      "confidence": 0.9
    },
    {
      "identifier": "FirmDBA_EthicalReporting_Compromised",
      "capability_class": "Ethical Reporting Capability",
      "possessed_by": "Firm DBA",
      "capability_statement": "Prepare public engagement reports for City projects",
      "demonstrated_through": "Report preparation and submission to City",
      "proficiency_level": "basic",
      "enables_obligations": "Should enable truthful representation but demonstrates deficiency",
      "temporal_aspect": "After public engagement sessions",
      "case_context": "Omitted critical details and misrepresented community support",
      "source_text": "prepares a carefully-framed report, omitting details about where the sessions were held",
      "is_existing_class": false,
      "confidence": 0.85
    },
    {
      "identifier": "EngineerM_EthicalAwareness",
      "capability_class": "Justification Capability",
      "possessed_by": "Engineer M",
      "capability_statement": "Recognize and articulate concerns about inadequate public engagement practices",
      "demonstrated_through": "Expressing concerns to Firm DBA about outreach methods",
      "proficiency_level": "advanced",
      "enables_obligations": "Identifying ethical issues and attempting corrective action",
      "temporal_aspect": "During public engagement phase",
      "case_context": "Identified problematic session locations and timing despite organizational resistance",
      "source_text": "Engineer M expresses concern to Firm DBA about the public outreach and session locations",
      "is_existing_class": true,
      "confidence": 0.88
    }
  ]
}
```