ACM Home Page
Please provide us with feedback. Feedback
A language for legal Discourse I. basic features
Full text PdfPdf (939 KB)
Source International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Law archive
Proceedings of the 2nd international conference on Artificial intelligence and law table of contents
Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
Pages: 180 - 189  
Year of Publication: 1989
ISBN:0-89791-322-1
Author
L. T. McCarty  Computer Science Department and Faculty of Law, Rutgers University
Sponsor
SIGART: ACM Special Interest Group on Artificial Intelligence
Publisher
ACM  New York, NY, USA
Bibliometrics
Downloads (6 Weeks): 9,   Downloads (12 Months): 33,   Citation Count: 32
Additional Information:

references   cited by   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/10.1145/74014.74037
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
L.E. Allen. Symbolic logic: A razor-edged tool ~r drafting and interpreting legal documents. Yale Law Journal, 66:833-879, 1957.
2
 
3
4
 
5
J. Barwise and ~I. Petty. Situations and Attitudes. Bradford Books, MIT Press, 1983.
 
6
A.J. Bonnet. A PROLOG framework for reasoning about permissions and obligations, with appliestions to contract law. Unpublished seminar paper, Rutgers University, 1985.
 
7
 
8
A.J. Bonnet. A logic for hypothetical reasoning. In Proceedings of the Seventh National Conference on A rtificial Intelligence, pages 480--484. AAAI, 1988.
 
9
H.C. Bunt. Mass Terms and Model-Theoretic Semaniics. Cambridge University Press, 1985.
 
10
K.L. Clark. Negation as failure. In H. Gallaire and J. Minker, editors, Logic and Data Bases, pages 293--322. Plenum, 1978.
 
11
 
12
;I. Doyle. A truth maintenance system. Artificial Intelligence, 12:231-272, 1979.
13
 
14
T.F. Gordon. The importance of nonmonotonicity for legal reasoning. In H. Fiedler, F. Haft, and R. Ttaunmflller, editors, Ezpert Systems in Lavo: Impacts on Legal Theorlt and Computer Law, pages 111-126. Attempto-Verlag, Tiibingen, 1988.
 
15
P. Hayes. The frame problem and related problems in artificial intelligence, in A. Elithorn and D. Jones, editors, Artificial and Human Thinking, pages 45-59. Jossey-Bass, 1973.
 
16
R. Jackendoff. Semantics and Cognition. MIT Press, 1983.
 
17
 
18
 
19
J. McCarthy. First order theories of individual concepts and propositions. In J. Hayes, D. Michie, and L. Mikulich, editors, Machine Intelligence, volume 9, pages 129-147. Ellis Horwood, 1979.
 
20
J. McCarthy. Circumscription: A form of nonmonotonic reasoning. A rtificial Intelligence, 13: 27- 39, 1980.
 
21
L.T. McCarty. Reflections on TAXMAN: An experiment in artificial intelligence and legal reasoning. Harvard Law Review, 90:837-93, 1977.
 
22
L.T. McCarty. Intelligent legal information systerns: Problems and prospects. Rutgers Compurer and Technology Law Journa~ 9(2):265-294, 1983. Also published in C. Campbell, editor, Data Processing and the ~aw, pp. 125-151 (Sweet and Maxwell, 1984).
 
23
L.T. McCarty. Permissions and obligations. In Proceedings of the Eighth International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, pages 287-294, 1983.
 
24
L.T. McCarty. Permissions and obligations: An informal introduction. In A.A. Martino and F. Socci Natali, editors, Automated Analysis of ~egal Tezts: Logic, Informatics, Law, pages 307-337. Elsevier North-Holland, 1986. Also available as ttutgers Technical Report LRP-TR-19.
 
25
 
26
 
27
L.T. McCaxty. Intelligent legal information systems' An update. In H. Fiedler, F. Haft, and R. Traunmiiller, editors, Ezpert Systems in ~aw: Impacts on Legal Theory and Computer Law, pages 15-25. Attempto-Verlag, Tflbingen, 1988. Also published in Law and Computers, No. 5, pp. 196- 202 (Law and Computers Association of J~pan, July 1987).
 
28
L.T. McCarty. Programming directly in a nonmonotonic logic. Technical Report LRP-TR-21, Computer Science Department, Rutgers U niversity, September 1988.
 
29
L.T. McCarty. Computing with prototypes (preliminary report). Technical Report LRP-TR-22, Computer Science Department, Rutgers University, March 1989.
 
30
L.T. McCarty. Real relationships. Forthcoming, 1989.
 
31
L.T. McCatty and N.S. Sridharan. A computational theory of legal argument. Technical Report LRP-TR-13, Computer Science Department, Rutgers University~ 1981.
 
32
L.T. McCarty and N.S. Sridharan. The representation of an evolving system of legal concepts: II. Prototypes and deformations. In Proceedings of the Seuenth International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, pages 246-53, 1981.
 
33
D.L. McOuinness. Reasoning with permissions and oblisations ~n contract law. Unpublished seminar paper, Rutgers University, 1986.
 
34
35
 
36
 
37
 
38
R. Reiter. A lo$ic for default reasoning. Artificial Intelligence, 13:81-132, 1980.
 
39
R. Reiter and G. Criscuolo. On interacting defaults. In Proceedings of the Seventh International $oint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, pages 270-276, 1981.
40
41
 
42
 
43
N.S. Sridharan. Representing knowledge in AIMDS. inforrnatica e Diritto, 7:201-221, 1981.
 
44
N.S. Sridharan. Evolving systems of knowlcdse. AI Magazine, 6:108-120, 1985.
 
45
46
 
47
L.A. Wallcn. Matrix proof methods for modal logics. In Proceedings of the Tenth International Joint Conference on Artificial intelligence, pages 917- 923, 1987.

CITED BY  32