Developer's choice in the legal domain

Subscribe (Full Service)


	Search: The ACM Digital Library The Guide

	Feedback

Developer's choice in the legal domain: the Sisyphean journey with DBR or down hill with rules (a working paper for the case-rules panel at the third international conference of artificial intelligence and law)

Full text

Pdf (260 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: 307 - 309

Year of Publication: 1991

ISBN:0-89791-399-X

Author

Donald H. Berman

Northeastern University School of Law, Co-Director, Center for Law and Computer Science

Sponsor

SIGART: ACM Special Interest Group on Artificial Intelligence

Publisher

ACM New York, NY, USA

Bibliometrics

Downloads (6 Weeks): 3, Downloads (12 Months): 11, Citation Count: 1

Additional Information:

references cited by index terms collaborative colleagues

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/10.1145/112646.112685 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	Kevin D. Ashley, Modelling legal argument: reasoning with cases and hypotheticals, University of Massachusetts, Amherst, MA, 1988
	2	Ashley, K. 1988b. Arguing By Analogy in Law: A Case-Based Model. In Analogical Reasoning, ed. D. Helman, 205-224. Deventer, NE'Kluwer
	3	Ashley, K. 1988b. Arguing By Analogy in Law' A Case-Based Model. In Analoeica! Reasonine, ed. D. Helman, 205-224. Deventer, NE:Kluwer
	4	Kevin D. Ashley , Vincent Aleven, Toward an intelligent tutoring system for teaching law students to argue with cases, Proceedings of the 3rd international conference on Artificial intelligence and law, p.42-52, May 1991, Oxford, England [doi>10.1145/112646.112651]
	5	Berman, D. 1989. The Need for a Medium Grain Choice of Law Filter in Certain Legal Expert Systems. In Pre-vroceedints _of the Third International Conference on. Logi.ca I_nfor_matica Diritto, ed. A. Martino, 65. Florence: Consiglio Nazionale delle Ricerche.
	6	Berman, D. &Hafner, C. 1988. Obstacles to the Development of Logic-Based Models of Legal Reasoning. In Computer Power and Legal Laneuage, ed. C. Walter, 183-214. New York: Quorum Books.
	7	Bench-Capon, T. & Sergot, M. 1985. Towards a rule based representation of open texture in law. In Computer Power and Legal Language, ed. C. Walter, 39-61. New York:Quorum Books.
	8	L. K. Branting, Representing and reusing explanations of legal precedents, Proceedings of the 2nd international conference on Artificial intelligence and law, p.103-110, May 1989, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada [doi>10.1145/74014.74029]
	9	Anne von der Lieth Gardner, An artificial intelligence approach to legal reasoning, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, 1987
	10	S. R. Goldman , M. C. Dyer , M. Flowers, Precedent-based legal reasoning and knowledge acquisition in contract law: A process model, Proceedings of the 1st international conference on Artificial intelligence and law, p.210-221, May 27-29, 1997, Boston, Massachusetts, United States [doi>10.1145/41735.41759]
	11	Hafaer C. 1981. An I..nformation Retrieval System Base~d on a Computer Mode.l.. of Legal Knowledge. Ann Arbor,MI:UMI Research Press.
	12	C. D. Hafner, Conceptual organization of case law knowledge bases, Proceedings of the 1st international conference on Artificial intelligence and law, p.35-42, May 27-29, 1997, Boston, Massachusetts, United States [doi>10.1145/41735.41740]
	13	McCarty, L. 1977. Reflections on Taxman: An Experiment in Artificial Intelligence and Legal Reasoning. Harvard La._w Review 90(5):837-893.
	14	McCarty, L.T. 1981. The representation of an evolving system of legal concepts' II. Prototypes and deformations. In Proceedin. gs of the S_eventh Inter.national Joi_nt Conferen_ce on Articifica! Intelligence, 246-53. Menlo Park, CA:International Joint Conferences on Artificial Intelligence.
	15	Peterson, M. & Waterman,D. 1985. An Expert Systems Approach to Evaluating Product Liability Cases. In Com._nuting Power and Legal Reasoning, ed. Walter, C., 629-59. St. Paul, MN:West.
	16	E. L. Rissland , K. D. Ashley, A case-based system for trade secrets law, Proceedings of the 1st international conference on Artificial intelligence and law, p.60-66, May 27-29, 1997, Boston, Massachusetts, United States [doi>10.1145/41735.41743]
	17	Edwina Rissland, AI and legal reasoning, AI Magazine, v.9 n.3, p.45-55, September 1988
	18	Rissland, E. 1990. Artificial Intelligence and Law: Stepping Stone to a Model of Legal Reasoning. Yale Law Journal 99' 1957-82.
	19	Stephen Slade, Case-based reasoning: a research paradigm, AI Magazine, v.12 n.1, p.42-55, Spring 1991
	20	Smith, J. & Doedman, C. (1987). The Application of Expert Systems Technology to Case-Based Law. In Proceedin2s of the First International Conference of Artificial Intelligence and Law, 85. New York:Association for Computing Machinery Press.