Interpreting statutory predicates

ABSTRACT

In this paper we discuss a hybrid approach to the problem of statutory interpretation that involves combining our past approach to case-based reasoning (“CBA”), as exemplified in our previous HYPO and TAX-HYPO systems, with traditional rule-based reasoning (“RBR”), as exemplified by expert systems. We do not tackle the fullblown version of statutory interpretation, which would include reasoning with legislative intent or other normative aspects (the “ought”), but confine ourselves to reasoning with explicit cases and rules. We discuss strategies that can be used to guide interpretation, particularly the interleaving of CBR and RBR, and how they are used in an agenda-based architecture, called CABARET, which we are currently developing in a general way and experimenting with in the particular area of Section §280A(c)(1) of the U.S. Internal Revenue Code, which deals with the so called “home office deduction”.

REFERENCES

• Ashley and Rissland, 1988: Kevin D. Ashley and Edwina L. Rissland. Dynamic Assessment of Relevancy in a Case-Based Reasoner. IEEE Ezpert, Fall 1988.
• Ashley, 1988: Kevin D. Ashley, Modelling legal argument: reasoning with cases and hypotheticals, University of Massachusetts, Amherst, MA, 1988
• Barletta and Mark, 1988: Ralph Barletta and William Mark. Explanation- Based Indexing of Cases. In Proceedinga AAAI-88, St. Paul, 1988. American Association fo~ Artificial intelligence.
• Dworkin, 1977: RonMd Dworkin. Taking Rightz 5eriouzly. Harvard, Cambridge, 1977.
• Fuller, 1958: Lon L. Fuller. Positivism and Fidelity to Law: A Reply to Professor Hart. Haruard Law Review, 71:630-672, 1958.
• Gardner, 1987: Anne von der Lieth Gardner, An artificial intelligence approach to legal reasoning, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, 1987
• Goel and Chandrasekaran, 1988: Ashok Goel and B. Ch~ndrasek~r~n. Integrating Model-Based Reasoning and Case-Based Reasoning. In Proceedings of the AAA Workshop on AI in Design. American Association for Artificial Intelligence, August 1988. St. Paul.
• Hammond, 1986: Kristian J. Hammond. CHEF: A Model of Case-based Planning. In Proceedings AAAI-86. American Association for Artificial Intelligence, August 1986. Philadelphia, PA.
• Hart, 1958: H.L.A. Hart. Positivism and the $eparation of Law and Morals. Harvard Law Review, 71:593-629, 1958.
• Hart, 1961: H.L.A. Hart. The Concept of Lsw. Clarendon Press, Oxford, 1961.
• Kolodner, 1987: Janet L. Kolodne~. Extendin8 Problem Solver Capabilities Through Case-Based Inference. In P~mceedings of the Fourth Annual l~ter- ~ational Machine Learning Work. shop, lrvine, CA, t987. Morgan Kaufman.
• Kolodner, 1988: ~anet L. Kolodner, editor. Proceedings of tke DARPA Case-Based Reasoning Workskop, Clearwater Beach, FL, May 1988.
• Kotan, 1988: Phyllis A. Koran. Uaing Ezpericnce in Learning a~d Problem Solving. PhD thesis, Department of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science, MIT, 1988.
• Lakatos, 1976: I. Lakatos. Proofs and Refutationz. Cambridge University Press, London, 1976'
• Lenat, 1976: Douglas Bruce Lenat, Am: an artificial intelligence approach to discovery in mathematics as heuristic search., 1976
• Levi, 1949: Edward H. Levi. An Introduction to Legal Reasoning. University of Chicago Press, 1949.
• Llewellyn, 1950: K.N. L!ewellyn. Remarks on the Theory of Appellate Decisions and The Rules or Canons About How Statutes Are to be Construed. Vand. ~. Re~., 3:395, 1950.
• Llewellyn, 1960: K.N. Llewellyn. The Common Law Tradition: Deciding Appeals. Little, Brown, Boston, 1960.
• McCarty and Sridharan, 1981: L. Thorne McCarty and N.S. Sridharan. The Representation of an Evolving System of Legal Concepts' II. Prototypes and Deformations. In Proceedings IJgAI-81, Vancouver, B.C., August 1981. International loins Conferences on Artificial Intelligence, Inc.
• Morris, 1937: Clarence Morris. How Lawyers Think. Harvard, Cambridge, Swallow Paperbooks edition, 1937.
• Polya, 1965a: G. Polya. Holy To Solve It. Princeton University Press, 1965.
• Polya, 1965b: G. Polya. Mathematical Discover~l, volume ii. John Wiley & Sons, New York, 1965.
• Rissland and King, 1988: Edwina L. Rissland and James A. King, editors. Proceedir~ys of the Case- Based Reasoning Workshop, St. Paul, August 1988. American Association for Artificial Intelligence.
• Rissland and Skalak, 1989: Edwina L. Rissland and David B. Skalak. Case-Based Reasoning in a Rule- Governed Domain. In Proceeclir~gs of the Fifth IEEE Conference on Artificial Intelligence Applicetior~s, Miami, March 1989. The Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, Inc.
• Rissland, 1978: Edwina L. Rissland. Understanding Understanding Mathematics. Cognitive Science, 1(4), 1978.
• Rissland, 1980: Edwina L. Rissland. Example Generation. In Third Biennial Conference of the Canadian Society for Computational Studies of lntelligence, University of Victoria, Victoria, B.C., 1980.
• Sergot et al., 1986: M. J. Sergot , F. Sadri , R. A. Kowalski , F. Kriwaczek , P. Hammond , H. T. Cory, The British Nationality Act as a logic program, Communications of the ACM, v.29 n.5, p.370-386, May 1986 [doi>10.1145/5689.5920]
• Skalak, 1988: David B. Skalak. Rules and Cases, Cases and Rules, and the Law. In Proceedings of the Case-Based Reasoning Workshop, St. Paul, 1988. American Association for Artificial Intelligence.
• Sunstein, 1988: Cans R, Sunatein. Statutes and the Regulatory State. Preliminary draft, from a forthcoming book, September 1988.
• Sycara, 1988: Katia $ycara. Resolving Goal Conflicts via Negotiation. In Proceedings AAAI-88, St. Paul, 1988. American Association for Artificial Intelligence.
• Twining and Miers, 1982: William Twining and David Micra. How To Do Things With Rules. Weidenfeld and Nicolson, London, second edition, 1982.
• Walker et al., 1988: R.F. Walker, P.G.M. Zeinstra, and P.H. van den Berg. A Model to Model Knowledge about Knowledge or Implementing MeSa- Knowledge in PROLEXS. In G. Vandenberghe, editor, Advanced Issues of Law and Information Technolo~ll. Kluwer, 1988.

INDEX TERMS

Primary Classification:
  I. Computing Methodologies
  I.2 ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE
      I.2.1 Applications and Expert Systems
          Subjects: Law

Additional Classification:
  I. Computing Methodologies
  I.2 ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE
      I.2.3 Deduction and Theorem Proving
          Subjects: Deduction (e.g., natural, rule-based); Nonmonotonic reasoning and belief revision

General Terms:
Design, Experimentation, Legal Aspects