A comparison of four ontologies for the design of legal knowledge systems

Artificial Intelligence and Law 6 (1):27-57 (1998)
Abstract
There is a growing interest in how people conceptualise the legal domain for the purpose of legal knowledge systems. In this paper we discuss four such conceptualisations (referred to as ontologies): McCarty's language for legal discourse, Stamper's norma formalism, Valente's functional ontology of law, and the ontology of Van Kralingen and Visser. We present criteria for a comparison of the ontologies and discuss the strengths and weaknesses of the ontologies in relation to these criteria. Moreover, we critically review the criteria.
Keywords No keywords specified (fix it)
Categories (categorize this paper)
Options
 Save to my reading list
Follow the author(s)
My bibliography
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Revision history Request removal from index
 
Download options
PhilPapers Archive


Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy on self-archival     Papers currently archived: 11,826
External links
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
Through your library
References found in this work BETA

No references found.

Citations of this work BETA
Similar books and articles
Anja Oskamp (1992). Model for Knowledge and Legal Expert Systems. Artificial Intelligence and Law 1 (4):245-274.
Adam Wyner (2008). An Ontology in Owl for Legal Case-Based Reasoning. Artificial Intelligence and Law 16 (4):361-387.
Analytics

Monthly downloads

Added to index

2009-01-28

Total downloads

19 ( #92,902 of 1,100,143 )

Recent downloads (6 months)

10 ( #24,072 of 1,100,143 )

How can I increase my downloads?

My notes
Sign in to use this feature


Discussion
Start a new thread
Order:
There  are no threads in this forum
Nothing in this forum yet.