Legal modeling and automated reasoning with ON-LINE

International Journal of Human Computer Studies

Volumn 51, Issue 6, 1999, Pages 1079-1125

  Valente, André ^a   Breuker, Joost ^b   Brouwer, Bob ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF AMSTERDAM   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 0038250845     PISSN: 10715819     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1006/ijhc.1999.0298     Document Type: Article

References (87)

1. ALCHOURRÓN, C. & BULYGIN, E. (1971). Normative Systems. Wien: Springer.
2. ALCHOURRÓN, C. & BULYGIN, E. (1981). The expressive conception of norms. In R. HILPINEN, (Ed.) New Studies in Deontic Logic. pp. 95-124, Dordrecht: Reidel.
3. ALLEN, L. (1997). A language for legal relations, LLR, useful for an ontology. In P. VISSER & R. WINKELS, Eds. Proceedings of the 1st workshop on ontologies in law, LEGONT-97, pp. 47-60. Melbourne, AU.
4. ALLEN, L. & SAXON, C. (1991). More IA needed in AI: interpretation assistance for coping with the problem of multiple structural interpretations. Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on AI and Law, pp. 53-61, Oxford.
5. ARTOSI, A., CATTABRIGA, P. & GOVERNATORI, G. (1994). An automated approach to deontic reasoning. In J. BREUKER, Ed. Proceedings of the ECAI'94 Workshop on Artificial Normative Reasoning, pp. 132-145, Amsterdam.
6. ASHLEY, K. (1990). Modelling Legal Argument: Reasoning with Cases and Hypotheticals. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
7. BAADER, F. & HOLLUNDER, B. (1991). KRIS: knowledge representation and inference system. SIGART Bulletin. 2, 8-14.
8. BAADER, F. & HOLLUNDER, B. (1992). Embedding defaults into terminological knowledge representation formalisms. In B. NEBEL, C. RICH & W. SWARTOUT, Eds. Principles of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning: Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference (KR'92), pp. 306-317. Los Altos, CA: Morgan Kaufmann.
9. BENCH-CAPON, T. (1989). Deep models, normative reasoning and legal expert systems. Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on AI and Law. Vancouver.
10. BENCH-CAPON, T. (1994). Deontic logic: who needs it? In J. BREUKER Ed. Proceedings of the ECAI'94 Workshop on Artificial Normative Reasoning. Amsterdam.
11. BENJAMINS, V., FENSEL, D. & STRAATMAN, R. (1996). Assumptions of problem solving methods and their role in knowledge engineering. In W. WAHLSTER Ed. Proceedings ECAI-96, pp. 408-412. New York: Wiley.
12. BING, J. (1987). Designing text retrieval systems for 'conceptual searching', Proceedings of the 1st International Conference on AI and Law, pp. 43-51. Boston.
13. BORST, P. & AKKERMANS, H. (1997). Engineering ontologies. International Journal of Human Computer Interaction (special issue on using explicit ontologies in KBS development), 46, 365-408.
14. BRACHMAN, R. & SCHMÖLZE, J. (1985). An overview of the KL-ONE knowledge representation system. Cognitive Science, 9, 171-216.
15. BREUKER, J. (1990). Towards a workbench for the legal practitioner. In C. VAN NOORTWIJK, A. SCHMIDT & R. WINKELS Eds. Legal Knowledge Based Systems: Aims for Research and Development, pp. 25-36. Lelystad; Koninklijke Vermande.
16. BREUKER, J. (1994). A suite of problem types. In J. BREUKER, & W. VAN DE VELDE, Eds. CommonKADS Library for Expertise Modelling, pp. 57-87. Amsterdam: IOS Press.
17. BREUKER, J. & DEN HAAN, N. (1991). Separating world and regulation knowledge: where is the logic? In M. SERGOT, Ed. Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on AI and Law, pp. 41-51.
18. BREUKER, J. & VAN DE VELDE, W., Eds. (1994). CommonKADS Library for Expertise Modelling. Amsterdam: IOS Press.
19. BUCHHEIT, M., DONINI, F. & SCHAERF, A. (1993). Decidable reasoning in terminological knowledge representation systems. Proceedings of IJCAI'93, pp. 704-709.
20. CHANDRASEKARAN, B. (1987). Towards a functional architecture for intelligence based on generic information processing tasks. Proceedings of IJCAI'87, pp. 1183-1192. Milano.
21. CHANDRASEKARAN, B. & JOHNSON, T. R. (1993). Generic tasks and task structures. In J.-M. DAVID, J.-P. KRIVINE & R. SIMMONS, Eds. Second Generation Expert Systems, pp. 232-272. Berlin: Springer.
22. CLANCEY, W. (1985). Heuristics classification. Artificial Intelligence, 27, 289-350.
23. DAVIS, R. (1983). Reasoning from first principles is electronic trouble shooting. MMST, 19, 403-423.
24. DAVIS, R. & HAMSCHER, H. (1988). Model-based reasoning: trouble shooting. In H. SHROBE, Ed. Exploring Artificial Intelligence. pp. 297-346. San Mateo, CA: Morgan Kaufmann Publishers, Inc.
25. DAVIS, R., SHROBE, H. & SZOLOVITS, P. (1993). What is a knowledge representation? AI Magazine, pp. 17-33.
26. DE KLEER, J., MACKWORTH, A. & REITER, R. (1992). Characterizing diagnoses and systems. Artificial Intelligence, 56, 197-222.
27. DE KLEER, J. & WILLIAMS, B . (1991). Qualitative reasoning about physical systems - II. Artificial Intelligence (special issue), 51, 1-473.
28. DEN HAAN, N., BREUKER, J. & WINKELS, R. (1996). Automated legislative drafting. In J. MEYER & L. VAN DER GAAG, Eds. Proceedings of the 8th Dutch AI Conference (NAIC-96), pp. 167-178.
29. DICK, J. (1991). Reasoning with portions of precedents. Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on AI and Law. pp. 244-252. Oxford.
30. ERIKSSON, H., SHAHAR, Y., TU, S., PUERTA, A. & MUSEN, M. (1995). Task modelling with reusable problem solving methods. Artificial Intelligence, 79, 293-325.
31. FARQUHAR, A., FIKES, R. & RICE, J. (1997). The Ontolingua server: a tool for collaborative ontology construction. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies 46, 707-728.
32. GORDON, T. (1995). The Pleadings Game. An Artificial Intelligence Model of Procedural Justice. Dordrecht: Kluwer.
33. GREENLEAF, G., MOWBRAY, A. & TYREE, A. (1987). Experts systems in law: the DATALEX project. Proceedings of the 1st International Conference on AI and Law, pp. 9-17. Boston.
34. GRUBER, T. (1992). Ontolingua: a mechanism to support portable ontologies, version 3.0. Technical Report, Knowledge Systems Laboratory, Stanford University, CA.
35. GRUBER, T. (1994). Toward principles for the design of ontologies used for knowledge sharing. In N. GUARINO & R. POLI Eds. Formal Ontology in Conceptual Analysis and Knowledge Representation. Dordrecht: Kluwer.
36. GRUBER, T., OLSEN, G. & RUNKEL, J. (1996). The configuration design ontologies and the VT elevator domain theory. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies (special issue on Sisyphus-VT), 44, 569-598.
37. GUARINO, N. (1995). Formal ontology, conceptual analysis and knowledge representation. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies (special issue on formal ontology), 43, 625-6640.
38. GUARINO, N. (1988). Formal ontology and information systems. In N. GUARINO, Ed. Formal Ontology in Information Systems, pp. 3-15. Amsterdam: IOS-Press.
39. HAFNER, C. (1981). Representation of knowledge in a legal information retrieval system. In R. ODDY, S. ROBERTSON, C. VAN RIJSBERGEN & P. WILLIAMS Eds. Information Retrieval Research. London: Butterworths.
40. HAMFELT, A. & BARKLUND, J. (1990). Metaprogramming for representation of legal principles. Proceedings of Meta'90, pp. 105-122.
41. HART, H. & HONORE, T. (1985). Causation in the Law (2nd edn.). New York: Oxford University Press.
42. HOBBS, J. (1995). Sketch on an ontology underlying the way we talk about the world. International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction (special issue on formal ontology), 43, 819-830.
43. JONES, A. & SERGOT, M. (1992). Deontic logic in the representation of law: towards a methodology. Artificial Intelligence and Law, 1, 45-64.
44. KELSEN, H. (1991). General Theory of Norms. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
45. KNIGHT, K., CHANDER, I., HAINES, M., HATZIVASSIGLOU, V., HOVY, E. H., IIDA, M., LUK, S., WHITNEY, R. & YAMAHADA, K. (1995). Filling knowledge gaps. Proceedings of IJCAI-95.
46. LENAT, D. & GUHA, R. (1990). Building Large Knowledge-based Systems. Representation and Inference in the CYC Project. Reading. MA: Addison-Wesley.
47. LEVESQUE, H. & BRACHMAN, R. (1985). A fundamental tradeoff in knowledge representation and reasoning. In R. B. H. LEVESQUE, Ed. Readings in Knowledge Representation. pp. 41-70. Los Altos, CA: Morgan Kaufmann.
48. LINDAHI, L. (1992). Conflicts in systems of legal norms: a logical point of view. In P. BROUWER, T. HOL, A. SOETEMAN, W. VAN DER VELDEN, & A. DE WILD, Eds. Coherence and Confict in Law, pp. 39-64. Deventer: Kluwer.
49. MACGREGOR, R. (1991). Inside the LOOM classifier. SIGART Bulletin, 2, 70-76
50. MARCUS, S., Ed (1988) Automatic Knowledge Acquisition for Expert Systems. Boston: Kluwer.
51. MCCARTY, T. (1984). Intelligent legal information systems: problems and prospects. In C. Campbell, Ed. Data Processing and the Law. London: Sweet and Maxwell.
52. MCCARTY (1989). A language for legal discourse. 1. Basic structures. Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on AI and Law, pp. 180-189. Vancouver: ACM.
53. MILLER, G. (1990) WordNet: an on-line lexical database. International Journal of Lexicography, (special issue), 3.
54. PADGHAM, L. & ZHANG, T. (1993). A terminological logic with defaults: a definition and an application. Proceedings of IJCAI'93, pp. 662-668.
55. PATEL-SCHNEIDER, P., MCGUINESS, D., BRACHMAN, R. & RESNICK, L. (1991). The CLASSIC knowledge representation system: guiding principles and implementation rationale. SIGART Bulletin, 2, 108-113.
56. PRAKKEN, H. (1993). Logical tools for modelling legal argument. Ph.D. Thesis, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam.
57. PRAKKEN, H. & SARTOR, G. (1999). A dialectical model of assessing conflicting arguments in legal reasoning. Journal of Artificial Intelligence and Law (to appear).
58. SARTOR, G. (1991). Inconsistency and legal reasoning. In Model-Based Legal Reasoning, JURIX' 1991, pp. 92-112. Lelystad: Koninklijke Vermande.
59. SARTOR, G. (1994). A formal model of legal argumentation. Ratio Juris, 7, 212-226.
60. SKALAK, D. & RISSLAND, E. (1991). Argument moves in a rule-guided domain. Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on AI and Law. pp. 1-11. Oxford, England.
61. SOWA, J. (1995). Top-level ontological categories. International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction (special issue on formal ontology), 43, 669-686.
62. STEELS, L. (1984). Second generation expert systems. Future Generation Computer Systems. 1.
63. STEELS, L. (1990). Components of expertise. AI Magazine.
64. STEFIK, M. (1995). Introduction to Knowledge Systems. San Francisco, CA: Morgan Kaufman.
65. STRUSS, P. (1997). Fundamentals of model-based diagnosis of dynamic systems. Proceedings of IJCAI97, pp. 480-485. San Francisco, CA: Morgan Kaufman.
66. SUSSKIND, R. (1987). Expert Systems in Law: a Jurisprudential Inquiry. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
67. SVENSSON, J., WASSINK, J. & VAN BUGGENHOUT, B. Eds. (1993) Intelligent Tools for Drafting and Computer-Supported Comparison of Law. Lelystad: Koninklijke Vermande.
68. TOURETZKY, D., HORTY, J. & THOMASON, R. (1987). A clash of intuitions: the current state of nonmonotonic multiple inheritance systems. Proceedings of IJCAI'87, pp. 476-482. Milan.
69. TURTLE, H. (1995). Text retrieval in the legal world. Artificial Intelligence and Law. 3, 5-54.
70. USCHOLD, M. & GRUNINGER, M. (1996). Ontologies: principles, methods and applications. The Knowledge Engineering Review, 11, 93-136.
71. VALENTE, A. (1995a). Knowledge level analysis of planning systems. SIGART Bulletin, 6, 33-41
72. VALENTE, A. (1995b). A Modelling Approach to Legal Knowledge Engineering. Amsterdam, Tokyo: IOS Press.
73. VALENTE, A. & BREUKER, J. (1994a). A commonsense formalization of normative systems. In J. BREUKER, Ed. Proceedings of the ECAI'94 Workshop on Artificial Normative Reasoning, pp. 56-67. Amsterdam.
74. VALENTE, A. & BREUKER, J. (1994b). Making ends meet: conceptual models on ontologies in legal problem solving. In Proceedings of the XI Brazilian AI Symposium (SBIA '94), pp. 1-15. Fortaleza, Brazil.
75. VALENTE, A. & BREUKER, J. (1996). Towards principled core ontologies. In B. GAINES & M. MUSEN Eds. Proceedings of the 10th Knowledge Acquisition for Knowledge-Based Systems Workshop. pp. 301-320.
76. VALENTE, A., BREUKER, J. & VAN DE VELDE, W. (1998). The CommonKADS Library in perspective. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies (special issue on Problem Solving Methods) 49, 391-416.
77. VALENTE, A. & LÖCKENHOFF, C. (1993). Organization as guidance: a library of assessment models. Proceedings of the 7th European Knowledge Acquisition Workshop, pp. 243-262.
78. VALENTE, A. & LÖCKENHOFF, C. (1994). Assessment. In J. BREUKER & W. VAN DE VELDE, Eds. CommonKADS Library for Expertise Modelling, Chapter 7, pp. 155-174. Amsterdam: IOS Press.
79. VAN DE VELDE, W. (1994). An overview of CommonKADS. In J. BREUKER & W. VAN DE VELDE, Eds. CommonKADS Library for Expertise Modelling, pp. 9-29. Amsterdam: IOS Press.
80. VAN HEIJST, G., SCHREIBER, A. T. & WIELINGA, B. (1997). Using explicit ontologies for KB development. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 46, 183-292.
81. VAN KRALINGER, R. W. (1995). Frame-based Conceptual Models of Statute Law. Computer/Law Series, The Hague. The Netherlands, Kluwer Law International, Ph.D. Thesis, University of Leiden.
82. VISSER, P. (1995). Knowledge Specification for Multiple Legal Tasks; a Case Study of the Interaction Problem in the Legal Domain. Computer/Law Series, The Hague, The Netherlands, Kluwer Law International, Ph.D. Thesis, University of Leiden.
83. VISSER, P. & BENCH-CAPON, T. (1997). A comparison of two legal ontologies. In P. VISSER, & R. WINKELS, Eds. Proceedings of the 1st Workshop on Ontologies in Law, LEGONT-97, pp. 37-46. Melbourne. Australia.
84. VISSER, P. & WINKELS, R. Eds. (1997). Proceedings of the 1st Workshop on Ontologies in Law. LEGONT-97. Melbourne, Australia.
85. WALKER, R. (1992). An expert system architecture for heterogenous domains: a case study in the legal field. Ph.D. Thesis, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam.
86. WIELINGA, B. J., SCHREIBER, A. T. & BREUKER, J. A. (1992). KADS: a modelling approach to knowledge engineering. Knowledge Acquisition, (special issue "The KADS approach to knowledge engineering), 4, 5-54.
87. WINKELS, R., BOER, A., BREUKER, J. & BOSSCHER, D. (1998). Assessment based legal information serving and co-operative dialogue in CLIME, in J. HAGE, Ed. Proceedings of JURIX-98 Conference. Vermande.