Step 1: Contextual Framework Pass (Facts)
Extract roles, states, and resources from the facts section
Public Welfare - Knowledge of Information Damaging to Client's Interest
Step 1 of 5
Facts Section
Section Content:
Facts: The XYZ Corporation has been advised by a State Pollution Control Authority that it has 60 days to apply for a permit to discharge manufacturing wastes into a receiving body of water. XYZ is also advised of the minimum standard that must be met. In an effort to convince the authority that the receiving body of water after receiving the manufacturing wastes will still meet established environmental standards, the corporation employs Engineer Doe to perform consulting engineering services and submit a detailed report. After completion of his studies but before completion of any written report, Doe concludes that the discharge from the plant will lower the quality of the receiving body of water below established standards. He further concludes that corrective action will be very costly. Doe verbally advises the XYZ Corporation of his findings. Subsequently, the corporation terminates the contract with Doe with full payment for services performed, and instructs Doe not to render a written report to the corporation. Thereafter, Doe learns that the authority has called a public hearing and that the XYZ Corporation has presented data to support its view that the present discharge meets minimum standards.
Roles Extraction
LLM Prompt
DUAL ROLE EXTRACTION - Professional Roles Analysis
EXISTING ROLE CLASSES IN ONTOLOGY:
- Test Professional Role: Test class for source reference
- Test Professional Role: Test class for source reference
- Test Professional Role: Test class for source reference
- Test Professional Role: Test class for source reference
- Test Professional Role: Test class for source reference
- Test Professional Role: Test class for source reference
=== TASK ===
From the following case text (facts section), extract information at TWO levels:
LEVEL 1 - NEW ROLE CLASSES: Identify professional roles that appear to be NEW types not covered by existing classes above. Look for:
- Specialized professional functions
- Emerging role types in engineering/technology
- Domain-specific professional positions
- Roles with unique qualifications or responsibilities
For each NEW role class, provide:
- label: Clear professional role name
- definition: Detailed description of role function and scope
- distinguishing_features: What makes this role unique/different
- professional_scope: Areas of responsibility and authority
- typical_qualifications: Required education, licensing, experience
- generated_obligations: What specific duties does this role create?
- associated_virtues: What virtues/qualities are expected (integrity, competence, etc.)?
- relationship_type: Provider-Client, Professional Peer, Employer, Public Responsibility
- domain_context: Engineering/Medical/Legal/etc.
- examples_from_case: How this role appears in the case text
- source_text: EXACT text snippet from the case where this role class is first identified or described (max 200 characters)
LEVEL 2 - ROLE INDIVIDUALS: Identify specific people mentioned who fulfill professional roles. For each person:
- name: EXACT name or identifier as it appears in the text (e.g., "Engineer A", "Client B", "Dr. Smith")
- role_classification: Which role class they fulfill (use existing classes when possible, or new class label if discovered)
- attributes: Specific qualifications, experience, titles, licenses mentioned in the text
- relationships: Employment, reporting, collaboration relationships explicitly stated
- Each relationship should specify: type (employs, reports_to, collaborates_with, serves_client, etc.) and target (person/org name)
- active_obligations: What specific duties is this person fulfilling in the case?
- ethical_tensions: Any conflicts between role obligations and personal/other obligations?
- case_involvement: How they participate in this case
- source_text: EXACT text snippet from the case where this individual is first mentioned or described (max 200 characters)
IMPORTANT: Use ONLY the actual names/identifiers found in the case text. DO NOT create realistic names or make up details not explicitly stated.
CASE TEXT:
The XYZ Corporation has been advised by a State Pollution Control Authority that it has 60 days to apply for a permit to discharge manufacturing wastes into a receiving body of water. XYZ is also advised of the minimum standard that must be met.
In an effort to convince the authority that the receiving body of water after receiving the manufacturing wastes will still meet established environmental standards, the corporation employs Engineer Doe to perform consulting engineering services and submit a detailed report.
After completion of his studies but before completion of any written report, Doe concludes that the discharge from the plant will lower the quality of the receiving body of water below established standards. He further concludes that corrective action will be very costly. Doe verbally advises the XYZ Corporation of his findings. Subsequently, the corporation terminates the contract with Doe with full payment for services performed, and instructs Doe not to render a written report to the corporation.
Thereafter, Doe learns that the authority has called a public hearing and that the XYZ Corporation has presented data to support its view that the present discharge meets minimum standards.
Respond with valid JSON in this format:
{
"new_role_classes": [
{
"label": "Environmental Compliance Specialist",
"definition": "Professional responsible for ensuring projects meet environmental regulations and standards",
"distinguishing_features": ["Environmental regulation expertise", "Compliance assessment capabilities", "EPA standards knowledge"],
"professional_scope": "Environmental impact assessment, regulatory compliance review, permit coordination",
"typical_qualifications": ["Environmental engineering degree", "Regulatory compliance experience", "Knowledge of EPA standards"],
"generated_obligations": ["Ensure regulatory compliance", "Report violations", "Maintain environmental standards"],
"associated_virtues": ["Environmental stewardship", "Regulatory integrity", "Technical competence"],
"relationship_type": "Provider-Client",
"domain_context": "Engineering",
"examples_from_case": ["Engineer A was retained to prepare environmental assessment", "specialist reviewed compliance requirements"],
"source_text": "Engineer A was retained to prepare environmental assessment"
}
],
"role_individuals": [
{
"name": "Engineer A",
"role_classification": "Environmental Compliance Specialist",
"attributes": {
"title": "Engineer",
"license": "professional engineering license",
"specialization": "environmental engineer",
"experience": "several years of experience"
},
"relationships": [
{"type": "retained_by", "target": "Client W"}
],
"case_involvement": "Retained to prepare comprehensive report addressing organic compound characteristics",
"source_text": "Engineer A, a professional engineer with several years of experience, was retained by Client W"
}
]
}
Saved: 2026-01-17 09:16
LLM Response
```json
{
"new_role_classes": [
{
"label": "Environmental Consulting Engineer",
"definition": "Professional engineer retained to perform independent technical studies and provide expert analysis on environmental impacts, specifically assessing whether industrial discharges meet regulatory standards for water quality",
"distinguishing_features": ["Independent technical assessment capability", "Environmental impact analysis expertise", "Regulatory standards interpretation", "Obligation to provide truthful findings regardless of client preference"],
"professional_scope": "Conducting environmental studies, analyzing discharge impacts on water bodies, comparing findings against established environmental standards, preparing detailed technical reports for regulatory compliance",
"typical_qualifications": ["Professional engineering license", "Environmental engineering expertise", "Knowledge of water quality standards", "Experience with pollution control regulations"],
"generated_obligations": ["Conduct thorough and accurate technical studies", "Report findings truthfully", "Maintain professional independence from client pressure", "Consider public welfare implications of environmental impacts"],
"associated_virtues": ["Technical competence", "Professional integrity", "Truthfulness", "Public responsibility", "Independence"],
"relationship_type": "Provider-Client",
"domain_context": "Engineering",
"examples_from_case": ["Engineer Doe retained to perform consulting engineering services and submit detailed report on discharge impacts"],
"source_text": "the corporation employs Engineer Doe to perform consulting engineering services and submit a detailed report"
}
],
"role_individuals": [
{
"name": "Engineer Doe",
"role_classification": "Environmental Consulting Engineer",
"attributes": {
"title": "Engineer",
"specialization": "consulting engineering services",
"engagement_type": "contracted consultant"
},
"relationships": [
{"type": "employed_by", "target": "XYZ Corporation"},
{"type": "contract_terminated_by", "target": "XYZ Corporation"}
],
"active_obligations": ["Perform consulting engineering services", "Submit detailed report on discharge impacts", "Assess whether discharge meets environmental standards"],
"ethical_tensions": ["Client terminated contract after unfavorable verbal findings", "Instructed not to render written report despite completing studies", "Client subsequently presented contradictory data to public authority", "Conflict between client instructions and public welfare/truthfulness obligations"],
"case_involvement": "Retained to study whether manufacturing waste discharge would meet environmental standards; concluded discharge would lower water quality below standards and corrective action would be costly; verbally advised corporation; contract terminated with instruction not to submit written report",
"source_text": "the corporation employs Engineer Doe to perform consulting engineering services and submit a detailed report"
},
{
"name": "XYZ Corporation",
"role_classification": "Client/Employer",
"attributes": {
"type": "corporation",
"industry": "manufacturing",
"regulatory_status": "required to apply for discharge permit"
},
"relationships": [
{"type": "employs", "target": "Engineer Doe"},
{"type": "regulated_by", "target": "State Pollution Control Authority"}
],
"active_obligations": ["Apply for permit to discharge manufacturing wastes within 60 days", "Meet minimum discharge standards"],
"ethical_tensions": ["Terminated engineer contract after receiving unfavorable findings", "Presented data to authority supporting view that discharge meets standards despite engineer's contrary conclusions"],
"case_involvement": "Advised by authority to apply for discharge permit; employed Engineer Doe for assessment; terminated contract after unfavorable verbal findings; presented contradictory data at public hearing",
"source_text": "The XYZ Corporation has been advised by a State Pollution Control Authority that it has 60 days to apply for a permit"
},
{
"name": "State Pollution Control Authority",
"role_classification": "Regulatory Authority",
"attributes": {
"type": "state government agency",
"jurisdiction": "pollution control",
"regulatory_power": "permit issuance, standard setting, public hearings"
},
"relationships": [
{"type": "regulates", "target": "XYZ Corporation"}
],
"active_obligations": ["Enforce environmental standards", "Review permit applications", "Conduct public hearings"],
"ethical_tensions": [],
"case_involvement": "Advised XYZ Corporation of permit requirement and minimum standards; called public hearing where XYZ presented data",
"source_text": "The XYZ Corporation has been advised by a State Pollution Control Authority that it has 60 days to apply for a permit"
}
]
}
```
States Extraction
LLM Prompt
EXISTING STATE CLASSES IN ONTOLOGY (DO NOT RE-EXTRACT THESE):
STATE STATES:
- Certification Required State: Checkpoint state requiring formal validation processes
- Make Objective Truthful Statements: Requirement for honesty in professional communications
- Non-Compliant State: Problematic state requiring immediate corrective action
- Objective and Truthful Statements: Requirement for honesty in professional communications
- Provide Objective Statements: Professional communication standard
- Public Statements: Requirement for honesty and objectivity in all public communications and professional statements
IMPORTANT: Only extract NEW state types not listed above!
You are analyzing a professional ethics case to extract both STATE CLASSES and STATE INSTANCES.
DEFINITIONS:
- STATE CLASS: A type of situational condition (e.g., "Conflict of Interest", "Emergency Situation", "Resource Constraint")
- STATE INDIVIDUAL: A specific instance of a state active in this case attached to specific people/organizations
CRITICAL REQUIREMENT: Every STATE CLASS you identify MUST be based on at least one specific STATE INDIVIDUAL instance in the case.
You cannot propose a state class without providing the concrete instance(s) that demonstrate it.
KEY INSIGHT FROM LITERATURE:
States are not abstract - they are concrete conditions affecting specific actors at specific times.
Each state has a subject (WHO is in the state), temporal boundaries (WHEN), and causal relationships (WHY).
YOUR TASK - Extract two LINKED types of entities:
1. NEW STATE CLASSES (types not in the existing ontology above):
- Novel types of situational states discovered in this case
- Must be sufficiently general to apply to other cases
- Should represent distinct environmental or contextual conditions
- Consider both inertial (persistent) and non-inertial (momentary) fluents
2. STATE INDIVIDUALS (specific instances in this case):
- Specific states active in this case narrative
- MUST be attached to specific individuals or organizations in the case
- Include temporal properties (when initiated, when terminated)
- Include causal relationships (triggered by what event, affects which obligations)
- Map to existing classes where possible, or to new classes you discover
EXTRACTION GUIDELINES:
For NEW STATE CLASSES, identify:
- Label: Clear, professional name for the state type
- Definition: What this state represents
- Activation conditions: What events/conditions trigger this state
- Termination conditions: What events/conditions end this state
- Persistence type: "inertial" (persists until terminated) or "non-inertial" (momentary)
- Affected obligations: Which professional duties does this state affect?
- Temporal properties: How does this state evolve over time?
- Domain context: Medical/Engineering/Legal/etc.
- Examples from case: Specific instances showing this state type
For STATE INDIVIDUALS, identify:
- Identifier: Unique descriptor (e.g., "John_Smith_ConflictOfInterest_ProjectX")
- State class: Which state type it represents (existing or new)
- Subject: WHO is in this state (person/organization name from the case)
- Initiated by: What event triggered this state?
- Initiated at: When did this state begin?
- Terminated by: What event ended this state (if applicable)?
- Terminated at: When did this state end (if applicable)?
- Affects obligations: Which specific obligations were affected?
- Urgency/Intensity: Does this state's urgency change over time?
- Related parties: Who else is affected by this state?
- Case involvement: How this state affected the case outcome
CASE TEXT FROM facts SECTION:
The XYZ Corporation has been advised by a State Pollution Control Authority that it has 60 days to apply for a permit to discharge manufacturing wastes into a receiving body of water. XYZ is also advised of the minimum standard that must be met.
In an effort to convince the authority that the receiving body of water after receiving the manufacturing wastes will still meet established environmental standards, the corporation employs Engineer Doe to perform consulting engineering services and submit a detailed report.
After completion of his studies but before completion of any written report, Doe concludes that the discharge from the plant will lower the quality of the receiving body of water below established standards. He further concludes that corrective action will be very costly. Doe verbally advises the XYZ Corporation of his findings. Subsequently, the corporation terminates the contract with Doe with full payment for services performed, and instructs Doe not to render a written report to the corporation.
Thereafter, Doe learns that the authority has called a public hearing and that the XYZ Corporation has presented data to support its view that the present discharge meets minimum standards.
Respond with a JSON structure. Here's a CONCRETE EXAMPLE showing the required linkage:
EXAMPLE (if the case mentions "Engineer A faced a conflict when discovering his brother worked for the contractor"):
{
"new_state_classes": [
{
"label": "Family Conflict of Interest",
"definition": "A state where a professional's family relationships create potential bias in professional decisions",
"activation_conditions": ["Discovery of family member involvement", "Family member has financial interest"],
"termination_conditions": ["Recusal from decision", "Family member withdraws"],
"persistence_type": "inertial",
"affected_obligations": ["Duty of impartiality", "Disclosure requirements"],
"temporal_properties": "Persists until formally addressed through recusal or disclosure",
"domain_context": "Engineering",
"examples_from_case": ["Engineer A discovered brother worked for ABC Contractors"],
"source_text": "Engineer A faced a conflict when discovering his brother worked for the contractor",
"confidence": 0.85,
"rationale": "Specific type of conflict not covered by general COI in existing ontology"
}
],
"state_individuals": [
{
"identifier": "EngineerA_FamilyConflict_ABCContractors",
"state_class": "Family Conflict of Interest",
"subject": "Engineer A",
"initiated_by": "Discovery that brother is senior manager at ABC Contractors",
"initiated_at": "When bidding process began",
"terminated_by": "Engineer A recused from contractor selection",
"terminated_at": "Two weeks after discovery",
"affects_obligations": ["Maintain impartial contractor selection", "Disclose conflicts to client"],
"urgency_level": "high",
"related_parties": ["Client B", "ABC Contractors", "Engineer A's brother"],
"case_involvement": "Led to Engineer A's recusal from contractor selection process",
"source_text": "Engineer A discovered his brother is senior manager at ABC Contractors during the bidding process",
"is_existing_class": false,
"confidence": 0.9
}
]
}
YOUR RESPONSE FORMAT (use the same structure with YOUR case's specific details):
{
"new_state_classes": [
// For each new state type you discover
],
"state_individuals": [
// For each specific instance in the case (MUST have at least one per new class)
]
}
EXTRACTION RULES:
1. For EVERY new state class you identify, you MUST provide at least one corresponding state individual
2. State individuals MUST have a clear subject (specific person/organization from the case)
3. If you cannot identify a specific instance, do not create the state class
4. States without subjects are invalid (e.g., cannot have "general emergency" - must be "City M's water emergency")
5. Each state individual should clearly demonstrate why its state class is needed
Focus on states that:
1. Are attached to specific individuals or organizations mentioned in the case
2. Have clear temporal boundaries (when initiated, when terminated)
3. Affect specific ethical obligations or professional duties
4. Show causal relationships with events in the case
5. Demonstrate the context-dependent nature of professional ethics
EXAMPLE OF CORRECT EXTRACTION:
State Class: "Public Health Risk State"
State Individual: "City_M_PublicHealthRisk_2023" with subject="City M", initiated_by="Decision to change water source", affects_obligations=["Ensure public safety", "Provide clean water"]
EXAMPLE OF INCORRECT EXTRACTION:
State Class: "Emergency Situation" with NO corresponding individual (INVALID - no specific instance)
Saved: 2026-01-17 09:16
LLM Response
```json
{
"new_state_classes": [
{
"label": "Regulatory Compliance Deadline State",
"definition": "A state where an organization faces a time-bound regulatory requirement to obtain permits or meet compliance standards, creating urgency for action and decision-making",
"activation_conditions": ["Receipt of regulatory notice", "Formal notification of compliance requirement with deadline"],
"termination_conditions": ["Permit application submitted", "Deadline expires", "Compliance achieved", "Regulatory exemption granted"],
"persistence_type": "inertial",
"affected_obligations": ["Duty to comply with regulations", "Duty to provide accurate information to authorities", "Duty to protect public welfare"],
"temporal_properties": "Persists from notification until deadline or compliance action; urgency increases as deadline approaches",
"domain_context": "Environmental Engineering",
"examples_from_case": ["XYZ Corporation received 60-day notice to apply for discharge permit"],
"source_text": "The XYZ Corporation has been advised by a State Pollution Control Authority that it has 60 days to apply for a permit to discharge manufacturing wastes into a receiving body of water.",
"confidence": 0.95,
"rationale": "Represents a specific regulatory pressure state with defined temporal boundaries that affects corporate and professional obligations"
},
{
"label": "Adverse Findings Possession State",
"definition": "A state where a professional possesses knowledge of findings that are unfavorable to their client's interests or position, creating tension between client loyalty and professional/public duties",
"activation_conditions": ["Completion of professional analysis", "Discovery of negative results", "Conclusion of investigation revealing adverse information"],
"termination_conditions": ["Disclosure of findings", "Formal reporting completed", "Professional relationship terminated without disclosure"],
"persistence_type": "inertial",
"affected_obligations": ["Duty to report truthfully", "Duty to protect public welfare", "Duty to client", "Professional integrity obligations"],
"temporal_properties": "Persists from discovery until disclosure or termination of professional relationship; ethical tension increases if suppression is attempted",
"domain_context": "Engineering Consulting",
"examples_from_case": ["Engineer Doe concluded discharge would lower water quality below standards before being terminated"],
"source_text": "After completion of his studies but before completion of any written report, Doe concludes that the discharge from the plant will lower the quality of the receiving body of water below established standards.",
"confidence": 0.92,
"rationale": "Captures the specific ethical state of possessing unfavorable professional findings that creates obligations beyond client relationship"
},
{
"label": "Suppressed Report State",
"definition": "A state where a professional's findings or report have been deliberately prevented from being formalized or disclosed by the client, creating ongoing ethical obligations regarding the suppressed information",
"activation_conditions": ["Client instruction to not produce report", "Termination of contract to prevent reporting", "Explicit prohibition on disclosure"],
"termination_conditions": ["Information disclosed to appropriate authorities", "Public disclosure occurs", "Regulatory action addresses the issue"],
"persistence_type": "inertial",
"affected_obligations": ["Duty to protect public welfare", "Duty to report to authorities", "Professional whistleblowing obligations"],
"temporal_properties": "Persists indefinitely until information is disclosed; ethical urgency increases if public harm is imminent",
"domain_context": "Engineering Consulting",
"examples_from_case": ["XYZ Corporation instructed Doe not to render a written report"],
"source_text": "Subsequently, the corporation terminates the contract with Doe with full payment for services performed, and instructs Doe not to render a written report to the corporation.",
"confidence": 0.90,
"rationale": "Represents a distinct state where professional work product is actively suppressed, creating unique ethical obligations"
},
{
"label": "Misleading Public Proceeding State",
"definition": "A state where a professional becomes aware that misleading or incomplete information is being presented in a public regulatory proceeding, triggering potential disclosure obligations",
"activation_conditions": ["Knowledge of public hearing", "Awareness that presented data contradicts professional findings", "Discovery of misrepresentation to authorities"],
"termination_conditions": ["Correction of record", "Professional disclosure to authorities", "Regulatory decision finalized"],
"persistence_type": "inertial",
"affected_obligations": ["Duty to protect public welfare", "Duty to ensure truthful public statements", "Duty to regulatory authorities"],
"temporal_properties": "Persists until proceeding concludes or correction is made; urgency is high due to potential for irreversible regulatory decisions",
"domain_context": "Environmental Engineering",
"examples_from_case": ["Doe learns XYZ presented data claiming discharge meets standards when his findings showed otherwise"],
"source_text": "Thereafter, Doe learns that the authority has called a public hearing and that the XYZ Corporation has presented data to support its view that the present discharge meets minimum standards.",
"confidence": 0.88,
"rationale": "Captures the specific ethical state triggered when a professional knows public proceedings contain misleading information"
},
{
"label": "Environmental Harm Risk State",
"definition": "A state where professional analysis has identified that an action or condition will cause environmental degradation below established standards, creating public welfare protection obligations",
"activation_conditions": ["Professional determination of environmental standard violation", "Scientific conclusion of environmental harm", "Analysis showing degradation below regulatory thresholds"],
"termination_conditions": ["Corrective action implemented", "Discharge prevented", "Environmental standards met"],
"persistence_type": "inertial",
"affected_obligations": ["Duty to protect public welfare", "Duty to protect environment", "Duty to report to authorities"],
"temporal_properties": "Persists until environmental risk is mitigated; urgency depends on immediacy and severity of harm",
"domain_context": "Environmental Engineering",
"examples_from_case": ["Doe concluded discharge would lower water quality below established standards"],
"source_text": "Doe concludes that the discharge from the plant will lower the quality of the receiving body of water below established standards.",
"confidence": 0.93,
"rationale": "Represents a specific environmental risk state that triggers professional obligations to protect public welfare"
}
],
"state_individuals": [
{
"identifier": "XYZ_RegulatoryComplianceDeadline_DischargePermit",
"state_class": "Regulatory Compliance Deadline State",
"subject": "XYZ Corporation",
"initiated_by": "Receipt of notice from State Pollution Control Authority",
"initiated_at": "Beginning of case narrative (Day 0)",
"terminated_by": "Not specified in case",
"terminated_at": "60 days from notification (deadline)",
"affects_obligations": ["Submit accurate permit application", "Meet minimum discharge standards", "Provide truthful information to authority"],
"urgency_level": "high",
"related_parties": ["State Pollution Control Authority", "Engineer Doe", "Public affected by water quality"],
"case_involvement": "Created the context for hiring Engineer Doe and the subsequent ethical conflict",
"source_text": "The XYZ Corporation has been advised by a State Pollution Control Authority that it has 60 days to apply for a permit to discharge manufacturing wastes into a receiving body of water.",
"is_existing_class": false,
"confidence": 0.95
},
{
"identifier": "Doe_AdverseFindings_WaterQuality",
"state_class": "Adverse Findings Possession State",
"subject": "Engineer Doe",
"initiated_by": "Completion of engineering studies showing discharge would violate standards",
"initiated_at": "After completion of studies, before written report",
"terminated_by": "Not terminated - Doe still possesses this knowledge",
"terminated_at": "Ongoing at end of case narrative",
"affects_obligations": ["Duty to report truthfully", "Duty to protect public welfare", "Professional integrity"],
"urgency_level": "high",
"related_parties": ["XYZ Corporation", "State Pollution Control Authority", "Public"],
"case_involvement": "Created the central ethical dilemma when XYZ terminated contract to suppress findings",
"source_text": "After completion of his studies but before completion of any written report, Doe concludes that the discharge from the plant will lower the quality of the receiving body of water below established standards.",
"is_existing_class": false,
"confidence": 0.92
},
{
"identifier": "Doe_SuppressedReport_XYZDischarge",
"state_class": "Suppressed Report State",
"subject": "Engineer Doe",
"initiated_by": "XYZ Corporation terminating contract and instructing Doe not to render written report",
"initiated_at": "After Doe verbally advised XYZ of findings",
"terminated_by": "Not terminated in case narrative",
"terminated_at": "Ongoing at end of case narrative",
"affects_obligations": ["Duty to protect public welfare", "Potential duty to disclose to authorities", "Professional whistleblowing considerations"],
"urgency_level": "high",
"related_parties": ["XYZ Corporation", "State Pollution Control Authority", "Public"],
"case_involvement": "Created the ethical question of whether Doe has obligation to disclose despite client instruction",
"source_text": "Subsequently, the corporation terminates the contract with Doe with full payment for services performed, and instructs Doe not to render a written report to the corporation.",
"is_existing_class": false,
"confidence": 0.90
},
{
"identifier": "Doe_MisleadingProceeding_PublicHearing",
"state_class": "Misleading Public Proceeding State",
"subject": "Engineer Doe",
"initiated_by": "Learning that XYZ presented data claiming compliance when Doe's findings showed non-compliance",
"initiated_at": "When Doe learned of public hearing and XYZ's presentation",
"terminated_by": "Not terminated in case narrative",
"terminated_at": "Ongoing at end of case narrative",
"affects_obligations": ["Duty to ensure public is not misled", "Duty to protect public welfare", "Potential duty to correct the record"],
"urgency_level": "critical",
"related_parties": ["XYZ Corporation", "State Pollution Control Authority", "Public attending hearing"],
"case_involvement": "Escalated the ethical dilemma by adding public proceeding dimension to suppressed findings",
"source_text": "Thereafter, Doe learns that the authority has called a public hearing and that the XYZ Corporation has presented data to support its view that the present discharge meets minimum standards.",
"is_existing_class": false,
"confidence": 0.88
},
{
"identifier": "XYZ_EnvironmentalHarmRisk_WaterDischarge",
"state_class": "Environmental Harm Risk State",
"subject": "XYZ Corporation",
"initiated_by": "Engineer Doe's professional determination that discharge would violate standards",
"initiated_at": "When Doe completed his studies",
"terminated_by": "Not terminated - discharge continues",
"terminated_at": "Ongoing at end of case narrative",
"affects_obligations": ["Corporate duty to comply with environmental standards", "Duty to protect receiving water body", "Duty to public health"],
"urgency_level": "high",
"related_parties": ["State Pollution Control Authority", "Engineer Doe", "Communities dependent on water body"],
"case_involvement": "The underlying environmental risk that creates the public welfare dimension of the ethical case",
"source_text": "Doe concludes that the discharge from the plant will lower the quality of the receiving body of water below established standards.",
"is_existing_class": false,
"confidence": 0.93
},
{
"identifier": "XYZ_NonCompliant_DischargeStandards",
"state_class": "Non-Compliant State",
"subject": "XYZ Corporation",
"initiated_by": "Engineer Doe's determination that discharge violates minimum standards",
"initiated_at": "When Doe completed analysis",
"terminated_by": "Not terminated in case narrative",
"terminated_at": "Ongoing - corrective action would be very costly",
"affects_obligations": ["Duty to achieve compliance", "Duty to truthfully represent status to authorities"],
"urgency_level": "high",
"related_parties": ["State Pollution Control Authority", "Engineer Doe", "Public"],
"case_involvement": "The non-compliant state that XYZ is attempting to conceal from the regulatory authority",
"source_text": "Doe concludes that the discharge from the plant will lower the quality of the receiving body of water below established standards. He further concludes that corrective action will be very costly.",
"is_existing_class": true,
"confidence": 0.94
}
]
}
```
Resources Extraction
LLM Prompt
EXISTING RESOURCE CLASSES IN ONTOLOGY: None found. All resources you identify will be new.
You are analyzing a professional ethics case to extract both RESOURCE CLASSES and RESOURCE INSTANCES.
DEFINITIONS:
- RESOURCE CLASS: A type of document, tool, standard, or knowledge source (e.g., "Emergency Response Protocol", "Technical Specification", "Ethics Code")
- RESOURCE INDIVIDUAL: A specific instance of a resource used in this case (e.g., "NSPE Code of Ethics 2023", "City M Water Quality Standards")
CRITICAL REQUIREMENT: Every RESOURCE CLASS you identify MUST be based on at least one specific RESOURCE INDIVIDUAL instance in the case.
You cannot propose a resource class without providing the concrete instance(s) that demonstrate it.
YOUR TASK - Extract two LINKED types of entities:
1. NEW RESOURCE CLASSES (types not in the existing ontology above):
- Novel types of resources discovered in this case
- Must be sufficiently general to apply to other cases
- Should represent distinct categories of decision-making resources
- Consider documents, tools, standards, guidelines, databases, etc.
2. RESOURCE INDIVIDUALS (specific instances in this case):
- Specific documents, tools, or knowledge sources mentioned
- MUST have identifiable titles or descriptions
- Include metadata (creator, date, version) where available
- Map to existing classes where possible, or to new classes you discover
EXTRACTION GUIDELINES:
For NEW RESOURCE CLASSES, identify:
- Label: Clear, professional name for the resource type
- Definition: What this resource type represents
- Resource type: document, tool, standard, guideline, database, etc.
- Accessibility: public, restricted, proprietary, etc.
- Authority source: Who typically creates/maintains these resources
- Typical usage: How these resources are typically used
- Domain context: Medical/Engineering/Legal/etc.
- Examples from case: Specific instances showing this resource type
For RESOURCE INDIVIDUALS, identify:
- Identifier: Unique descriptor (e.g., "NSPE_CodeOfEthics_2023")
- Resource class: Which resource type it represents (existing or new)
- Document title: Official name or description
- Created by: Organization or authority that created it
- Created at: When it was created (if mentioned)
- Version: Edition or version information
- URL or location: Where to find it (if mentioned)
- Used by: Who used this resource in the case
- Used in context: How this resource was applied
- Case involvement: How this resource affected decisions
CASE TEXT FROM facts SECTION:
The XYZ Corporation has been advised by a State Pollution Control Authority that it has 60 days to apply for a permit to discharge manufacturing wastes into a receiving body of water. XYZ is also advised of the minimum standard that must be met.
In an effort to convince the authority that the receiving body of water after receiving the manufacturing wastes will still meet established environmental standards, the corporation employs Engineer Doe to perform consulting engineering services and submit a detailed report.
After completion of his studies but before completion of any written report, Doe concludes that the discharge from the plant will lower the quality of the receiving body of water below established standards. He further concludes that corrective action will be very costly. Doe verbally advises the XYZ Corporation of his findings. Subsequently, the corporation terminates the contract with Doe with full payment for services performed, and instructs Doe not to render a written report to the corporation.
Thereafter, Doe learns that the authority has called a public hearing and that the XYZ Corporation has presented data to support its view that the present discharge meets minimum standards.
Respond with a JSON structure. Here's an EXAMPLE:
EXAMPLE (if the case mentions "Engineer A consulted the NSPE Code of Ethics and the state's engineering regulations"):
{
"new_resource_classes": [
{
"label": "State Engineering Regulations",
"definition": "Legal requirements and regulations governing engineering practice at the state level",
"resource_type": "regulatory_document",
"accessibility": ["public", "official"],
"authority_source": "State Engineering Board",
"typical_usage": "Legal compliance and professional practice guidance",
"domain_context": "Engineering",
"examples_from_case": ["State engineering regulations consulted by Engineer A"],
"source_text": "Engineer A consulted the state's engineering regulations",
"confidence": 0.85,
"rationale": "Specific type of regulatory resource not in existing ontology"
}
],
"resource_individuals": [
{
"identifier": "NSPE_CodeOfEthics_Current",
"resource_class": "Professional Ethics Code",
"document_title": "NSPE Code of Ethics",
"created_by": "National Society of Professional Engineers",
"created_at": "Current version",
"version": "Current",
"used_by": "Engineer A",
"used_in_context": "Consulted for ethical guidance on conflict of interest",
"case_involvement": "Provided framework for ethical decision-making",
"source_text": "Engineer A consulted the NSPE Code of Ethics",
"is_existing_class": true,
"confidence": 0.95
},
{
"identifier": "State_Engineering_Regulations_Current",
"resource_class": "State Engineering Regulations",
"document_title": "State Engineering Practice Act and Regulations",
"created_by": "State Engineering Board",
"used_by": "Engineer A",
"used_in_context": "Referenced for legal requirements",
"case_involvement": "Defined legal obligations for professional practice",
"source_text": "Engineer A referenced the State Engineering Practice Act and Regulations",
"is_existing_class": false,
"confidence": 0.9
}
]
}
EXTRACTION RULES:
1. For EVERY new resource class you identify, you MUST provide at least one corresponding resource individual
2. Resource individuals MUST have identifiable titles or descriptions
3. If you cannot identify a specific instance, do not create the resource class
4. Focus on resources that directly influence decision-making in the case
5. Each resource individual should clearly demonstrate why its resource class is needed
Focus on resources that:
1. Are explicitly mentioned or referenced in the case
2. Guide professional decisions or actions
3. Provide standards, requirements, or frameworks
4. Serve as knowledge sources for the professionals involved
Saved: 2026-01-17 09:17
LLM Response
```json
{
"new_resource_classes": [
{
"label": "Environmental Discharge Permit Application",
"definition": "Official regulatory document required for organizations seeking authorization to discharge manufacturing or industrial wastes into bodies of water",
"resource_type": "regulatory_document",
"accessibility": ["restricted", "official"],
"authority_source": "State Pollution Control Authority",
"typical_usage": "Compliance with environmental regulations for waste discharge authorization",
"domain_context": "Environmental Engineering",
"examples_from_case": ["Permit application required by State Pollution Control Authority within 60 days"],
"source_text": "XYZ Corporation has been advised by a State Pollution Control Authority that it has 60 days to apply for a permit to discharge manufacturing wastes into a receiving body of water",
"confidence": 0.85,
"rationale": "Specific regulatory document type governing environmental discharge compliance"
},
{
"label": "Environmental Quality Standards",
"definition": "Established regulatory standards defining minimum acceptable quality levels for environmental resources such as water bodies",
"resource_type": "standard",
"accessibility": ["public", "official"],
"authority_source": "State Pollution Control Authority",
"typical_usage": "Benchmark for evaluating environmental impact and compliance of industrial activities",
"domain_context": "Environmental Engineering",
"examples_from_case": ["Minimum standards for water quality that must be met", "Established environmental standards referenced by Engineer Doe"],
"source_text": "XYZ is also advised of the minimum standard that must be met... the discharge from the plant will lower the quality of the receiving body of water below established standards",
"confidence": 0.90,
"rationale": "Regulatory standards that serve as the benchmark for environmental compliance decisions"
},
{
"label": "Environmental Impact Assessment Report",
"definition": "Technical engineering report analyzing the environmental effects of industrial activities, particularly discharge impacts on receiving environments",
"resource_type": "technical_report",
"accessibility": ["proprietary", "client-commissioned"],
"authority_source": "Consulting Engineers",
"typical_usage": "Evaluation of environmental compliance and impact of industrial operations",
"domain_context": "Environmental Engineering",
"examples_from_case": ["Detailed report commissioned from Engineer Doe on discharge impacts"],
"source_text": "the corporation employs Engineer Doe to perform consulting engineering services and submit a detailed report",
"confidence": 0.88,
"rationale": "Professional engineering deliverable specifically addressing environmental impact analysis"
},
{
"label": "Public Hearing Submission",
"definition": "Data and documentation submitted by organizations to regulatory authorities during public hearings on environmental matters",
"resource_type": "regulatory_submission",
"accessibility": ["public", "official_proceeding"],
"authority_source": "Regulated entities submitting to regulatory authority",
"typical_usage": "Presentation of evidence and arguments in regulatory proceedings",
"domain_context": "Environmental Regulatory Proceedings",
"examples_from_case": ["Data presented by XYZ Corporation at public hearing"],
"source_text": "the authority has called a public hearing and that the XYZ Corporation has presented data to support its view that the present discharge meets minimum standards",
"confidence": 0.82,
"rationale": "Formal submission to regulatory proceedings that may conflict with engineering findings"
}
],
"resource_individuals": [
{
"identifier": "State_Pollution_Control_Permit_Notice_XYZ",
"resource_class": "Environmental Discharge Permit Application",
"document_title": "State Pollution Control Authority Permit Application Notice",
"created_by": "State Pollution Control Authority",
"created_at": "Not specified (60 days prior to deadline)",
"version": "Current",
"used_by": "XYZ Corporation",
"used_in_context": "Notification requiring permit application for manufacturing waste discharge",
"case_involvement": "Initiated the compliance process and engagement of Engineer Doe",
"source_text": "XYZ Corporation has been advised by a State Pollution Control Authority that it has 60 days to apply for a permit to discharge manufacturing wastes into a receiving body of water",
"is_existing_class": false,
"confidence": 0.85
},
{
"identifier": "State_Water_Quality_Minimum_Standards",
"resource_class": "Environmental Quality Standards",
"document_title": "State Minimum Water Quality Standards for Receiving Bodies of Water",
"created_by": "State Pollution Control Authority",
"created_at": "Not specified",
"version": "Established/Current",
"used_by": "Engineer Doe, XYZ Corporation, State Pollution Control Authority",
"used_in_context": "Benchmark for evaluating whether discharge meets environmental requirements",
"case_involvement": "Central standard against which Doe measured discharge impact; basis for his conclusion that discharge would lower water quality below acceptable levels",
"source_text": "XYZ is also advised of the minimum standard that must be met... the discharge from the plant will lower the quality of the receiving body of water below established standards",
"is_existing_class": false,
"confidence": 0.90
},
{
"identifier": "Doe_Environmental_Assessment_XYZ_Discharge",
"resource_class": "Environmental Impact Assessment Report",
"document_title": "Engineer Doe's Environmental Impact Assessment of XYZ Manufacturing Discharge",
"created_by": "Engineer Doe",
"created_at": "During consulting engagement (not completed in written form)",
"version": "Draft/Verbal findings only",
"used_by": "XYZ Corporation (verbal findings received)",
"used_in_context": "Commissioned to demonstrate compliance with environmental standards; findings indicated non-compliance",
"case_involvement": "Doe's verbal findings led to contract termination; written report was suppressed by corporation's instruction",
"source_text": "the corporation employs Engineer Doe to perform consulting engineering services and submit a detailed report... After completion of his studies but before completion of any written report, Doe concludes that the discharge from the plant will lower the quality of the receiving body of water below established standards",
"is_existing_class": false,
"confidence": 0.88
},
{
"identifier": "XYZ_Public_Hearing_Data_Submission",
"resource_class": "Public Hearing Submission",
"document_title": "XYZ Corporation Data Submission to State Pollution Control Authority Public Hearing",
"created_by": "XYZ Corporation",
"created_at": "After termination of Doe's contract",
"version": "Submitted version",
"used_by": "XYZ Corporation, State Pollution Control Authority",
"used_in_context": "Presented to support corporation's claim that discharge meets minimum standards",
"case_involvement": "Contradicts Engineer Doe's findings; raises ethical concerns about accuracy and potential misrepresentation to regulatory authority",
"source_text": "the authority has called a public hearing and that the XYZ Corporation has presented data to support its view that the present discharge meets minimum standards",
"is_existing_class": false,
"confidence": 0.85
}
]
}
```