Toward an Ontological Representation for Corporate Financial Documents and Their Components: An Investigation on Balance Sheets and Their Accounts Mauricio Almeida 1, Cristiano Moreira 2 1 Federal University of Minas Gerais 2 Federal University of Minas Gerais Abstract Some documents record information as a literature book, for example, the Odyssey by Homer. There are other documents capable of creating social entities, for example, a financial document, which one, enforced by law (also a document), can transform one person or corporation into a debtor or a creditor. In the present paper, we start to investigate the ontological aspects of financial documents, particularly the balance sheet, as part of an ongoing project for an accounting and corporative ontology. To reach our goals, we first contextualize financial documents and explain what a balance sheet is. Then, we advance a meaning for money and its value in the ontological sense, thus suggesting a place for it within Basic Formal Ontology (BFO) framework. Then, we also address issues concerning parts of documents to explain what the accounts in a balance sheet represent in reality. Finally, we provide a first attempt of an axiomatization in OWL for the issues discussed so far. We hope that the initiative can contribute so that studies in social ontology increasingly acquire a realistic character. Keywords1 Social ontology, financial documents, document acts, BFO 1. Introduction Any person or modern corporation needs to create, manipulate and keep several kinds of financial documents during their life span. In the case of corporations, such a need arises from the commitment with partners and shareholders in controlling business for for-profit purposes. Also, from obligations to pay taxes to government agencies like the Federal Revenue Service. Within the various financial documents of this kind that one can number, the balance sheet is a vital one. By using a balance sheet, accountants can answer questions about whether or not a business is thriving. In addition, it is a mandatory document for the majority of corporations in order to meet obligations regarding taxes. As a whole, the balance sheet has the primary purpose of revealing the corporation's financial situation, a sort of picture of it on a specific date. The balance sheet comprises main blocks: assets, liabilities, and stockholders' equity (Figure 1). The assets block (Figure 1, left side) represents the rights of a corporation, in different degrees of liquidity, the most liquid on the top. The liabilities block (Figure 1, right side) represents obligations according to demand degrees; in other words, what should be paid first comes on the top. SoLEE 2021: 2nd International Workshop on Ontology of Social, Legal and Economic Entities, held at JOWO 2021: Episode VII The Bolzano Summer of Knowledge, September 11-18, 2021, Bolzano, Italy EMAIL: mba@eci.ufmg.br (M. Almeida); cristianomoreirasilv@ufmg.br (C. Moreira); ORCID: 0000-0002-4711-270X (M. Almeida); 0000-0002-9350-8262 (C. Moreira). © 2021 Copyright for this paper by its authors. Use permitted under Creative Commons License Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0). CEUR Workshop Proceedings (CEUR-WS.org) CEUR ht tp: // ceur -ws. org Works hop I SSN1613- 0073 Pr oceedi ngs Figure 1: A template for a balance sheet [1]. Many of these accounts – regarding assets or liabilities – represent the monetary values of entities in the real world that compose a corporation. However, what does it mean to say that something has a monetary value? In this paper, we investigate an alternative answer for this question in approaching the balance sheet. Taking the balance sheet as a normative document, we focus on how its "parts" – the accounts themselves – can also represent entities other than those provided by the whole document. The remaining paper is organized as follows: Section 2 introduces basic notions about the meaning of money. Section 3 approaches documents and their parts, while Section 4 examines what kind of financial document a "balance sheet" is. Finally, Section 5 presents a preliminary axiomatization of the investigations developed in prior sections. 2. The Meaning of Money and its Value Among the social acts that compose reality, a relevant kind is the act of promising [2]. If I promise to pay you 20 dollars because you lent me this amount of money, I have an obligation (to pay), and you have a right (to receive). Situations like this are studied within the scope of a discipline called Social Ontology [3]. In this simple case, everything can be arranged verbally by "doing things with words" [4]. The importance of such a simple situation is made clear by the proposal of the so-called speech acts [4], [5], which can explain many everyday situations regarding rights and obligations. However, one can no longer rely only on memories, for example, to pay debts and receive rights, insofar as social relations expand every day. Within larger societies, those obligations extend beyond the local realm and become networks of duties, impossible to retrieve without the help of records. Smith [6], in his theory of document acts, calls these records documentary economic objects. One prominent entity like this is money, although it is a complex and hard to define entity. Ancient human societies had no resources like money. Negotiations were made in terms of exchange. For example, if John had a cow and Mary had apples, they could negotiate their items in an exchange process in which John provided some milk and received apples in return. One issue here is to identify how many units of milk correspond to how many apples. Another issue is that both John and Mary could desire other products and not always they would be able to find someone that possessed the desirable item while also interested in milk or apples. The solution was creating an exchange mechanism to trade products corresponding to a unique and widely accepted entity. Using a mechanism like this, John and Mary would have more options to obtain other desirable things, still offering milk and apples. The mechanism, nowadays evident to us, consists in the use of money for trade. In this introductory essay, we define money as something that someone receives in return for providing an item, which can also be used to acquire other different and desirable items. In basic terms, any specific item can be assessed – cheap or expensive – according to its usefulness within a community. An item like this acquires a value, in other words, a combination of debt discharging and purchasing power [7]. In addition, such value is associated with either material or immaterial objects and a measurement system. The notion of value evolved historically, producing different kinds [7]: • Use value is the value assigned to something desired, relevant for a community; • Payment value is something that a community ranks as a means of discharging debts of any species (not only monetary ones); • An exchange value is a value that supports receiving a numerical value in a meaningful way. Applying the exchange value to the current monetary system, one can delineate a debit and credit relation between a debtor and a creditor. The importance of understanding properties and relations like these resides in their contribution to the functioning of money. It is also important to stress that what supports money is not physical entities like in chemistry or biology. Ultimately, what support money and other social entities are people who have powers and functions assigned by society, both by verbal orders and through documents [6]. 3. Documents and Parts of Documents Money and its value are entities recorded when one writes their economic qualities that are useful for society. When focusing our attention on a record like this – for example, a title of a house and not on the house itself – we are entering the realm of the social ontology where money lives [6]. The record that governs all economic assets in a corporation is the balance sheet; a document used to control and pay taxes. As we have already mentioned (Section 1), this document has two main blocks representing the rights and obligations of a corporation. These main blocks, in turn, are divided into other small blocks; for example, the assets block is divided into the following sub-blocks: i) current assets, ii) investments, plant & equipment; iii) intangible assets; iv) other assets. In dividing each of these sub-blocks, again and again, one reaches the minor portion of information within a balance sheet: the account. For example, the first account of current assets block for rights is called cash and cash equivalents, the second is called short-term investments, and so forth (Figure 1). The same happens with the liabilities block, using different accounts for obligations, divided into small parts. The accounts contained in balance sheets record the value of different rights and obligations held by the corporation. One can think about accounts like "components" of the balance sheet: an account is a component of a balance sheet in the social world in the same way that a hand is part of the human body in the natural world. To adequately address wholes and their parts, one generally takes advantage of the theories of mereology [8]. However, to work well, mereology has to be applied to concrete and spatiotemporal objects, which allow the mereological sums found in extensional systems. This is not the case when one is dividing the content of documents like balance sheets. Another approach to understanding a document and its components is to consider them as kinds of human artifacts [9]. There is a multitude of objects considered artifacts: in terms of variety, they range, for example, from a bulb to a fork; in terms of granularity, they are found in many sorts, some small, some seen from space; in terms of complexity, they have distinct levels of complexity, ranging from domestic stoves to spaceships; in terms of time, some are built-in minutes and others, like old cathedrals that took hundreds of years. This variety transforms the project from achieving a general approach to artifacts into an ambitious undertaking, even more so for documents and their components [10]. Efforts to understand documents can be found in Information Artifact Ontology (IAO)2 and in Document Acts Ontology (D-Acts)3, the ontologies of the OBO Foundry4 specialized in documents. IAO has a class called document, a sibling of document part, both subclasses of information content entity. Examples of document part – for example, abstract, sections, authors list, and result, to mention a few – reveal that IAO privileges scientific papers as documents. These subclasses for document parts – although relevant for IAO in the scope of Biomedical research – represent only informal parts related to scientific content. There is no way to represent financial accounts and their values, as in the case of the balance sheet. D-acts ontology reuses IAO maintaining the same document "parts" and providing other classes that can be useful to address a balance sheet and its accounts. We approach the alternatives provided by IAO and D-acts when investigating the place of balance sheets in an ontology (Section 3). Finally, another option to be used is Granular Partitions Theory (GPT) based on partitions, which are defined as cognitive mechanisms employed by people to label, classify, and catalog other people's activities [11]. GPT encompasses several types of partitions, namely, objects that can be recognized as a partition unit. These objects can be bona-fide, that is, objects that exist independently of human demarcation activities, for example, the coast of the state of Rio de Janeiro on the Atlantic Ocean. It can also be fiat-objects, which exist precisely because of demarcation activities, for example, the border between the state of Rio de Janeiro and the state of Minas Gerais. GPT is a formal theory consolidated in two sub-theories: i) Theory A reflects the notion that units of a partition can recognize fiat objects through human cognition; and, Theory B explains how fiat-objects are created by projecting partitions onto reality. According to Theory A, the partitions created by people divide reality into units and sub-units (or cells and sub-cells). If two units of a partition overlap, then one is a subunit of another. A unit is defined by its position within the partition and by the relationships it maintains with other units. Units can further be nested within one another as constituent subunits. On the other hand, Theory B connects partitions to reality, for example, the relationship between the "partition fruit" and fruit in reality. In other words, Theory B has two directions: it projects partitions onto reality and locates real objects in the partition. Projection is a successful relationship if the object on which a unit is projected is also located in that unit. For example, the architectural design of a building is first produced by the architect's mind, and then, reality will match the design through the construction of the building. Figure 2: Blocks of a balance sheet seen as cells and subcells Thus, relationships of projection and localization and GTP as a theory are helpful resources for the present essay. They are applied here to explain the relationships between accounts within a balance sheet and between accounts and reality. Using Theory A, we consider the balance sheet as the maximum 2 Available on the internet on: . Access: June 07, 2021. 3 Available on the internet on: . Access: June 07, 2021. 4 Available on the internet on: . Access: June 07, 2021. unit, having "assets" and "liabilities" as sub-units (Figure 2). Besides, the sub-units just mentioned having by themselves balance sheet accounts as sub-units. For example, on the left side (Figure 3), the accounts named cash and cash equivalent and short term investments are sub-units of assets, in addition to be minimum units as well. On the right side (Figure 2), short-term loans payable and the current portion of long-term debt are sub-units of liabilities. Ther are examples of minimum units. Theory A provides a connection among accounts and blocks and accounts, which matters for future papers. Theory B is relevant for this essay since it can connect entities in the world to accounts in a balance sheet. Nevertheless, using theory B, one can say that any account – short-term investments and inventory – is a minimum unit. Items like this project onto the entity we called exchange value (see Section 2). While the short-term investments account projects partitions onto cash values, the inventory account projects partition onto the value of material assets in the real world, for example, machines and industrial plants. On the other hand, these very same values of cash and inventory are located in accounts, which are themselves partitions. Figure 3: accounts of a balance sheet projected onto reality and located in the document 4. The Place of Balance Sheet in Ontologies To find room for balance sheets within the BFO framework, we examine two ontologies mentioned above specialized in documents. We also employ another mechanism, the illocutionary logic, a theory that analyses English verbs and their effects within the scope of the speech acts theory [12]. Among the illocutionary verbs – namely, assertives, comissives, expressives, declaratives, and directives – we are interested in directives. We do not intend to mix linguistic and ontological resources in thinking about verbs as candidates to relationships. The inspiration comes from the translation between speech acts and document acts carried out by Smith [6]. As we have already mentioned, D-acts reuse IAO's kinds of documents. Thus, in both ontologies, one can find only one class able to subsume a balance sheet, namely, the IAO's directive information entity (DIE). A DIE is defined as "an information content entity whose concretizations indicate to their bearer how to realize them in a process."5 The definition for directives in Searle's view is not so different from the IAO's DIE, namely: "the primitive for the directive is 'direct,' a verb that means an attempt to get the hearer to do something as specified, with the alternative of refusal" [11]. Looking for a place for a balance sheet in IAO, we examined the definitions under IAO's DIE6: Action specification, Conditional specification, Objective specification, Plan specification. The verb used in IAO's definition of DIE is "to indicate": "An information content entity whose concretizations indicate to their bearer how to realize them in a process" (IAO, 2021). This is not one of the 5 Available on the internet on: . Access: June 07, 2021. 6 Available on the internet on: . Access: June 07, 2021. illocutionary verbs listed by Searle's account, which are ordered according to what is called point7, in direct, request, ask, urge, tell, require, demand, command, order, forbid, prohibit, enjoin, permit, suggest, insist, warn, advise, recommend, beg, supplicate, entreat, beseech, implore, pray [12]. Figure 4: A visual scheme of the ontology Informally comparing, the verb "indicate" in the IAO's definition might correspond to the verbs "advise" or "recommend" in Searle's list. We believe that IAO's subclasses of a DIE lack the deontic aspect required if one considers a balance sheet as a mandatory document capable of generating obligations in the form of taxes. Thus, D-acts ontology is required here since it contains a family of "roles" under the deontic role class, which might fulfill the need for rights and obligations. The impossibility of some distinctions between deontic concepts to clarify philosophical concepts is well-known [13]. The distinctions provided are made in a non-classic logic, which is not suitable for modern ontologies. Nevertheless, the theoretical insights obtained help define the relations between money, value, and financial documents that we have been conducting for practical purposes. So, we created another class under IAO's DIE – we called mandatory specification – to accommodate the balance sheet and other standard financial documents that one might need to represent. In general lines, the taxonomy can be as bellow. 7 Point means what the speaker intends to do when he performs an act, see Searle and Vanderveken [12]. 1. iao:information content entity is-a bfo:generically dependent continuant 2. iao:directive information entity is-a iao:information content entity 3. fin:mandatory specification is-a iao:directive information entity 4. fin:balance sheet is-a fin: mandatory specification A draft of the schema proposed is presented in Figure 4. More details are provided in the next section on the axiomatization (Section 5). From here, we adopt as a notation that classes are written in bold, properties in italics, and both follow the W3C's camel-case style. 5. Axiomatizing the Accounts of a Balance Sheet So far, we have provided an informal account of a representation for financial documents and their parts. In this section, we formulate the first axiomatization of such representations using OWL constructs in a notation based on Manchester Syntax plus natural language definitions. At this point, we combine the notions presented for money, value, and exchange value, and others (Section 2) to reach the formal account. For the sake of clarity, we rename the exchange value used before (Section 3 and 4) for exchange monetary value. To identify the origin of the reused entities, we use the correspondent namespaces and the fictitious "fin:" to entities created here. Finally, the majority of relations used comes from Relations Ontology (RO)8. Class – fin:Account Superclass iao:InformationContentEntity Definition An account is an information content entity that denotes an exchange monetary process and projects onto some entity in the real world. Equivalent class iao:InformationContentEntity fin:projectsOnto some bfo:Entity and iao:denotes some (fin:ExchangingMonetaryProcess) Example of use The short-term loans payable account (of a balance sheet) denotes a monetary exchange process of discharging debts that refer to some asset; the short-term investments account (of a balance sheet) denotes a monetary exchange process of receiving rights that refer to some asset Observation The "denotes" relationship is a sub-property of "is about" (in IAO), which has an information content entity as domain and no range. Class – fin:ExchangeMonetaryProcess Superclass iao:PlannedProcess Definition A monetary exchange process is the planned process that realizes the role of the debtor or creditor. Equivalent class iao:PlannedProcess and bfo:realizes some (iao:ClaimantRole or iao:DutyHolderRole) Example of use GM sold cars to US public administration in a process where the corporation is the creditor, and the public administration is the debtor. Class – fin:ReceivingARight Superclass fin:ExchangeMonetaryProcess Definition Receiving a right is a monetary exchange process that realizes the role of the creditor. Equivalent class fin:ExchangeMonetaryProcess and bfo:realizes some iao:ClaimantRole Example of use GM is receiving rights from the US administration in a monetary exchange process of selling cars as expected. 8 Available on the internet on: < http://www.obofoundry.org/ontology/ro.html>. Access: June 07, 2021. Class – fin:DischargingADebt Superclass fin: monetary exchange process Definition Discharging debt is a monetary exchange process that realizes the role of the debtor. Equivalent class fin:ExchangeMonetaryProcess and bfo:realizes some iao:DutyHolderRole Example of use Netflix is paying debts regarding federal taxes to the US administration in the process specified by Federal Revenue Service. Class – iao:ClaimantRole Superclass iao:DeonticRole Definition A deontic role that inheres in an agent A, that mutually depends on the existence of a duty holder role borne by agent B, and that specifies B is doing or abstaining from C or providing or surrendering C to A. Equivalent class fin:MandatorySpecification and bfo:concretizes some (fin:DocumentForPayment) Example of use Claimant roles can be discharged by one act of fulfilling a duty (e.g., when I pay back $5 owed to a friend), or they can remain intact and require ongoing adhering to a duty. Observations The fields "Definition" and "Example of use" came from IAO9. Class – iao:DutyHolderRole Superclass iao:DeonticRole Definition A deontic role that inheres in an agent A, that mutually depends on the existence of a claimant role borne by agent B, and that specifies A doing or abstaining from some action C, or providing or surrendering C to B. Equivalent class fin:MandatorySpecification and bfo:concretizes some (fin:DocumentForReceipting) Example of use - Observations The fields "Definition" and "Example of use" came from IAO10. Class – fin:DocumentForPayment Superclass fin:MandatorySpecification Definition Document for payment is a mandatory specification that has a currency, a value, and involves a duty holder role. Equivalent class fin:MandatorySpecification and fin:hasCurrency some iao:Symbol and fin:hasExchangeValue exactly “x” xsd:decimal Example of use GM has an invoice to receive values referred to cars sold to Google. Class – fin:DocumentForReceipting Superclass fin:MandatorySpecification Definition Document for payment is a mandatory specification with a currency, a value and involves claimant role. Equivalent class fin:MandatorySpecification and fin:hasCurrency some iao:Symbol and fin:hasExchangeValue exactly “x” xsd:decimal Example of use Google has an invoice to pay values referred to cars bought from GM. 9 Available on the internet on: . Access July 7 2021 10 Available on the internet on: . Access July 7 2021 Observations The "document for payment" and "document for receipting" are equivalent classes. We could call it "invoice": on the claimant's side, it works as a way of receiving and on the side of the duty holder as a way of paying. Class – fin:MandatorySpecification Superclass iao:DirectiveInformationEntity Definition A mandatory specification is a directive information entity that specifies what must happen when a monetary exchange process occurs. Equivalent class iao:DirectiveInformationEntity and denotes some fin:ExchangeMonetaryProcess Example of use John has an invoice in his hands specifying what he must pay because of the exchange monetary processes hold with eBay. Class – fin:BalanceSheet Superclass fin:MandatorySpecification Definition A balance sheet is a mandatory specification that has accounts and records the exchange processes that occurred in a corporation. Equivalent class fin:MandatorySpecification and fin:hasComponent fin:Accounts and fin:records some fin:ExchangeMonetaryProcess and obi:isSpecifiedInputOf iao:DeonticDocumentAct Example of use The balance sheet of Ford Motor Company specifies that the corporation must pay some value to shareholders. Observations The deontic document act of which the balance sheet is the input can be an exchange process regarding a tax, a tribute, or a fee. Datatype property – fin:hasCurrency Super property iao:hasMeasurementValue Equivalent - Domain fin:DocumentForPayment and fin:DocumentForReceipting Range xsd:string Characteristics - Example of use A "document for payment" or a "document for receipting" has a currency, for example, dollar, Deutsche mark, or franc. Observations There is no unit for monetary values in Units of Measurement Ontology (UO), the ontology responsible by units in the OBO scope. Datatype property – fin:hasExchangeValue Super property iao:hasMeasurementValue Equivalent - Domain fin:DocumentForPayment and fin:DocumentForReceipting Range xsd:decimal Characteristics - Example of use An asset of the corporation has an exchange value of 10,000 dollars; a receipt has an exchange value of 1,000 dollars regarding a health service. Object property – ro:hasComponent Super property owl:topObjectProperty Equivalent - Domain fin:BalanceSheet Range fin:Account Characteristics - Example of use A balance sheet has the "land account" and "equipment account" (Figure 1) as components. Observations We use this relationship from Relations Ontology (RO) since it has no range or domain. However, the natural language definition leads to believe that it is not suitable for the situation here: it is not possible to "disassemble" a balance sheet in accounts in the real world. See the original in RO11 Object property – fin:projectsOnto Super property owl:topObjectProperty Equivalent - Domain fin:Account Range bfo:Entity Characteristics inverse of isProjectionOf Example of use In an earthmoving company XYZ, the "equipment account" (Figure 1) projects onto a Caterpillar tractor in the real world. Object property – fin:isProjectionOf Super property owl:topObjectProperty Equivalent - Domain bfo:Entity Range fin:Account Characteristics inverse of fin:projectsOnto Example of use In any company, the cash and cash equivalents kept in the vault are projected onto the "cash account" (Figure 1). Observations In GPT, the relations are "projection onto" and "located in," but we do not use the second term because it exists in RO with another sense. 6. Final remarks In this article, we provided a preliminary effort to the financial documents for corporative domains. Indeed, this approach is not exactly a novelty since works exist on the theme – see, for example, an extensive reference by Sartor [14] or a reference using another ontological framework by Griffo, Almeida, and Guizzardi [15]. Within the BFO framework, the only approach that involves corporations is the Common Core Ontologies12, which seems to be an ongoing endeavor. We believe that more research is justified in the scope of financial documents and both documents and their components. This conviction relies on the fact that the investigated entities are pervasive, and parts of document alone, as accounts of a balance sheet, can represent material and social entities. It is worth mentioning that several different financial statements adopted by accounting can be used in the scheme proposed here. As we mentioned, the approach is preliminary, and much still needs to be done. For example, one might say that the requirement to be considered money presented before is necessary but not sufficient. Indeed, several things that are not money could fit the description proposed, such as diamonds, gold, and cryptocurrencies. For the sake of conclusion, we list limitations observed in writing the paper, which is not well-defined yet, left to be dealt with in future works: • In the scope of GPT, what are the relations between cell and sub-cell in a balance sheet? • Some relationships employed here are not part of RO (the reference for relationships in BFO), for example, those used to represent GPT and those with the namespace "fin:"; • Deontic distinctions proposed by [12] can not be captured in OWL but can point directions; • The "denotes" was used to say that financial documents represent a financial entity, but we could take advantage of more investigation; 11 Available on the internet on: . Access July 7 2021 12 Available on the internet on: . Access: June 07, 2021. • We believe that the hasComponent relationship should have a broader range and domain, but we limited it to our purposes here; • We should add an instantiation of the ontology to explain modeling decisions better; • Improvements in the literature review are required since there are many good references to be investigated, for example, theoretical [16] [17] or adopting other top-level ontologies [15] [18]. References [1] H. Averkamp, “Balance Sheet Example,” AccountingCoach.com. https://www.accountingcoach.com/balance-sheet-new/explanation/2 (accessed Jun. 29, 2021). [2] K. Mulligan, "Promisings and other social acts: Their constituents and structure," in Speech act and sachverhalt, Springer, 1987, pp. 29–90. [3] R. Tuomela, The Philosophy of Sociality: The Shared Point of View. Oxford University Press. Accessed: Jul. 07, 2021. [Online]. Available: https://oxford.universitypressscholarship.com/view/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195313390.001.00 01/acprof-9780195313390 [4] J. L. Austin, "How to do things with words Clarendon Press." Oxford, 1962. [5] J. R. Searle, P. G. Searle, S. Willis, and J. R. Searle, Speech acts: An essay in the philosophy of language, vol. 626. Cambridge university press, 1969. [6] B. Smith, "How to do things with documents," Rivista di Estetica, no. 50, pp. 179–198, 2012. [7] T. Lawson, The Nature of Social Reality: Issues in Social Ontology. Routledge, 2019. [8] P. Simons, "Parts: A study in ontology," 1987. [9] M. Franssen, P. Kroes, T. A. Reydon, and P. E. Vermaas, "Artifact kinds," Ontology and the Human-Made World, 2014. [10] R. Poli and P. Simons, Eds., Formal Ontology, vol. 53. Dordrecht: Springer Netherlands, 1996. doi: 10.1007/978-94-015-8733-4. [11] B. Smith and T. Bittner, "A Theory of Granular Partitions," Oct. 2001, DOI: 10.1201/9780203009543.ch7. [12] J. R. Searle, J. R. S. Searle, D. Vanderveken, and S. Willis, Foundations of illocutionary logic. CUP Archive, 1985. [13] S. O. Hansson and V. F. Hendricks, Introduction to Formal Philosophy. Springer, 2018. [14] G. Sartor, P. Casanovas, M. Biasiotti, and M. Fernández-Barrera, “Approaches to legal ontologies: Theories, domains, methodologies. law,” Governance and Technology series. Springer, 2011. [15] C. Griffo, J. P. A. Almeida, and G. Guizzardi, "A Systematic Mapping of the Literature on Legal Core Ontologies," 2015. [Online]. Available: http://ceur-ws.org/Vol-1442/paper_8.pdf [16] L. Jansen, “Artefact kinds need not be kinds of artefacts,” in Johanssonian Investigations, De Gruyter, 2013, pp. 317–337. [17] J. R. Searle, “Money: ontology and deception,” Cambridge Journal of Economics, vol. 41, no. 5, pp. 1453–1470, 2017. [18] G. Amaral, T. P. Sales, G. Guizzardi, and D. Porello, “A reference ontology of money and virtual currencies,” in IFIP Working Conference on The Practice of Enterprise Modeling, 2020, pp. 228–243. [Online]. Available: http://www.inf.ufes.br/~gguizzardi/A_Reference_Ontology_of_Money_and_Virtual_Currencies. pdf Funding information The first author is funded by Brazilian National Council for Scientific and Technological Development (Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico, CNPq), https://www.gov.br/cnpq/pt-br, Grant Number: Process 303050/2016-0