The concept of code-driven law, i.e. of "legal norms or policies that have been articulated in computer code" by some actors with normative competence, has been convincingly elaborated by Hildebrandt [1]. Its introduction has the merit to refocus the discussion on the role of artificial devices in the legal activity, rather than on ontological positions expressed under code-is-law or law-is-code banners, which are present, with various interpretations and changing fortunes, in the literature and practice of contemporary regulatory technologies, and technology-oriented legal scholarship (see the overview in [2]). According to Hildebrandt, code-driven law should be distinguished from data-driven law, i.e. computational decision-making derived from statistical or other inductive methods, and from text-driven law, i.e. the legal activity performed by humans by means of sources of norms such as statutory and case law. A crucial difference between these forms of "law" is that the linguistic artifacts used in text-driven law are characterized by open-textured concepts (e.g.

AI algorithms used in the public sector, e.g., for allocating social benefits or predicting fraud, often involve multiple public and private stakeholders at various phases of the algorithm's life-cycle. Communication issues between these diverse stakeholders can lead to misinterpretation and misuse of algorithms. We investigate the communication processes for AI fairness-related decisions by conducting interviews with practitioners working on algorithmic systems in the public sector. By applying qualitative coding analysis, we identify key elements of communication processes that underlie fairness-related human decisions. We analyze the division of roles, tasks, skills, and challenges perceived by stakeholders. We formalize the underlying communication issues within a conceptual framework that i. represents the communication patterns ii. outlines missing elements, such as actors who miss skills for their tasks. The framework is used for describing and analyzing key organizational issues for fairness-related decisions. Three general patterns emerge from the analysis: 1. Policy-makers, civil servants, and domain experts are less involved compared to developers throughout a system's life-cycle. This leads to developers taking on extra roles such as advisor, while they potentially miss the required skills and guidance from domain experts. 2. End-users and policy-makers often lack the technical skills to interpret a system's limitations, and rely on developer roles for making decisions concerning fairness issues. 3. Citizens are structurally absent throughout a system's life-cycle, which may lead to decisions that do not include relevant considerations from impacted stakeholders.

Unexpectedness is a central concept in Simplicity Theory, a theory of cognition relating various inferential processes to the computation of Kolmogorov complexities, rather than probabilities. Its predictive power has been confirmed by several experiments with human subjects, yet its theoretical basis remains largely unexplored: why does it work? This paper lays the groundwork for three theoretical conjectures. First, unexpectedness can be seen as a generalization of Bayes' rule. Second, the frequentist core of unexpectedness can be connected to the function of tracking ergodic properties of the world. Third, unexpectedness can be seen as constituent of various measures of divergence between the entropy of the world (environment) and the variety of the observer (system). The resulting framework hints to research directions that go beyond the division between probabilistic and logical approaches, potentially bringing new insights into the extraction of causal relations, and into the role of descriptive mechanisms in learning.

The paper presents the main characteristics and a preliminary implementation of a novel computational framework named CompLog. Inspired by probabilistic programming systems like ProbLog, CompLog builds upon the inferential mechanisms proposed by Simplicity Theory, relying on the computation of two Kolmogorov complexities (here implemented as min-path searches via ASP programs) rather than probabilistic inference. The proposed system enables users to compute ex-post and ex-ante measures of unexpectedness of a certain situation, mapping respectively to posterior and prior subjective probabilities. The computation is based on the specification of world and mental models by means of causal and descriptive relations between predicates weighted by complexity. The paper illustrates a few examples of application: generating relevant descriptions, and providing alternative approaches to disjunction and to negation.

Several solutions for specifying normative artefacts (norms, contracts, policies) in a computational processable way have been presented in the literature. Legal core ontologies have been proposed to systematize concepts and relationships relevant to normative reasoning. However, no solution amongst those has achieved general acceptance, and no common ground (representational, computational) has been identified enabling us to easily compare them. Yet, all these efforts share the same motivation of representing normative directives, therefore it is plausible that there may be a representational model encompassing all of them. This presentation will introduce DPCL, a domain-specific language (DSL) for specifying higher-level policies (including norms, contracts, etc.), centred on Hohfeld's framework of fundamental legal concepts. DPCL has to be seen primarily as a "template", i.e. as an informational model for architectural reference, rather than a fully-fledged formal language; it aims to make explicit the general requirements that should be expected in a language for norm specification. In this respect, it goes rather in the direction of legal core ontologies, but differently from those, our proposal aims to keep the character of a DSL, rather than a set of axioms in a logical framework: it is meant to be cross-compiled to underlying languages/tools adequate to the type of target application. We provide here an overview of some of the language features.

Artificial Intelligence (AI) started out with an ambition to reproduce the human mind, but, as the sheer scale of that ambition became manifest, it quickly retreated into either studying specialized intelligent behaviours, or proposing over-arching architectural concepts for interfacing specialized intelligent behaviour components, conceived of as agents in a kind of organization. This agent-based modeling paradigm, in turn, proves to have interesting applications in understanding, simulating, and predicting the behaviour of social and legal structures on an aggregate level. For these reasons, this chapter examines a number of relevant cross-cutting concerns, conceptualizations, modeling problems and design challenges in large-scale distributed Artificial Intelligence, as well as in institutional systems, and identifies potential grounds for novel advances.

Modelling, specifying and reasoning about complex systems requires to process in an integrated fashion declarative and procedural aspects of the target domain. The paper reports on an experiment conducted with a propositional version of Logic Programming Petri Nets (LPPNs), a notation extending Petri Nets with logic programming constructs. Two semantics are presented: a denotational semantics that fully maps the notation to ASP via Event Calculus; and a hybrid operational semantics that process separately the causal mechanisms via Petri nets, and the constraints associated to objects and to events via Answer Set Programming (ASP). These two alternative specifications enable an empirical evaluation in terms of computational efficiency. Experimental results show that the hybrid semantics is more efficient w.r.t.

Principles of cognitive economy would require that concepts about objects, properties and relations should be introduced only if they simplify the conceptualisation of a domain. Unexpectedly, classic logic conditionals, specifying structures holding within elements of a formal conceptualisation, do not always satisfy this crucial principle. The paper argues that this requirement is captured by \emph{supervenience}, hereby further identified as a property necessary for compression. The resulting theory suggests an alternative explanation of the empirical experiences observable in Wason's selection tasks, associating human performance with conditionals on the ability of dealing with compression, rather than with logic necessity.

For being potentially destructive, in practice incomprehensible and for the most unintelligible, contemporary technology is setting high challenges on our society. New conception methods are urgently required. Reorganizing ideas and discussions presented in AI and related fields, this position paper aims to highlight the importance of normware--that is, computational artifacts specifying norms--with respect to these issues, and argues for its irreducibility with respect to software by making explicit its neglected ecological dimension in the decision-making cycle.