ACM Home Page
Please provide us with feedback. Feedback
NewMINT interpretation assistance system: United States Constitution First Amendment's initial 1344 interpretations
Full text PdfPdf (1.06 MB)
Source
International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Law archive
Proceedings of the 11th international conference on Artificial intelligence and law table of contents
Stanford, California
SESSION: Modelling aspects of law table of contents
Pages: 161 - 165  
Year of Publication: 2007
ISBN:978-1-59593-680-6
Authors
Layman E. Allen  University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI
Adam W. Tury  Bloomberg, LP, New York, NY
Sponsor
: International Association for Artificial Intelligence and Law
Publisher
ACM  New York, NY, USA
Bibliometrics
Downloads (6 Weeks): 2,   Downloads (12 Months): 21,   Citation Count: 0
Additional Information:

abstract   references   index terms   collaborative colleagues  

Tools and Actions: Request Permissions Request Permissions    Review this Article  
DOI Bookmark: Use this link to bookmark this Article: http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/1276318.1276348
What is a DOI?

ABSTRACT

In this paper, we describe and illustrate a new refinement in the MINT (Multiple INTerpretation) Assistance System that has Arrow Diagrams in the left margin of interpretations of legal text that indicates the sentential logical relationships of the constituent sentences of the interpretations. The new version is called NewMINT. An example of the use of NewMINT is presented in detail with respect to the First Amendment of the United States Constitution. For the seven ambiguities detected in the text of the one-sentence First Amendment, a total of 1344 different interpretations are constructed by NewMINT. By responding to seven questions about the ambiguities detected, readers can generate short-names for and full text of their own interpretations presented in Normalized Form in the language of LEGAL RELATIONS. An example of NewMINT output is presented by the complete Arrow Diagram and structured interpretation of retired Judge William A. Norris of the Ninth Circuit.


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
Hohfeld, Wesley N. {1913} "Fundamental Legal Conceptions as Applied in Judicial Reasoning,"23 YALE L. J. 16 (1913). Reprinted with a New Foreword by Arthur L. Corbin by Yale University Press, London & New Haven (1964).
 
2
Allen, Layman E., Symbolic Logic: A Razor Edged Tool for Drafting and Interpreting Legal Documents, 66 Yale Law Journal 833 (1957).
3
 
4
Allen, Layman E., Some Examples of Using the LEGAL RELATIONS Language in the Legal Domain: Applied Deontic Logic, 73 NOTRE DAME L. REV. 535--573 (1998).
 
5
Allen, Layman E., The Legal Argument Game of LEGAL RELATIONS (designed to facilitate becoming fluent In the LEGAL RELATIONS Language, with Sandra Bartlett, 2003).

Collaborative Colleagues:
Layman E. Allen: colleagues
Adam W. Tury: colleagues