Artificial Intelligence and Law 5 (1-2):97-118 (1997)
This paper presents a new algorithm to find an appropriate similarityunder which we apply legal rules analogically. Since there may exist a lotof similarities between the premises of rule and a case in inquiry, we haveto select an appropriate similarity that is relevant to both thelegal rule and a top goal of our legal reasoning. For this purpose, a newcriterion to distinguish the appropriate similarities from the others isproposed and tested. The criterion is based on Goal-DependentAbstraction (GDA) to select a similarity such that an abstraction basedon the similarity never loses the necessary information to prove the ground (purpose of legislation) of the legal rule. In order to cope withour huge space of similarities, our GDA algorithm uses some constraintsto prune useless similarities.
|Keywords||legal reasoning analogy similarity order-sorted logid taxonomic hierarchy goal-dependent abstraction|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
On Universal Relevance in Legal Reasoning.Barbara Baum Levenbook - 1984 - Law and Philosophy 3 (1):1 - 23.
The IKBALS Project: Multi-Modal Reasoning in Legal Knowledge Based Systems. [REVIEW]John Zeleznikow, George Vossos & Daniel Hunter - 1993 - Artificial Intelligence and Law 2 (3):169-203.
Rhetoric and the Rule of Law: A Theory of Legal Reasoning.Neil MacCormick - 2005 - Oxford University Press.
Implicit Learning in Rule Induction and Problem Solving.Aldo Zanga & Jean-Fran - 2004 - Thinking and Reasoning 10 (1):55 – 83.
Arguing About Goals: The Diminishing Scope of Legal Reasoning. [REVIEW]Pauline Westerman - 2010 - Argumentation 24 (2):211-226.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads42 ( #122,056 of 2,158,893 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #353,783 of 2,158,893 )
How can I increase my downloads?