Reasoning About a Simulated Printer Case Investigation with Forensic Lucid

In this work we model the ACME (a fictitious company name) "printer case incident" and make its specification in Forensic Lucid, a Lucid- and intensional-logic-based programming language for cyberforensic analysis and event reconstruction specification. The printer case involves a dispute between two parties that was previously solved using the finite-state automata (FSA) approach, and is now re-done in a more usable way in Forensic Lucid. Our simulation is based on the said case modeling by encoding concepts like evidence and the related witness accounts as an evidential statement context in a Forensic Lucid program, which is an input to the transition function that models the possible deductions in the case. We then invoke the transition function (actually its reverse) with the evidential statement context to see if the evidence we encoded agrees with one's claims and then attempt to reconstruct the sequence of events that may explain the claim or disprove it.Comment: 18 pages, 3 figures, 7 listings, TOC, index; this article closely relates to arXiv:0906.0049 and arXiv:0904.3789 but to remain stand-alone repeats some of the background and introductory content; abstract presented at HSC'09 and the full updated paper at ICDF2C'11. This is an updated/edited version after ICDF2C proceedings with more references and correction

Intensional Cyberforensics

This work focuses on the application of intensional logic to cyberforensic analysis and its benefits and difficulties are compared with the finite-state-automata approach. This work extends the use of the intensional programming paradigm to the modeling and implementation of a cyberforensics investigation process with backtracing of event reconstruction, in which evidence is modeled by multidimensional hierarchical contexts, and proofs or disproofs of claims are undertaken in an eductive manner of evaluation. This approach is a practical, context-aware improvement over the finite state automata (FSA) approach we have seen in previous work. As a base implementation language model, we use in this approach a new dialect of the Lucid programming language, called Forensic Lucid, and we focus on defining hierarchical contexts based on intensional logic for the distributed evaluation of cyberforensic expressions. We also augment the work with credibility factors surrounding digital evidence and witness accounts, which have not been previously modeled. The Forensic Lucid programming language, used for this intensional cyberforensic analysis, formally presented through its syntax and operational semantics. In large part, the language is based on its predecessor and codecessor Lucid dialects, such as GIPL, Indexical Lucid, Lucx, Objective Lucid, and JOOIP bound by the underlying intensional programming paradigm.Comment: 412 pages, 94 figures, 18 tables, 19 algorithms and listings; PhD thesis; v2 corrects some typos and refs; also available on Spectrum at http://spectrum.library.concordia.ca/977460

Toward Formal Reasoning in Cyberforensic Case Investigation with Forensic Lucid

This work focuses on the application of the intensional logic to cyberforensic analysis and its benefits and difficulties are compared with the finite-state automata approach. This work extends the use of the scientific intensional programming paradigm onto modeling and implementation of a cyberforensics investigation process with the backtrace of event reconstruction, modeling the evidence as multidimensional hierarchical contexts, and proving or disproving the claims with it in the intensional manner of evaluation. This is a practical, context-aware improvement over the finite state automata (FSA) approach we have seen in the related works. As a base implementation language model we use in this approach is a new dialect of the Lucid programming language, that we call Forensic Lucid and we define hierarchical contexts based on the intensional logic for the evaluation of cyberforensic expressions. We also augment the work with the credibility factors surrounding digital evidence and witness accounts, which have not been previously modeled. The Forensic Lucid programming language proposed for this intensional cyberforensic analysis, includes the syntax and operational semantics. In large part, the language is based on its predecessor and codecessor Lucid dialects, such as GIPL, Indexical Lucid, Lucx, Objective Lucid, and JOOIP bound by the intensional (temporal) logic that is behind them. The distributed Java-based eduction (demand-driven) evaluation engine of the General Intensional Programming System (GIPSY) is the run-time system to cope with the scalability issues of the large evidential knowledge base. We then propose a near future work with the dataflow graph visualization and a toolset for compilation and execution of the Forensic Lucid programs. We show some examples by re-writing them in Forensic Lucid. We then postulate other investigations applications beyond the digital forensics domain

Towards Automatic Deduction and Event Reconstruction Using Forensic Lucid and Probabilities to Encode the IDS Evidence

We apply the theoretical framework and formal model of the observation tuple with the credibility weight for forensic analysis of the IDS data and the corresponding event reconstruction. Forensic Lucid - a forensic case modeling and specification language is used for the task. In the ongoing theoretical and practicalwork, Forensic Lucid is augmented with the Dempster-Shafer theory of mathematical evidence to include the credibility factors of the evidential IDS observations. Forensic Lucid's toolset is practically being implemented within the General Intensional Programming System (GIPSY) and the probabilisticmodel-checking tool PRISM as a backend to compile the Forensic Lucid model into the PRISM’s code and model-check it. This work may also help with further generalization of the testing methodology of IDSs

Intensional Cyberforensics

This work focuses on the application of intensional logic to cyberforensic analysis and its benefits and difficulties are compared with the finite-state-automata approach. This work extends the use of the intensional programming paradigm to the modeling and implementation of a cyberforensics investigation process with backtracing of event reconstruction, in which evidence is modeled by multidimensional hierarchical contexts, and proofs or disproofs of claims are undertaken in an eductive manner of evaluation. This approach is a practical, context-aware improvement over the finite state automata (FSA) approach we have seen in previous work. As a base implementation language model, we use in this approach a new dialect of the Lucid programming language, called Forensic Lucid, and we focus on defining hierarchical contexts based on intensional logic for the distributed evaluation of cyberforensic expressions. We also augment the work with credibility factors surrounding digital evidence and witness accounts, which have not been previously modeled. The Forensic Lucid programming language, used for this intensional cyberforensic analysis, formally presented through its syntax and operational semantics. In large part, the language is based on its predecessor and codecessor Lucid dialects, such as GIPL, Indexical Lucid, Lucx, Objective Lucid, MARFL, and JOOIP bound by the underlying intensional programming paradigm

Towards a Self-Forensics Property in the ASSL Toolset

This preliminary conceptual work discusses a notion of self-forensics as an autonomic property to augment the Autonomic System Specification Language (ASSL) framework of formal specification tools for autonomic systems. The core of the proposed methodology leverages existing designs, theoretical results, and implementing systems to enable rapid completion of and validation of the experiments and their the results initiated in this work. Specifically, we leverage the ASSL toolkit to add the self-forensics autonomic property (SFAP) to enable generation of the Java-based Object-Oriented Intensional Programming (JOOIP) language code laced with traces of Forensic Lucid to encode contextual forensic evidence and other expressions

MARFL: An Intensional Language for Demand-Driven Management of Machine Learning Backends

Artificial Intelligence (AI) is a rapidly evolving field that has transformed numerous industries and one of its key applications, Pattern Recognition, has been instrumental to the success of Large Language Models like ChatGPT, Bard, etc. However, scripting these advanced systems can be complex and challenging for some users. In this research, we propose a simpler scripting language to perform complex pattern recognition tasks. We introduce a new intensional programming language, MARFL, which is an extension of the Lucid family supported by General Intensional Programming System (GIPSY). Our solution focuses on providing syntax and semantics for MARFL, which enables scripting of Modular A* Recognition Framework (MARF)-based applications as context aware, where the notion of context represents fine-grained configuration details of a given MARF instance. We adapt the concept of context to provide an easily comprehensible language that can perform complex pattern recognition tasks on a demand-driven system such as GIPSY. Our solution is also generic enough to handle other machine learning backends such as PyTorch or TensorFlow in the future. We also provide a complete implementation of our approach, including a new compiler component and MARFL-specific execution engines within GIPSY. Our work extends the use of intensional programming to modeling and executing scripted pattern recognition tasks, which can be used for implementing different algorithmic specifications. Additionally, we utilize the demand-driven distributed computing capabilities of GIPSY to enable an efficient and scalable execution

The legal attitude toward mental abnormality: a comparative analysis of the historical and modern criminal law tests of responsibility, with respect to insanity, in England, Scotland and the United States of America

Probably the most difficult problem in the relationship of law and medicine is that of mental abnormality. It is not so much a question of the law or lawyers being dissatisfied with the aid of psychiatry, as psychiatry being discontent with the standard imposed upon its science. Criminal law has often been assailed by the public, or by experts in other disciplines. No branch of criminal law has been as much the target of obloquy, controversy and criticism, however, as the defence of insanity. Vagueness, confusion, lack of clarity, have been attributed to the legal definition; lack of accord with the conclusions of modern science has been alleged; and results at variance with the principles of justice (or at least such fundamentals of law as "actus non facit reum, nisi mens sit rea") have been charged. At the same time, it must be acknowledged by even the sternest critics that determination of standards of criminal responsibility are, and must be, a function of law as a learned profession, A need for evaluation and clear definition of the legal attitude toward mental abnormality continues to exist. The attempt in some small measure to meet that need has been the justification, reason and purpose of this work.The method, or scope of examination, adopted to achieve that end has been a comparative analysis of the historical and modern criminal law concepts regarding responsibility under mental deviation. The areas of investigation have been Scotland, England and the United States of America. The factors that determined these particular limitations of scope and area have been set out below.It has already been noted that definition was part of the need to be answered by the present investigation. Customarily, definitions have been treated in a few pages of introductory analysis, or, less often in a chapter of conclusions. Neither approach was possible here, since the same word had different meanings at different times, and the legal attitude was in a process of historical evolution. And even if a historical examination were to be omitted altogether, no simple solution of definition could be achieved. The word "insanity" itself offered an example. It was found by some writers that "insanity is a purely medical term" , but others were equally positive that "insanity does not connote any definite medical entity but is solely a legal and sociological concept" . There were those who regarded it as simply "a legal designation" , while still others maintained, "with insanity as such the law has no concern" , There was even the ambivalent outlook that, "Insanity, from a medical point of view, is one things insanity from the point of view of the criminal law is a different thing" . These characterizations did not purport to define the term, but rather to assess upon whom the responsibility for definition should fall, law or medicine.The result was that in the eyes of medico-legal experts, as Sir Sydney Smith and Dr. F. S. Fiddes pointed out, "No definition of insanity is laid down in the law" . The answer was not to be found in a sentence or even a paragraph of definition. It had to be carefully reconstructed for each jurisdiction and period; and such reconstruction required not only an analysis of authorities then current, but some idea of historical perspective as well. The entire thesis was thus, in an important sense, a definition or series of definitions.The investigation restriced itself to criminal law with private or civil law entering only collaterally. It was first thought that it might be possible to examine both. It quickly became obvious, however, that such could not be accomplished without sacrificing some part of the criminal law development. Organic cohesion dictated the alternative choice. Equally important was the fact that the criminal law aspect presented problems of greater complexity and magnitude. Einally, the high incidence of mental abnormality in criminal law,as contrasted with private law, gave the former unquestionable priority. Sir David Henderson and Dr. R.D. Gillespie had indicated that it was "conservative to state that 10 to 15 per cent of criminals suffer from some degree of mental disorder or mental defect, but rarely is this taken into consideration". The material for examination forced its own choice of criminal law over private law.Psychiatrist, criminologist, sociologist, penologist and a host of others have their own particular way of regarding the legal attitude toward mental abnormality. Even the ultimate subject of all this concern may have some viewpoint. Certainly the public exercises a vocal, if not always discerning, review; usually in condemnation of psychiatry when that science is, or seems to be, in conflict, and sometimes in condemnation of law when the judicial process yields a result at variance with the lay diagnosis and lay standard of mental abnormality. The contributions of some of these groups, particularly the psychiatrists, afford lawyers insight that the framers of the present rules of law did not have. Nonetheless, determination of what the law should be must inevitably involve consideration of what it is, what operated to make it that way, and what factors within law act as limitations upon change. The legal attitude toward mental abnormality must, therefore, fundamentally be considered a problem for legal analysis rather than scientific or social analysis