Case-based reasoning and the deep structure approach to knowledge representation

Subscribe (Full Service)


	Search: The ACM Digital Library The Guide

	Feedback

Case-based reasoning and the deep structure approach to knowledge representation

Full text

Pdf (883 KB)

Source

International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Law archive
Proceedings of the 3rd international conference on Artificial intelligence and law table of contents

Oxford, England

Pages: 21 - 30

Year of Publication: 1991

ISBN:0-89791-399-X

Author

Andrzej Kowalski

Tollrurst, Druce & Emmerson, Solicitors and The University of Melbourne, Law School

Sponsor

SIGART: ACM Special Interest Group on Artificial Intelligence

Publisher

ACM New York, NY, USA

Bibliometrics

Downloads (6 Weeks): 3, Downloads (12 Months): 20, Citation Count: 2

Additional Information:

references cited by index terms

Tools and Actions:	Request Permissions Review this Article Save this Article to a Binder Display Formats: BibTeX EndNote ACM Ref

DOI Bookmark:	Use this link to bookmark this Article: http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/112646.112649 What is a DOI?

REFERENCES

Note: OCR errors may be found in this Reference List extracted from the full text article. ACM has opted to expose the complete List rather than only correct and linked references.

	1	McCa _rp/, L. Thorne, "A.I. and Law:. How to Get There from Here", presented at the International Conference on Expert Systems in Lay/' Bologna, Italy, May 3-5, 1990.
	2	Su,~kind, Richard E., "Expert Systems in Law:. A Juri~rudential Approach to Artificial Intelligence and Legal Reasoning", 0986) 49 Modern Law Review 168.
	3	By "purelg rule-based system" I mean a non-CBR system. I use the terms "purely rule-based system" and "CBR system" pnmarilyto distinguish between the earlier rule-based non-CBR legal expert Systems and later CBR legal expert systems. This terminology may not be entirely accurate because it is arguable that all legal systems to date, whether CBR or otherwise, are rule-based in one way or another.
	4	Copyright ~ 1989- 1991 by Andrzej Kowalsld. All rights reserved.
	5	A product of IntelligenceWare, inc., 9800 s. Sepulveda Bl0d., Los Angeles, CA which retails for about $590 USD. The stand-alone version of the MPC occupies about 2.5 megabytes of disk space, including cases, it runs on a 286 or 386 IBM PC (or compatible) with a hard disk drive, 640K RAM and at least 1 megabyte of extended memory.
	6	A product of Ashton-Tate Corporation.
	7	Many of the cases are in full text and were retrieved and stored with the kind permission of QL Systems Limited.
	8	Smith J.C., & Deedman, C., ~l'he Application of Expert Systems Technology to Case-Basea-Reasoning", "Proceedings of 1st International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Law", (Boston) A.C.M. Press, New York, 1987, p. 84; Deedman, C., "Building Rule-Based Expert Systems in Case-Based Law'r, LL.M. Thesis, University of British Columbia, Faculty of Law, 1987.
	9	Deedman, Cal, 'Exposing Some Myths About Law and Dispelling Some Myths About Computers." Unpublished.
	10	For an interesting description of how law students studyin$ torts are taught to "flip" legal arguments see Boyle, James, "Anatomy of a Torts Class", (1985) 34
	11	American University Law Review 131,
	12	Deedman, supra, note 9. e.g. q~e Nervous Shock Advisor' by Professor J.C. Smith and Cal Deedman and q"he Hearsay Rule Advisor' by Professor M.T. MacCrimmon and Susan Blackman, The University of British Columbia, Faculty of Law.
	13	E. L. Rissland , D. B. Skalak, Interpreting statutory predicates, Proceedings of the 2nd international conference on Artificial intelligence and law, p.46-53, May 1989, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada [doi>10.1145/74014.74021]
	14	It was Cal Deedman's idea to represent case law as a' cuboid and Dorota Gertig prepared the sketches.
	15	This system was developed in conjunction with A.I. and law personnel at The University of British Columbia,
	16	Faculty of Law. Although a difficult factor to account for computationally, the reader will note that the date of the decision is also used in the weighing formula to a limited extent.
	17	The user may choose from: the Australian states or territories, the Canadian provinces or territories, New Zealand and England.
	18	Savile v Roberts (1698) 1 Ld Raym. 374; 91 E. tL 1147.
	19	Wiffen v Bailey & Romford U.D.C. {1915} 1 K.B. 600. For another limited exception see Coleman v Buckingham's Ltd {1964} N.S.W.R.. 363.
	20	See Fleming, J.G, ~l-'he Law of Torts', 7th ed., 1987, p. 581; Rogers, W.H.V., "Winfield & Jolowicz on TortTM, 13th. ed., 1989, p. 552.
	21	Jervois Sulphates Ltd v Petrocarb (197_4)5 A.L.R. 1; Stoffrnan v Ontario Veterinary Assn. {1990} O.J. No. 1151, Action No. 542/85, Unreported (Ont. H.C.).
	22	Winfield 8: Jolowicz, supra, note 20,1:). 547.
	23	Hicks v Faulkner (1878) 8 Q.B.D. 167 at 171 as appoved by the House of Lords in Herniman v Smith {1938} A.C. 305 at 316.
	24	Brazier, M.B., Street on Torts, 8th ed., 1988, p. 437.
	25	Supra, note 20, p. 586, citing Herniman v Smith {1938} A.C. 305 at 317.
	26	Brown v Hawkes {1891} 2 Q.B. 718 at 722; Carpenter v McDonald (1979) 21 D.IL (2(1) 165 at 184; Hawker v Hillsburgh L1942} 2 W.W.R. 488 at 489.
	27	gandir, on v Rybialt (197a), 1 O_R_ (2d) 74.
	28	{1927} 2 W.W.R. 623.
	29	(1964) 45 D.L. IL 638
	30	Smith, J.C. & Deedman, C., 'The Nervous Shock Advisor'.
	31	eg. The 'Flexicon' project by The University of British Columbia Faculty of Law IBM (Canada) Law and Computer Centre.

CITED BY 2

	Ruth Murbach , Éva Nonn, Similarity in harder cases: sentencing for fraud, Proceedings of the 4th international conference on Artificial intelligence and law, p.236-244, June 15-18, 1993, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
	J. C. Smith, The use of lexicons in information retrieval in legal databases, Proceedings of the 6th international conference on Artificial intelligence and law, p.29-38, June 30-July 03, 1997, Melbourne, Australia