The European legal approach to Open Science and research data

This dissertation proposes an analysis of the governance of the European scientific research, focusing on the emergence of the Open Science paradigm: a new way of doing science, oriented towards the openness of every phase of the scientific research process, able to take full advantage of the digital ICTs. The emergence of this paradigm is relatively recent, but in the last years it has become increasingly relevant. The European institutions expressed a clear intention to embrace the Open Science paradigm (eg., think about the European Open Science Cloud, EOSC; or the establishment of the Horizon Europe programme). This dissertation provides a conceptual framework for the multiple interventions of the European institutions in the field of Open Science, addressing the major legal challenges of its implementation. The study investigates the notion of Open Science, proposing a definition that takes into account all its dimensions related to the human and fundamental rights framework in which Open Science is grounded. The inquiry addresses the legal challenges related to the openness of research data, in light of the European Open Data framework and the impact of the GDPR on the context of Open Science. The last part of the study is devoted to the infrastructural dimension of the Open Science paradigm, exploring the e-infrastructures. The focus is on a specific type of computational infrastructure: the High Performance Computing (HPC) facility. The adoption of HPC for research is analysed from the European perspective, investigating the EuroHPC project, and the local perspective, proposing the case study of the HPC facility of the University of Luxembourg, the ULHPC. This dissertation intends to underline the relevance of the legal coordination approach, between all actors and phases of the process, in order to develop and implement the Open Science paradigm, adhering to the underlying human and fundamental rights

AI approaches to the complexity of legal systems : models and ethical challenges for legal systems, legal language and legal ontologies, argumentation and software agents

International Workshop AICOL-III, Held as Part of the 25th IVR Congress, Frankfurt am Main, Germany, August 15-16, 2011. Revised Selected PapersThe inspiring idea of this workshop series, Artificial Intelligence Approaches to the Complexity of Legal Systems (AICOL), is to develop models of legal knowledge concerning organization, structure, and content in order to promote mutual understanding and communication between different systems and cultures. Complexity and complex systems describe recent developments in AI and law, legal theory, argumentation, the Semantic Web, and multi-agent systems. Multisystem and multilingual ontologies provide an important opportunity to integrate different trends of research in AI and law, including comparative legal studies. Complexity theory, graph theory, game theory, and any other contributions from the mathematical disciplines can help both to formalize the dynamics of legal systems and to capture relations among norms. Cognitive science can help the modeling of legal ontology by taking into account not only the formal features of law but also social behaviour, psychology, and cultural factors. This book is thus meant to support scholars in different areas of science in sharing knowledge and methodological approaches. This volume collects the contributions to the workshop's third edition, which took place as part of the 25th IVR congress of Philosophy of Law and Social Philosophy, held in Frankfurt, Germany, in August 2011. This volume comprises six main parts devoted to the each of the six topics addressed in the workshop, namely: models for the legal system ethics and the regulation of ICT, legal knowledge management, legal information for open access, software agent systems in the legal domain, as well as legal language and legal ontology.-- Compliance with normative system (G. Sartor); -- Coherence-Based Account of the Doctrine of Consistent Interpretation (M. Araszkiewicz); -- Three Roads to Complexity, AI and Law of Robotics: On Crimes, Contracts and Torts (U. Pagallo); -- The Legal Challenges of Networked Robotics: From the Safety Intelligence Perspective (Y.-H. Weng, S. T. H. Zhao); -- Cloud Computting: New Research Perspectives for Computers and Law (D. Bourcier, P. De Filippi) -- Balancing Rights and Values in the Italian Courts: A Benchmark for a Quantitative Analysis (T. Agnoloni, M.-T. Sagri, D. Tiscornia); -- Survival of the Fittest: Network Analysis of Dutch Supreme Court Cases (R. Winkels, J. de Ruyter); -- Ontology Framework for Judgement Modelling (M. Ceci, M. Palmirani); -- Eunomos, a Legal Document and Knowledge Management System to Build Legal Services (G. Boella, L. Humphreys, M. Martin, P. Rossi, L. van der Torre); -- Axioms on a Semantic Model for Legislation for Accessing and Reasoning over Normative Provisions (E. Francesconi); -- An Open Access Policy for Legal Informatics Dissemination and Sharing (E. Francesconi, G. Peruginelli); -- Advancing an Open Access Publication Model for Legal Information Institutes (P. Casanovas, E. Plaza); -- Combinations of Normal and Non-normal Modal Logics for Modeling Collective Trust in Normative MAS (C. Smith, A. Ambrossio, L. Mendoza, A. Rotolo); -- Software Agents as Boundary Objects (M. Laukyte); -- Argumentation and Intuitive Decision Making: Criminal Sentencing and Sentence Indication (A. Vincent); -- 16. Application of Model-Based Diagnosis to Multi-Agent Systems Representing Public Administration (A. Boer, T. van Engers); -- 17. Semantic Annotation of Legal Texts through a FrameNet-Based Approach (M. Ceci, L. Lesmo, A. Mazzei, M. Palmirani); -- 18. Developing a Frame-Based Lexicon for the Brazilian Legal Language: The Case of the Criminal_Process Frame (A. Bertoldi, R. L. de Oliveira Chishman); -- 19. Creative Commons and Grand Challenge to Make Legal Language Simple (M. Myška, T. Smejkalová, J. Šavelka, M. Škop); -- From User Needs to Expert Knowledge: Mapping Laymen Queries with Ontologies in the Domain of Consumer Mediation (M. Fernández-Barrera, P. Casanovas