Measuring the complexity of the law: the United States Code

Artificial Intelligence and Law 22 (4):337-374 (2014)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

Einstein’s razor, a corollary of Ockham’s razor, is often paraphrased as follows: make everything as simple as possible, but not simpler. This rule of thumb describes the challenge that designers of a legal system face—to craft simple laws that produce desired ends, but not to pursue simplicity so far as to undermine those ends. Complexity, simplicity’s inverse, taxes cognition and increases the likelihood of suboptimal decisions. In addition, unnecessary legal complexity can drive a misallocation of human capital toward comprehending and complying with legal rules and away from other productive ends. While many scholars have offered descriptive accounts or theoretical models of legal complexity, most empirical research to date has been limited to simple measures of size, such as the number of pages in a bill. No extant research rigorously applies a meaningful model to real data. As a consequence, we have no reliable means to determine whether a new bill, regulation, order, or precedent substantially effects legal complexity. In this paper, we begin to address this need by developing a proposed empirical framework for measuring relative legal complexity. This framework is based on “knowledge acquisition”, an approach at the intersection of psychology and computer science, which can take into account the structure, language, and interdependence of law. We then demonstrate the descriptive value of this framework by applying it to the U.S. Code’s Titles, scoring and ranking them by their relative complexity. We measure various features of a title including its structural size, the net flow of its intra-title citations and its linguistic entropy. Our framework is flexible, intuitive, and transparent, and we offer this approach as a first step in developing a practical methodology for assessing legal complexity.

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 74,429

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

The Catholic Hierarchy and United States Culture.Joseph B. Code - 1941 - Thought: Fordham University Quarterly 16 (2):224-240.
The Instrumental Complexity of States.George Svetlichny - 1982 - Foundations of Physics 12 (3):301-326.
Measuring Complexity Using Information Fluctuation.Harvey K. Shepard - 1995 - In R. J. Russell, N. Murphy & A. R. Peacocke (eds.), Chaos and Complexity. Vatican Observatory Publications. pp. 303.
Complexity: From Formal Analysis to Final Action.Douglas Frye & Philip David Zelazo - 1998 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 21 (6):836-837.
Is the 2008 NMC Code Ethical?Stephen Pattison & Paul Wainwright - 2010 - Nursing Ethics 17 (1):9-18.

Analytics

Added to PP
2015-09-03

Downloads
17 (#634,461)

6 months
1 (#417,143)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?