Legal Knowledge and Information Systems: JURIX 2006 - the Nineteenth Annual Conference PDF
Preview Legal Knowledge and Information Systems: JURIX 2006 - the Nineteenth Annual Conference
LEGAL KNOWLEDGE AND INFORMATION SYSTEMS Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence and Applications FAIA covers all aspects of theoretical and applied artificial intelligence research in the form of monographs, doctoral dissertations, textbooks, handbooks and proceedings volumes. The FAIA series contains several sub-series, including “Information Modelling and Knowledge Bases” and “Knowledge-Based Intelligent Engineering Systems”. It also includes the biennial ECAI, the European Conference on Artificial Intelligence, proceedings volumes, and other ECCAI – the European Coordinating Committee on Artificial Intelligence – sponsored publications. An editorial panel of internationally well-known scholars is appointed to provide a high quality selection. Series Editors: J. Breuker, R. Dieng-Kuntz, N. Guarino, J.N. Kok, J. Liu, R. López de Mántaras, R. Mizoguchi, M. Musen and N. Zhong Volume 152 Recently published in this series Vol. 151. R. Mizoguchi et al. (Eds.), Learning by Effective Utilization of Technologies: Facilitating Intercultural Understanding Vol. 150. B. Bennett and C. Fellbaum (Eds.), Formal Ontology in Information Systems – Proceedings of the Fourth International Conference (FOIS 2006) Vol. 149. X.F. Zha and R.J. Howlett (Eds.), Integrated Intelligent Systems for Engineering Design Vol. 148. K. Kersting, An Inductive Logic Programming Approach to Statistical Relational Learning Vol. 147. H. Fujita and M. Mejri (Eds.), New Trends in Software Methodologies, Tools and Techniques – Proceedings of the fifth SoMeT_06 Vol. 146. M. Polit et al. (Eds.), Artificial Intelligence Research and Development Vol. 145. A.J. Knobbe, Multi-Relational Data Mining Vol. 144. P.E. Dunne and T.J.M. Bench-Capon (Eds.), Computational Models of Argument – Proceedings of COMMA 2006 Vol. 143. P. Ghodous et al. (Eds.), Leading the Web in Concurrent Engineering – Next Generation Concurrent Engineering Vol. 142. L. Penserini et al. (Eds.), STAIRS 2006 – Proceedings of the Third Starting AI Researchers’ Symposium Vol. 141. G. Brewka et al. (Eds.), ECAI 2006 – 17th European Conference on Artificial Intelligence ISSN 0922-6389 Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence and Applications ISSN 1570-3886 Legal Knowledge and Information Systems Legal Knowledge and Information Systems JURIX 2006: The Nineteenth Annual Conference Edited by Tom M. van Engers University of Amsterdam, the Netherlands Amsterdam • Berlin • Oxford • Tokyo • Washington, DC © 2006 The authors and IOS Press. All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, without prior written permission from the publisher. ISBN 1-58603-698-X Library of Congress Control Number: 2006937405 Publisher IOS Press Nieuwe Hemweg 6B 1013 BG Amsterdam Netherlands fax: +31 20 687 0019 e-mail: [email protected] Distributor in the UK and Ireland Distributor in the USA and Canada Gazelle Books Services Ltd. IOS Press, Inc. White Cross Mills 4502 Rachael Manor Drive Hightown Fairfax, VA 22032 Lancaster LA1 4XS USA United Kingdom fax: +1 703 323 3668 fax: +44 1524 63232 e-mail: [email protected] e-mail: [email protected] LEGAL NOTICE The publisher is not responsible for the use which might be made of the following information. PRINTED IN THE NETHERLANDS Legal Knowledge and Information Systems v T.M. van Engers (Ed.) IOS Press, 2006 © 2006 The authors and IOS Press. All rights reserved. Preface This volume contains the Proceedings of the Nineteenth JURIX Conference on Legal KnowledgeandInformationSystems(JURIX2006),December7th–9th,UniversitéPan- theonAssas–ParisII,France.Thisyearwehopedtoputtwonewtopicsontheagenda: ArtificialIntelligenceinpoliceandintelligenceservicesandtheimpactofAIonlaw,le- galproceduresandlegalinstitutions.Despitethepoliticalattentionpaidtointernational crime,thewaronterrorismandtheconcernsaboutthegrowingnumberofregulations, increase of administrative costs and overloading of courts, too few contributions about theseissuesweresubmitted.Nevertheless,thelargenumberofsubmissionsshowsthat ourinterdisciplinarycommunityisstillgrowingandactive. This volume again covers a broad range of topics. Argumentation is central to le- gal reasoning and therefore it is no surprise that researchers have focused on compu- tational theories of argumentation. In this book four papers are dedicated to this topic. Atkinson & Bench-Capon compare disputes as dialectical trees to other abstract sys- tems for argument representation. Bex et al. focus on causal-abductive reasoning and default-styleargumentationtodealwithstories,evidenceandgeneralisationsinthelegal domain. Prakken & Sartor study formal models of representation of presumptions and theireffectsontheburdenofproof.Chorley&Bench-CaponaddthepossibilityofState interventions to improve the outcome of previous research on an argument scheme for practicalreasoning. Typical to the legal field is the use of written knowledge sources, especially legal sources. These have been subject to AI&Law research for a long time, varying from structuringandaccessinglegalsourcestousingnaturallanguageprocessingtechniques inordertodeterminethesemanticsoflanguageutterances.Thisbookcontainsfourpa- personlegalsources.DeMaatetal.explainhowparsingcanprovidesupportforcom- bininglegalcontentstoresofdifferentproviders.Saravananetal.proposeprobabilistic graphical models for automatic text summarization. Klein et al. report on methods for retrieving relevant case law within the domain of tort law. Van Opijnen describes the problemsencounteredinthedevelopmentofacitationstandardandexplainsthePublic IndexwithintheDutchjudiciary. Central to AI and consequently to AI&Law are knowledge representation and on- tologies.Thelatterespeciallyarebecomingmoreandmorepopularduetodevelopments in SemanticWeb research. In this book we have included four papers on these topics. Roth describes an evaluation method for determining the effectiveness of deterrence. Lindahl&Odelstadanalyseintermediariesbyusingatheoryof“intervenients”.Rubino etal.presentadescriptionofanontologythatshouldenablesemanticaccesstodigital legal information and clarify legal theoretical concepts. Hagiwara et al. propose a the- oryandanimplementationwhichdetectsdiscordanceinthetextofanordinanceofthe ToyamaprefectureinJapan. I am not a philosopher so I am also pleased to see some practical results of our theoretical reflections. This book contains three papers on applications. Zeleznikow & Bellucciexplainhownotionsoffairness tointerestsareusedintheirFamily_Mediator system.VanZeelandetal.explaintheirPersonalInjuryClaimsExpressweb-application. vi Toyamaetal.explainhownaturallanguageprocessingcanbeusedtosupportboththe compilation of a standard bilingual dictionary and unifying translation equivalents of legaltechnicalterms.Lastbutnotleastwehavefourshortpapersonvarioustopics. Acknowledgments TheJURIX2006ConferenceorganizersexpresstheirwarmthankstoDanièleBourcier whoorganizedtheconferencetogetherwithhercolleaguesandtheUniversitéPantheon Assas–ParisII.WewouldalsoliketothankthepeopleattheLeibnizCenterforLaw (UvA)forprovidingsupportforthereviewprocess. ForthisConferenceweselected15fullpapersand4shortpapersoutof29contribu- tions.Theauthorsrepresentedfifteencountries.Papershavebeenreviewedbymembers oftheprogrammecommittee: • KevinAshley(UniversityofPittsburgh) • TrevorBench-Capon(UniversityofLiverpool) • DanièleBourcier(CERSA-CNRS,UniversitéParisII) • PaulBourgine(CREA,EcolePolytechnique,Paris) • KarlBranting(BAESystemsInc.) • JaimeDelgado(UniversitatPolitècniadeCatalunya) • TomvanEngers(UniversityofAmsterdam) • AldoGangemi(CNR-ISTC) • ThomasF.Gordon(FraunhoferFOKUS,Berlin) • EduardHovy(UniversityofSouthernCalifornia) • RonaldLeenes(UniversiteitvanTilburg) • ArnoLodder(VrijeUniversiteitAmsterdam) • RonaldLoui(WashingtonUniversity) • ThorneMcCarty(RutgersUniversity) • HenryPrakken(UtrechtUniversity&UniversityofGroningen) • GiovanniSartor(UniversityofBologna) • ErichSweighofer(UniversityofVienna) • PeterSpyns(VrijeUniversiteitBrussel) • AndrewStranieri(JustSyssPtyLtd) • BartVerheij(UniversiteitofGroningen) • MariaWimmer(UniversityofKoblenz-Landau) • RadboudWinkels(UniversityofAmsterdam) Wewouldalsoliketothankallexternalreviewers.Theconferencewouldnothave beenpossiblewithoutthetimeandeffortputinbythesepeopleandsothanksaredueto themall.Ialsotaketheopportunitytothanktheinvitedspeakers,RonLouiandBurkhard Schaeffer,fortheircontribution.Finally,thanksareduetoJobienSombekkeandRinke Hoekstra(UniversityofAmsterdam)forstrugglingagainwithLATEXandsucceedingin gettingthefinalversionofthisbookingoodshapebeforethedeadline. IhopethatboththeconferenceandthebookhelptheAI&Lawcommunitystaythe vivid,inspiring,knowledgeproductiveandcollaborativebunchofresearchersandprac- titionersithasbeenoverthelasttwodecades. TomM.vanEngers ProgramChair vii Contents Preface v Tom M. van Engers Zeno Revisited: Representation of Persuasive Argument 1 Katie Atkinson and Trevor Bench-Capon Anchored Narratives in Reasoning About Evidence 11 Floris Bex, Henry Prakken and Bart Verhey Presumptions and Burdens of Proof 21 Henry Prakken and Giovanni Sartor Modelling State Intervention in Cases of Conflicting Interests 31 Alison Chorley and Trevor Bench-Capon Automated Detection of Reference Structures in Law 41 Emile de Maat, Radboud Winkels and Tom van Engers Improving Legal Document Summarization Using Graphical Models 51 M. Saravanan, B. Ravindran and S. Raman Thesaurus-Based Retrieval of Case Law 61 Michel C.A. Klein, Wouter van Steenbergen, Elisabeth M. Uijttenbroek, Arno R. Lodder and Frank van Harmelen A Public Index of Case Law References – The End of Multiple and Complex Citations 71 Marc van Opijnen Deterrence Under Uncertainty: A Case Study 81 Bram Roth Open and Closed Intermediaries in Normative Systems 91 Lars Lindahl and Jan Odelstad An OWL Ontology of Fundamental Legal Concepts 101 Rossella Rubino, Antonino Rotolo and Giovanni Sartor Discordance Detection in Regional Ordinance: Ontology-Based Validation 111 Shingo Hagiwara and Satoshi Tojo Family_Mediator – Adding Notions of Fairness to Those of Interests 121 John Zeleznikow and Emilia Bellucci Handling Personal Injury Claims PICE 131 Corry van Zeeland, Ronald Leenes, Jelle van Veenen and Janneke van der Linden viii Application of Word Alignment for Supporting Translation of Japanese Statutes into English 141 Katsuhiko Toyama, Yasuhiro Ogawa, Kazuhiro Imai and Yoshiharu Matsuura AVER: Argument Visualization for Evidential Reasoning 151 Susan W. van den Braak and Gerard A.W. Vreeswijk An Action-Based Legal Model for Dynamic Digital Rights Expression 157 Melanie Dulong de Rosnay Disjunction of Causes and Disjunctive Cause: A Solution to the Paradox of Conditio Sine Qua Non Using Minimal Abduction 163 Ken Satoh and Satoshi Tojo Developing Content for LKIF: Ontologies and Frameworks for Legal Reasoning 169 Joost Breuker, Alexander Boer, Rinke Hoekstra and Kasper van den Berg Previous Publications by JURIX 175 Contact Information on JURIX 177 Author Index 179 Legal Knowledge and Information Systems 1 T.M. van Engers (Ed.) IOS Press, 2006 © 2006 The authors and IOS Press. All rights reserved. Zeno Revisited: Representation of Persuasive Argument KatieATKINSONa,1andTrevorBENCH-CAPONa aDepartmentofComputerScience,UniversityofLiverpool,Liverpool,UK Abstract.Inthispaperweexploreandcontrastdifferentformsofdisputerepre- sentationfromthepresentandpastliterature.Inparticular,weexaminetheZeno Framework,whichrepresentsdisputesasdialecticaltrees,andcomparethistoother abstractsystemsforargumentrepresentation.Wediscussthemeritsofeachmethod andshowhowtheexampleargumentfirstrepresentedinZenocanbetransformed intoamoreconciserepresentationwhilstretainingitsdesirablefeatures. Keywords.Argumentation,Persuasion,Values,DisputeResolution,e-Democracy. Introduction Persuasion through argument plays a crucial role in many areas addressed by AI and Law,suchasdisputeresolution,e-democracyanddecidinglegalcases.Inthispaperwe willexamineaninfluentialapproachtopersuasionthroughargument[10],inthelightof recentdevelopmentsinworkonargumentation.Thisisnecessarysinceafrequentques- tionaskedofapproachesbasedonthesedevelopments,suchastheauthor’sParmenides system[4],ishowtheyrelatetoworksuchas[10]. TheZenosystem[10],whichisinatraditiongoingbacktotheIBIS(IssueBased Information System) of Rittel and Weber [11] represents a deliberation between two individuals(intheexamplegiventhereahusbandandwife)astoanissue(intheexample as to what car to buy). The dispute is represented as a dialectical graph. This graph containstwokindsofnode,positionsandissues.Ifapositionisdisputed,itgivesriseto anissue,andthenreappearsinthegraphasachoicewithrespecttothatissue.Positions mayeitherbefactualstatements(“Porschesarefastcars”)orpreferenceexpressions,in which one position is preferred to another (“Porsches are fast cars” is more important than “Porsches are expensive cars”). Edges are of one of four types: the children of issuesareeitherchoices(factualpositions)orconstraints(preferenceexpressions),while the children of positions are either pros, supporting the position, or cons, attacking the position. An argument is a pair of positions, one of which is a pro or con of the other. Givensuchagraph,itispossibletocalculatethestatusofanissue,withrespecttoarange ofproofstandards,runningfromscintillaofevidencetobeyondareasonabledoubt[9]. 1CorrespondingAuthor:KatieAtkinson,DepartmentofComputerScience,UniversityofLiverpool,L69 3BX,UK.Tel.:+44(0)1517954243;Fax:+44(0)1517954235;E-mail:[email protected]
The list of books you might like
