Using critical questions to disambiguate and formalize statutory provisions

Subscribe (Full Service)


	Search: The ACM Digital Library The Guide

	Feedback
Take a look at the new version of this page: [ beta version ]. Tell us what you think.

Using critical questions to disambiguate and formalize statutory provisions

Full text

Pdf (363 KB)

Source

International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Law archive
Proceedings of the 12th International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Law table of contents

Barcelona, Spain

SESSION: Research abstracts table of contents

Pages: 240-241

Year of Publication: 2009

ISBN:978-1-60558-597-0

Authors

Matthias Grabmair	University of Pittsburgh
Kevin D. Ashley	University of Pittsburgh

Publisher

ACM New York, NY, USA

Bibliometrics

Downloads (6 Weeks): 7, Downloads (12 Months): 21, Citation Count: 0

Additional Information:

abstract references 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/10.1145/1568234.1568273 What is a DOI?

ABSTRACT

This paper outlines a process model for disambiguating legal provisions in order to ease their formalization into logic. It centers around a reformulation of the provision driven by critical questioning and mandatory legal justifications.

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	L. E. Allen and C. R. Engholm. Normalized legal drafting and the query method. Journal of Legal Education, 29: 380--412, 1978.
	2	Trevor Bench, Exploiting isomorphism: development of a KBS to support British coal insurance claims, Proceedings of the 3rd international conference on Artificial intelligence and law, p.62-68, May 1991, Oxford, England [doi>10.1145/112646.112653]
	3	Joost Breuker, Modelling Artificial Legal Reasoning, Proceedings of the 7th European Workshop on Knowledge Acquisition for Knowledge-Based Systems, p.66-78, September 06-10, 1993
	4	Guus T. Schreiber , Hans Akkermans, Knowledge engineering and management: the CommonKADS methodology, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, 2000
	5	A. Valente. Legal Knowledge Engineering. 1995.
	6	D. Walton and T. F. Gordon. Critical questions in computational models of legal argument. Argumentation in Artificial Intelligence and Law, pages 103--111, 2005.