arXiv subjects

Mehmet Nafiz Aydin

Publications and source records attributed to Mehmet Nafiz Aydin.

2 recordsLinked to original sources

arXiv2026

Semantic Alignment Between Normative Theories of Ethics and the European Union Artificial Intelligence Act: A Transformer-Based Semantic Textual Similarity Analysis

The European Union Artificial Intelligence (EU AI) Act, which explicitly references fundamental rights and ethical principles, is a comprehensive regulatory framework for governing Artificial Intelligence (AI) systems. This study examines the Act's possible moral grounding by analyzing the semantic alignment between three normative theories of ethics--virtue ethics, deontological ethics, and consequentialism--and the Act's regulatory language. Drawing on the philosophy of law, in which both antipositivist and some positivist accounts recognize an overlap between moral and legal norms, the relationship between the theories and the Act is treated as one of association. The encyclopedic descriptions of the theories serve as source documents, and the Act serves as the target document, analyzed in two target sections: its preamble and its statutory provisions. Semantic Textual Similarity (STS) is used as an indicator of association. The source documents are manually preprocessed to reduce semantic overlap among them. In all documents, each sentence is encoded by eight Transformer-based sentence encoders (SBERT, ALBERT, DistilBERT, RoBERTa, TinyBERT, MiniLM, E5-base, and GTE-base), and embeddings are aggregated to the document level by centroid cosine similarity, hierarchical sentence-block aggregation (HSBA; blocks of 3, 5, and 10 sentences), and mean pairwise sentence similarity. Because raw similarity scales differ across encoders, encoders are combined by voting on rankings. Deontological ethics shows the highest association with both target sections in all eight encoders and under every aggregation method, and the preamble is more closely associated with every source document than the provisions are. Consequentialism ranks second at the document level, but its position relative to virtue ethics depends on the granularity of aggregation.

cs.CY↗

arXiv2026

High-Level Text Preprocessing for Semantic Similarity Analysis of Discursive Texts: A Framework and Empirical Demonstration

Semantic Textual Similarity (STS) methods assume that a document's lexical content faithfully represents what it asserts. This assumption fails for discursive documents that discuss, compare, critique, and contextualize other positions in the process of articulating their own. The result is semantic diffusion: similarity scores between documents are inflated by vocabulary acquired through discursive engagement rather than substantive alignment. Standard Natural Language Processing (NLP) preprocessing (tokenization, stopword removal, stemming, lemmatization) cannot address this problem because it operates at the lexical level, treating all content identically regardless of its discursive function. This paper introduces high-level text preprocessing: a systematic, rule-based intervention applied before the standard preprocessing pipeline to isolate each document's actual claim from its discursive structure. We propose 12 rules, each with an explicit rationale, and demonstrate their effect on an encyclopedic philosophical corpus: three entries from the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (virtue ethics, deontological ethics, and consequentialism). A three-phase experiment using eight Transformer-based STS models shows that preprocessing reduces centroid cosine similarity scores across all three theory pairs, with 23 of 24 model-pair comparisons showing the expected decrease and cross-model agreement ranging from 7-1 to 8-0. We introduce the semantic diffusion index (SDI), a per-document metric for assessing the semantic reorientation between a document's raw and high-level preprocessed representations. Although the framework is demonstrated using philosophical texts, it potentially addresses a domain-agnostic problem applicable to legal texts, policy documents, academic articles, and any genre in which a discursive approach introduces vocabulary from positions the document does not endorse.

cs.CL↗