30 research outputs found

    Thirty years of Artificial Intelligence and Law:the second decade

    Get PDF
    The first issue of Artificial Intelligence and Law journal was published in 1992. This paper provides commentaries on nine significant papers drawn from the Journal’s second decade. Four of the papers relate to reasoning with legal cases, introducing contextual considerations, predicting outcomes on the basis of natural language descriptions of the cases, comparing different ways of representing cases, and formalising precedential reasoning. One introduces a method of analysing arguments that was to become very widely used in AI and Law, namely argumentation schemes. Two relate to ontologies for the representation of legal concepts and two take advantage of the increasing availability of legal corpora in this decade, to automate document summarisation and for the mining of arguments

    Teaching Law and Digital Age Legal Practice with an AI and Law Seminar

    Get PDF
    This article provides a guide and examples for using a seminar on Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Law to teach lessons about legal reasoning and about legal practice in the digital age. Artificial Intelligence and Law is a subfield of AI/ computer science research that focuses on computationally modeling legal reasoning. In at least a few law schools, the AI and Law seminar has regularly taught students fundamental issues about law and legal reasoning by focusing them on the problems these issues pose for scientists attempting to computationally model legal reasoning. AI and Law researchers have designed programs to reason with legal rules, apply legal precedents, predict case outcomes, argue like a legal advocate and visualize legal arguments. The article illustrates some of the pedagogically important lessons that they have learned in the process. As the technology of legal practice catches up with the aspirations of AI and Law researchers, the AI and Law seminar can play a new role in legal education. With advances in such areas as e-discovery, legal information retrieval (IR), and semantic processing of web-based information for electronic contracting, the chances are increasing that, in their legal practices, law students will use, and even depend on, systems that employ AI techniques. As explained in the Article, an AI and Law seminar invites students to think about processes of legal reasoning and legal practice and about how those processes employ information. It teaches how the new digital documents technologies work, what they can and cannot do, how to measure performance, how to evaluate claims about the technologies, and how to be savvy consumers and users of the technologies

    Detecting Arguments in CJEU Decisions on Fiscal State Aid

    Get PDF
    The successful application of argument mining in the legal domain can dramatically impact many disciplines related to law. For this purpose, we present Demosthenes, a novel corpus for argument mining in legal documents, composed of 40 decisions of the Court of Justice of the European Union on matters of fiscal state aid. The annotation specifies three hierarchical levels of information: the argumentative elements, their types, and their argument schemes. In our experimental evaluation, we address 4 different classification tasks, combining advanced language models and traditional classifiers

    ARGO: Arguments Ontology

    Get PDF
    Although the last decade has seen a proliferation of ontological approaches to arguments, many of them employ ad hoc solutions to representing arguments, lack interoperability with other ontologies, or cover arguments only as part of a broader approach to evidence. To provide a better ontological representation of arguments, we present the Arguments Ontology (ArgO), a small ontology for arguments that is designed to be imported and easily extended by researchers who work in different upper-level ontology frameworks, different logics, and different approaches to argument evaluation. Unlike most ontological approaches to arguments, ArgO utilizes Basic Formal Ontology (BFO) as an upper-level ontology, and may be used alongside other commonly used ontologies in the BFO framework, including boththe Information Artifact Ontology (IAO), and the Information Entity Ontology (INFO). Critically, our proposal is principled, based on rigorous definitions and formal axioms out of which characterizations of arguments naturally fall. It is our hope that ArgO may assist researchers in many projects, including: integrating heterogeneous sources of evidence, structuring the content of semantic wikis, and enhancing semantic reasoning

    Ontologies for Legal Relevance and Consumer Complaints. A Case Study in the Air Transport Passenger Domain

    Get PDF
    Applying relevant legal information to settle complaints and disputes is a common challenge for all legal practitioners and laymen. However, the analysis of the concept of relevance itself has thus far attracted only sporadic attention. This thesis bridges this gap by understanding the components of complaints, and by defining relevant legal information, and makes use of computational ontologies and design patterns to represent this relevant knowledge in an explicit and structured way. This work uses as a case-study a real situation of consumer disputes in the Air Transport Passenger domain. Two artifacts were built: the Relevant Legal Information in Consumer Disputes Ontology, and its specialization, the Air Transport Passenger Incidents Ontology, aimed at modelling relevant legal information; and the Complaint Design Pattern proposed to conceptualize complaints. In order to demonstrate the ability of the ontologies to serve as a knowledge base for a computer program providing relevant legal information, a demonstrative application was developed

    Linked Democracy

    Get PDF
    This open access book shows the factors linking information flow, social intelligence, rights management and modelling with epistemic democracy, offering licensed linked data along with information about the rights involved. This model of democracy for the web of data brings new challenges for the social organisation of knowledge, collective innovation, and the coordination of actions. Licensed linked data, licensed linguistic linked data, right expression languages, semantic web regulatory models, electronic institutions, artificial socio-cognitive systems are examples of regulatory and institutional design (regulations by design). The web has been massively populated with both data and services, and semantically structured data, the linked data cloud, facilitates and fosters human-machine interaction. Linked data aims to create ecosystems to make it possible to browse, discover, exploit and reuse data sets for applications. Rights Expression Languages semi-automatically regulate the use and reuse of content. ; Links information flow, social intelligence, rights management, and modelling with epistemic democracy Presents examples of regulatory and institutional desig

    Linked democracy : foundations, tools, and applications

    Get PDF
    Chapter 1Introduction to Linked DataAbstractThis chapter presents Linked Data, a new form of distributed data on theweb which is especially suitable to be manipulated by machines and to shareknowledge. By adopting the linked data publication paradigm, anybody can publishdata on the web, relate it to data resources published by others and run artificialintelligence algorithms in a smooth manner. Open linked data resources maydemocratize the future access to knowledge by the mass of internet users, eitherdirectly or mediated through algorithms. Governments have enthusiasticallyadopted these ideas, which is in harmony with the broader open data movement

    Automatic extraction and structure of arguments in legal documents

    Get PDF
    A argumentação desempenha um papel fundamental na comunicação humana ao formular razões e tirar conclusões. Desenvolveu-se um sistema automático para identificar argumentos jurídicos de forma eficaz em termos de custos a partir da jurisprudência. Usando 42 leis jurídicas do Tribunal Europeu dos Direitos Humanos (ECHR), anotou-se os documentos para estabelecer um conjunto de dados “padrão-ouro”. Foi então desenvolvido e testado um processo composto por 3 etapas para mineração de argumentos. A primeira etapa foi avaliar o melhor conjunto de recursos para identificar automaticamente as frases argumentativas do texto não estruturado. Várias experiencias foram conduzidas dependendo do tipo de características disponíveis no corpus, a fim de determinar qual abordagem que produzia os melhores resultados. No segundo estágio, introduziu-se uma nova abordagem de agrupamento automático (para agrupar frases num argumento legal coerente), através da utilização de dois novos algoritmos: o “Algoritmo de Identificação do Grupo Apropriado”, ACIA e a “Distribuição de orações no agrupamento de Cluster”, DSCA. O trabalho inclui também um sistema de avaliação do algoritmo de agrupamento que permite ajustar o seu desempenho. Na terceira etapa do trabalho, utilizou-se uma abordagem híbrida de técnicas estatísticas e baseadas em regras para categorizar as orações argumentativas. No geral, observa-se que o nível de precisão e utilidade alcançado por essas novas técnicas é viável como base para uma estrutura geral de argumentação e mineração; Abstract: Automatic Extraction and Structure of Arguments in Legal Documents Argumentation plays a cardinal role in human communication when formulating reasons and drawing conclusions. A system to automatically identify legal arguments cost-effectively from case-law was developed. Using 42 legal case-laws from the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR), an annotation was performed to establish a ‘gold-standard’ dataset. Then a three-stage process for argument mining was developed and tested. The first stage aims at evaluating the best set of features for automatically identifying argumentative sentences within unstructured text. Several experiments were conducted, depending upon the type of features available in the corpus, in order to determine which approach yielded the best result. In the second stage, a novel approach to clustering (for grouping sentences automatically into a coherent legal argument) was introduced through the development of two new algorithms: the “Appropriate Cluster Identification Algorithm”,(ACIA) and the “Distribution of Sentence to the Cluster Algorithm” (DSCA). This work also includes a new evaluation system for the clustering algorithm, which helps tuning it for performance. In the third stage, a hybrid approach of statistical and rule-based techniques was used in order to categorize argumentative sentences. Overall, it’s possible to observe that the level of accuracy and usefulness achieve by these new techniques makes it viable as the basis of a general argument-mining framework
    corecore