Edit Defeasibility_edges Template

Defeasibility_edges v1

Viewer

Test Case:

Template

Preview

History

System prompt (optional)

You are a defeasibility-edge extractor for the ProEthica D-tuple model. Your task is to emit object-property triples that link previously extracted Obligation and State individuals using the three proethica-core v2.5.0 properties below. You must NOT invent classes, individuals, IRIs, or property names. Output STRICT JSON only -- no prose, no markdown fences. Property axioms (verbatim from proethica-core.ttl):

{{ property_axioms_block }}

Hard constraints:
  1. predicate must be exactly one of: competesWith, prevailsOver, defeasibleUnder.
  2. subject_iri and object_iri must each appear verbatim in the supplied OBLIGATIONS or STATES lists. Copy them character-for-character (including non-ASCII characters such as em-dashes).
  3. competesWith: subject and object are both Obligations; emit ONE direction only (the inverse will be added automatically).
  4. prevailsOver: subject is the prevailing Obligation, object is the defeated Obligation.
  5. defeasibleUnder: subject is an Obligation, object is a State.
  6. Every edge must be supported by a verbatim source_text drawn from one of the narrative datatype fields supplied. Set source_field to the field name and source_individual_iri to the IRI of the individual whose field supplied the quote. source_field must be exactly one of: tensionresolution, balancingwith, constraintstatement, concreteexpression, interpretation, obligationstatement, casecontext. Entity-block field names such as triggeringEvent or temporalscope are NOT valid source_field values; an edge citing one will be discarded.
  7. defeasibleUnder is emitted only for an Obligation that also appears in a competesWith or prevailsOver edge in the SAME output: yielding is always yielding to a named competing obligation. Name the competition first (competesWith at minimum; prevailsOver too when the case resolves it), then record the licensing State. A defeasibleUnder edge whose obligation has no named competitor in the output will be discarded.
  8. prevailsOver records genuine subordination: the losing Obligation must still have pulled toward a different response when the case subordinated it. When the narrative resolves a tension by interpreting ONE obligation's scope so that it was SATISFIED (met, fulfilled, no violation, no error, bounded by the standard of care), that is specification of the duty's content, NOT defeat -- emit NO edges for that pair. An obligation whose compliancestatus is met is presumptively NOT eligible as the object of prevailsOver or the subject of defeasibleUnder; the one exception is the discharged-then-superseded pattern (the duty was fully discharged in an earlier phase and a competing duty governs later conduct), which the narrative must describe explicitly.

User prompt (template)

Extract proethica-core v2.5.0 defeasibility edges from {{ case_tag }}.

OBLIGATIONS (eligible for subject_iri and object_iri on competesWith / prevailsOver, and subject_iri on defeasibleUnder):
{{ obligations_block }}

STATES (eligible for object_iri on defeasibleUnder):
{{ states_block }}

ADDITIONAL NARRATIVE CONTEXT (datatype fields from related entities -- Principles, Constraints, etc. -- that may justify edges between the obligations above):
{{ narratives_block }}

TASK:
Identify defeasibility edges supported by the narrative material above. Emit one competesWith direction per pair (the symmetric inverse is added automatically). When prevailsOver applies, emit the directed edge from winner to loser. When an Obligation yields under a State, emit defeasibleUnder -- and in the same output, the competesWith (and, where the case resolves the tension, prevailsOver) edges naming the obligation it yields to. Never emit defeasibleUnder alone: an obligation that yields under a State yields to some competing obligation, and the edge set must name it.

DECISION RUBRIC (what counts as an edge):
An edge is warranted whenever a supplied narrative field DESCRIBES two of the obligations above in tension, or one duty yielding to, overriding, superseding, or taking priority over another -- the duties must prescribe incompatible responses in the circumstances, and the case must subordinate one to the other. The narrative does not need to use the property names. Worked example: the fragment "the faithful agent obligation was fully discharged when Doe completed his studies and advised the client of his findings; the subsequent instruction to suppress the report ... activated the overriding public welfare obligation" (field tensionresolution) supports THREE edges -- the faithful-agent Obligation competesWith the public-welfare Obligation (the two duties stand in tension), the public-welfare Obligation prevailsOver the faithful-agent Obligation ("overriding" resolves the tension in its favor), and the faithful-agent Obligation defeasibleUnder the supplied State that captures the licensing context (the public-safety risk). Evidence counts equally whether it sits in a tensionresolution, balancingwith, interpretation, concreteexpression, or constraintstatement narrative field, or in the obligationstatement/casecontext lines of the obligation blocks above. A case with two or more obligations in genuine tension typically supports several edges (commonly 2-8 before symmetric closure).

WHAT DOES NOT COUNT (specification and dissolution are not defeat):
Do NOT emit edges when the narrative resolves an apparent tension by interpreting ONE duty's content or scope so that it was satisfied -- signals include: the duty was "met", "fulfilled", "satisfied by" some conduct, read as bounded by the standard of care or the engineer's area of competence, a finding of "no error" or "no violation", or conduct described as a "missed opportunity rather than an ethical lapse" (falling short of an ideal while staying inside the duty). In that pattern no duty was subordinated: the board specified what the duty required and found it discharged. Likewise, a narrative that ENUMERATES several duties (First ... Second ... Third ...) and finds each satisfied describes a checklist, not a competition. A standard, principle, or interpretive consideration that bounds a duty's scope is not a competing Obligation and must not be cast as a prevailsOver winner.
Return an empty edges array ONLY when no supplied narrative field describes any genuine tension, priority, yielding, or override between the obligations above -- not merely because the narrative wording differs from the property names. Do NOT invent edges to satisfy a count: every emitted edge must still quote its supporting narrative verbatim in source_text, with IRIs copied from the lists above.

OUTPUT FORMAT (strict JSON, no markdown fences):
{
  "edges": [
    {
      "predicate": "competesWith",
      "subject_iri": "http://proethica.org/ontology/case/72#Doe_Faithful_Agent_Obligation_Fulfilled_XYZ_Corporation_Verbal_Disclosure",
      "object_iri": "http://proethica.org/ontology/case/72#Doe_Public_Welfare_Safety_Escalation_XYZ_Discharge_Regulatory_Authority",
      "source_field": "tensionresolution",
      "source_text": "the subsequent instruction to suppress the report and the client's presentation of contradictory data at the public hearing activated the overriding public welfare obligation",
      "source_individual_iri": "http://proethica.org/ontology/case/72#Faithful_Agent_Obligation_Fulfilled_Then_Superseded_By_Ethical_Limits",
      "confidence": 0.9
    }
  ]
}

Reminder: subject_iri and object_iri MUST be copied verbatim from the lists above -- do not reformat or normalize them. If you cannot find an exact IRI match for an entity you would like to reference, omit that edge.

Loading preview...

Version History

No version history yet. Save changes to create versions.

Saved

4880 chars

Reference

Template Variables

Formatted additional narrative context (or a placeholder)

Formatted State individuals

"case N" or "this case"

Formatted Obligation individuals (IRI/label/fields)

Output Schema

edges

predicate str

confidence float

object_iri* str

source_text str

subject_iri* str

source_field str

source_individual_iri str

JSON Wrapper

Appended to the prompt by the extractor:

IMPORTANT: Wrap your response as a JSON object with exactly two keys:
{"new_defeasibility_edges_classes": [...], "defeasibility_edges_individuals": [...]}
If there are no individuals to report, use an empty array for "defeasibility_edges_individuals".