research-article

Reliability of electronic evidence: an application for model-based auditing

Authors:

Rob Christiaanse,

Paul Griffioen,

Joris HulstijnAuthors Info & Claims

ICAIL '15: Proceedings of the 15th International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Law

Pages 43 - 52

https://doi.org/10.1145/2746090.2746098

Published: 08 June 2015 Publication History

Abstract

Much legal evidence is being generated by and stored in information systems. In this paper we look at evidence from an auditing point of view. Auditors rely on evidence of the party being audited, who may have a legitimate or illegitimate interest to manipulate it. To assess the quality of audit evidence, we argue for an approach called model-based auditing. It is based on a mathematically precise model of the expected relationships between the flow of money and the flow of goods or services. Such equations are used for cross verification. If the equations do not hold, either something is wrong (violation) or some underlying assumption is false (exception). To show the usefulness of the approach, we look in particular at a case study of a legal dispute about automated contract monitoring. A precise revenue model is instrumental in demonstrating that the data set does indeed constitute appropriate evidence to settle the case.

References

[1]

American Accounting Association. Report of the committee on basic auditing concepts. The Accounting Review, XLVII: 14--74, 1972.

[2]

T. J. Anderson, D. A. Schum, and W. L. Twining. Analysis of Evidence. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2005.

[3]

F. Bex, P. van Koppen, H. Prakken, and B. Verheij. A hybrid formal theory of arguments, stories and criminal evidence. Artificial Intelligence and Law, 18: 123--152, 2010.

Digital Library

[4]

F. Bex, H. Prakken, C. Reed, and D. Walton. Towards a formal account of reasoning about evidence: argumentation schemes and generalisations. Artificial Intelligence and Law, 11: 125--165, 2003.

Digital Library

[5]

J. Black. Regulatory conversations. Journal of Law and Society, 29(1): 163--196, 2002.

[6]

J. Blokdijk. Tests of control in the audit risk model: effective? efficient? International Journal of Auditing, 8: 185--194, 2004.

[7]

J. Blokdijk, F. Drieënhuizen, and P. Wallage. Reflections on auditing theory, a contribution from the Netherlands. Limperg Instituut, Amsterdam, 1995.

[8]

B. Burgemeestre, J. Hulstijn, and Y.-H. Tan. Value-based argumentation for justifying compliance. Artificial Intelligence and Law, 19(2-3): 149--186, 2011.

Digital Library

[9]

B. Burgemeestre, J. Hulstijn, and Y.-H. Tan. Value-based argumentation for designing and auditing security measures. Ethics and Information Technology, 15: 153--171, 2013.

Digital Library

[10]

R. Christiaanse and J. Hulstijn. Control automation to reduce costs of control. International Journal of Information System Modeling and Design, 4(4): 27--47, 2013.

Digital Library

[11]

COSO. Internal control - integrated framework. Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission, 1992.

[12]

J. L. Dietz. The deep structure of business processes. Communications of the ACM, 49(5): 59--64, 2006.

Digital Library

[13]

P. Elsas. Computational auditing. PhD thesis, Vrije Universiteit, Amsterdam, 1996.

[14]

J. Gordijn and J. M. Akkermans. Value-based requirements engineering: Exploring innovative e-commerce ideas. Requirements Engineering, 8(2): 114--134, 2003.

Digital Library

[15]

G. Governatori and S. Sadiq. The journey to business process compliance, pages 426--445. IGI Global, 2009.

[16]

P. Griffioen. Type inference for linear algebra with units of measurement. Technical report, Centrum Wiskunde en Informatica (CWI), 2013.

[17]

P. Griffioen, P. Elsas, and R. van de Riet. Analyzing Enterprises: the value-cycle approach, pages 685--697. Springer Verlag, Berlin, 2000.

Digital Library

[18]

IFAC. ISA 530: Audit sampling. International Auditing and Assurance Standards Board (IAASB), International Federation of Accountants (IFAC), 2008.

[19]

IFAC. ISA 500: Audit evidence. International Auditing and Assurance Standards Board (IAASB), International Federation of Accountants (IFAC), 2012.

[20]

Y. Ijiri. The foundations of accounting measurement: a mathematical, economic, and behavioral inquiry. Prentice-Hall, 1967.

[21]

B. Klievink, E. van Stijn, D. Hesketh, H. Aldewereld, S. Overbeek, F. Heijmann, and Y.-H. Tan. Enhancing visibility in international supply chains: The data pipeline concept. International Journal of Electronic Government Research, 8(4): 14--33, 2012.

[22]

W. Knechel, S. Salterio, and B. Ballou. Auditing: Assurance and Risk. Thomson Learning, Cincinatti, 3rd edition, 2007.

[23]

R. B. Korobkin. Behavioral analysis and legal form: Rules vs. principles revisited. Oregon Law Review, 79(1): 23--60, 2000.

[24]

L. Lindahl and J. Odelstad. Intermediaries and intervenients in normative systems. Journal of Applied Logic, 6(2): 229--250, 2008.

[25]

L. A. Maines and J. M. Wahlen. The nature of accounting information reliability: Inferences from archival and experimental research. Accounting Horizons, 20(4): 399--425, 2006.

[26]

J.-J. Meyer and R. Wieringa. Deontic Logic in Computer Science: Normative System Specification. John Wiley and Sons, 1993.

Digital Library

[27]

J. Pearl. Fusion, propagation, and structuring in belief networks. Artificial Intelligence, 29(3): 241--288, 1986.

Digital Library

[28]

M. Power. The risk management of nothing. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 34: 849--855, 2009.

[29]

H. Prakken, D. Ionita, and R. Wieringa. Risk assessment as an argumentation game. In J. Leite, editor, 14th International Workshop on Computational Logic in Multi-Agent Systems (CLIMA XIV), pages 357--373. Springer Verlag, 2013.

[30]

R. Reiter. A theory of diagnosis from first principles. Artificial Intelligence, 32(1): 57--95, 1987.

Digital Library

[31]

A. Rozinat and W. M. P. van der Aalst. Conformance checking of processes based on monitoring real behavior. Information Systems, 33(1): 64--95, 2008.

Digital Library

[32]

J. R. Searle. The Construction of Social Reality. The Free Press, 1995.

[33]

R. W. Starreveld, B. de Mare, and E. Joels. Bestuurlijke Informatieverzorging (in Dutch), volume 1. Samsom, Alphen aan den Rijn, 1994.

[34]

W. Wagenaar, P. v. Koppen, and H. N. Y. Crombag. Anchored Narratives: The Psychology of Criminal Evidence. St. Martin's Press, New York, 1993.

[35]

D. N. Walton. Argument Schemes for Presumptive Reasoning. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah, 1996.

[36]

D. N. Walton and E. C. Krabbe. Commitment in Dialogue: Basic Concepts of Interpersonal Reasoning. State University of New York Press, 1995.

[37]

H. Weigand and P. Elsas. Model-based auditing using REA. International Journal of Accounting Information Systems, 13: 287--310, 2012.

[38]

P. Westerman. Who is regulating the self? Self-regulation as outsourced rule-making, In: M. Hertogh and P. Westerman, editors, Self-Regulation and the Future of the Regulatory State, pages 23--36, University of Groningen, 2009.

[39]

J. Wigmore. The Principles of Judicial Proof or the Process of Proof as Given by Logic, Psychology, and General Experience and Illustrated in Judicial Trials. Little, Brown and Company, Boston, 2nd edition, 1931.

Cited By

Christiaanse R(2023)Human Centricity as Leading Design Principle for Smart City Innovations: Implications for the Governance, Control, Reporting and Performance Evaluation of Well-being of Civil Society ActorsDigital Government: Research and Practice10.1145/35976164:3(1-24)Online publication date: 19-May-2023
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3597616
Christiaanse R(2019)Mobility as a ServiceCompanion Proceedings of The 2019 World Wide Web Conference10.1145/3308560.3317050(83-92)Online publication date: 13-May-2019
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3308560.3317050
Wang YHulstijn JTan YJanssen MChun SWeerakkody V(2018)Regulatory supervision with computational audit in international supply chainsProceedings of the 19th Annual International Conference on Digital Government Research: Governance in the Data Age10.1145/3209281.3209319(1-10)Online publication date: 30-May-2018
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3209281.3209319
Show More Cited By

Index Terms

Reliability of electronic evidence: an application for model-based auditing

Recommendations

Research on the Rules of Electronic Evidence in Chinese Criminal Proceedings

As a new object in judicial practice, electronic evidence is of great practical significance. To locate the probative force of electronic evidence, which can be used to prove the facts of the crime, judging the electronic evidence validity, and how to ...
Dealing with the problem of collection and analysis of electronic evidence

Today, the internet is being used in everybody's daily life thanks to rapid development of science and technology including information and communications technology. The cyberspace has also been used as a den for cybercriminals, whose recent number ...
Computer Forensics And Electronic Evidence - Failure of Competent Computer Forensic Analysis And Other Computer-Related Acts As Ineffective Assistance Of Counsel
SADFE '11: Proceedings of the 2011 Sixth IEEE International Workshop on Systematic Approaches to Digital Forensic Engineering

American defendants have the right to the effective assistance of counsel in criminal prosecutions pursuant to the Sixth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. We examine how the effective assistance of counsel addresses competence and expertise with ...

Comments

Please enable JavaScript to view thecomments powered by Disqus.

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

cover image ACM Other conferences

ICAIL '15: Proceedings of the 15th International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Law

June 2015

246 pages

ISBN:9781450335225

DOI:10.1145/2746090

Conference Chair:
Ted Sichelman
University of San Diego School of Law, San Diego, CA
,
Program Chair:
Katie Atkinson
University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK

Copyright © 2015 ACM.

Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than the author(s) must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected].

Sponsors

Center for IP Law & Markets: Center for Intellectual Property Law & Markets, University of San Diego School of Law
TrademarkNow: TrademarkNow
The International Association for Artificial Intelligence and Law
Davis Polk: Davis Polk & Wardwell LLP
Legal Robot: Legal Robot
Thomson Reuters: Thomson Reuters Corporation

In-Cooperation

SIGAI: ACM Special Interest Group on Artificial Intelligence

Publisher

Association for Computing Machinery

New York, NY, United States

Publication History

Published: 08 June 2015

Permissions

Request permissions for this article.

Request Permissions

Check for updates

Author Tags

Qualifiers

Research-article

Conference

ICAIL '15

Sponsor:

Center for IP Law & Markets
TrademarkNow
Davis Polk
Legal Robot
Thomson Reuters

ICAIL '15: 15th International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Law

June 8 - 12, 2015

California, San Diego

Acceptance Rates

ICAIL '15 Paper Acceptance Rate 30 of 58 submissions, 52%;

Overall Acceptance Rate 69 of 169 submissions, 41%

Contributors

Other Metrics

View Article Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

6
Total Citations
View Citations
250
Total Downloads

Downloads (Last 12 months)12
Downloads (Last 6 weeks)3

Reflects downloads up to 10 Nov 2024

Other Metrics

View Author Metrics

Citations

Cited By

Christiaanse R(2023)Human Centricity as Leading Design Principle for Smart City Innovations: Implications for the Governance, Control, Reporting and Performance Evaluation of Well-being of Civil Society ActorsDigital Government: Research and Practice10.1145/35976164:3(1-24)Online publication date: 19-May-2023
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3597616
Christiaanse R(2019)Mobility as a ServiceCompanion Proceedings of The 2019 World Wide Web Conference10.1145/3308560.3317050(83-92)Online publication date: 13-May-2019
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3308560.3317050
Wang YHulstijn JTan YJanssen MChun SWeerakkody V(2018)Regulatory supervision with computational audit in international supply chainsProceedings of the 19th Annual International Conference on Digital Government Research: Governance in the Data Age10.1145/3209281.3209319(1-10)Online publication date: 30-May-2018
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3209281.3209319
Ezzamouri NHulstijn JJanssen MChun SWeerakkody V(2018)Continuous monitoring and auditing in municipalitiesProceedings of the 19th Annual International Conference on Digital Government Research: Governance in the Data Age10.1145/3209281.3209301(1-10)Online publication date: 30-May-2018
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3209281.3209301
Griffioen PChristiaanse RHulstijn J(2018)Controlling Production Variances in Complex Business ProcessesSoftware Engineering and Formal Methods10.1007/978-3-319-74781-1_6(72-85)Online publication date: 2-Feb-2018
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-74781-1_6
Ruano SHulstijn J(2017)Governance and Collaboration in Regulatory SupervisionInternational Journal of Electronic Government Research10.4018/IJEGR.201710010313:4(34-52)Online publication date: 1-Oct-2017
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.4018/IJEGR.2017100103

View Options

Get Access

Login options

Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

Full Access

Get this Publication

View options

PDF

View or Download as a PDF file.

eReader

View online with eReader.

Media

Figures

Other

Tables

View Table of Contents