ProEthica/OntServe Ontology Corpus: NSPE Board of Ethical Review Case Ontologies with Core, Domain, and Professional-Code Ontologies

Archival deposit for An Ontology-Grounded Representation for Defeasible Professional Ethics Analysis (KI 2026, 49th German Conference on AI, Bremen; LNAI, DOI 10.1007/978-3-032-32335-4_25). The corpus is served live at ontserve.ontorealm.net and drives ProEthica (proethica.org), a deployed case-analysis system. Contents. proethica-ontology-corpus-2026-08.zip: 119 case ontologies (one OWL ontology per NSPE Board of Ethical Review case; 516,584 triples) and 11 supporting ontologies (proethica-core, proethica-intermediate, proethica-intermediate-extended, engineering-ethics, proethica-cases, proethica-provenance, proethica-shapes, and the NSPE, ASCE, ASME, and IEEE codes of ethics), with a manifest of per-file triple counts and SHA-256 hashes. ontserve-src-d639257.zip and proethica-src-92e38840.zip: source snapshots of the ontology server and of the extraction pipeline at the deposited state (both repositories are public at github.com/cr625/OntServe and github.com/cr625/proethica). Corpus state. Exported 2026-08-03 from the production database. Defeasibility structure: 165 asserted edges (competesWith 96, prevailsOver 35, defeasibleUnder 34) across 26 of 119 cases, of which 21 carry a resolved prevailsOver edge; 37 further cases carry specification or dissolution resolution-pattern markers. Every edge carries a prov:Derivation record with its source field and quoted anchor. The full corpus is Pellet-consistent (119 of 119 case ontologies merged with the core; verified 2026-08-03, 0 disjointness violations). Relation to the published chapter. The published chapter describes the earlier extraction run of this corpus (1,872 competesWith / 788 prevailsOver / 2,177 defeasibleUnder across 118 of 119 cases). The corpus was subsequently re-extracted under tightened defeasibility semantics in which the edge trio records genuine obligation defeat: resolutions by specification or dissolution no longer emit competition edges and are recorded as resolution-pattern markers instead. The counts in this deposit describe the current corpus; the difference is a precision result, not data loss. Source case texts. The NSPE Board of Ethical Review opinions are publicly available through the NSPE Ethics Resources website and are not redistributed here.