Online dispute resolution: an artificial intelligence perspective

  • 2103 Accesses

  • 19 Citations


Litigation in court is still the main dispute resolution mode. However, given the amount and characteristics of the new disputes, mostly arising out of electronic contracting, courts are becoming slower and outdated. Online Dispute Resolution (ODR) recently emerged as a set of tools and techniques, supported by technology, aimed at facilitating conflict resolution. In this paper we present a critical evaluation on the use of Artificial Intelligence (AI) based techniques in ODR. In order to fulfill this goal, we analyze a set of commercial providers (in this case twenty four) and some research projects (in this circumstance six). Supported by the results so far achieved, a new approach to deal with the problem of ODR is proposed, in which we take on some of the problems identified in the current state of the art in linking ODR and AI.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Access options

Buy single article

Instant unlimited access to the full article PDF.

US$ 39.95

Price includes VAT for USA

Subscribe to journal

Immediate online access to all issues from 2019. Subscription will auto renew annually.

US$ 99

This is the net price. Taxes to be calculated in checkout.


  1. Aamodt A, Plaza E (1994) Case-based reasoning: foundational issues, methodological variations, and system approaches.. AI Commun 7(1): 39–59

  2. Aleven V (1997) Teaching case-based argumentation through a model and examples. PhD thesis, University of Pittsburgh

  3. Ashley KD, Aleven V (1991) Toward an intelligent tutoring system for teaching law students to argue with cases. In: Proceedings of the 3rd international conference on Artificial intelligence and Law. ACM, New York, pp 42–52

  4. Ashley KD (1991) Modeling legal arguments: reasoning with cases and hypotheticals. The MIT Press, Cambridge

  5. Ashley KD (2004) Case-based models of legal reasoning in a civil law context. International Congress of Comparative Cultures and Legal Systems of the Instituto de Investigaciones Jurídicas

  6. Beer M, d’Inverno M, Jennings NR, Luck M, Preist C, Schroeder M (1999) Negotiation in multi-agent systems. Knowl Eng Rev 14(3): 285–289

  7. Bellucci E, Zeleznikow J (2001) Representations of decision-making support in negotiation. J Decis Syst 10(3–4): 449–479

  8. Benjamins RV, Casanovas P, Breuker J, Gangemi A (2005) Law and the semantic web: legal ontologies, methodologies, legal information retrieval, and applications. Springer

  9. Bennett SC (2002) Arbitration: essential concepts. ALM, New York

  10. Bonczek RH, Holsapple CW, Whinston AB (1981) Foundations of decision support systems. Academic Press, New York

  11. Brachman R, Levesque H (2004) Knowledge representation and reasoning. Morgan Kaufmann, Massachusetts

  12. Brams SJ, Taylor AD (1996) Fair division: from cake cutting to dispute resolution. Cambridge University Press, New York

  13. Brown H, Marriott A (1999) ADR principles and practice. Sweet and Maxwell, London

  14. Bruninghaus S, Ashley KD (2003) Predicting the outcome of case-based legal arguments. In: Proceedings of the 9th international conference on artificial intelligence and law, ICAIL, pp 234–242

  15. Buchanan B, Headrick T (1970) Some speculation about artificial intelligence and legal reasoning. Stanf Law Rev 23(1): 40–62

  16. Cáceres E (2008) EXPERTIUS: a mexican judicial decision-support system in the field of family law. In: Francesconi EBE, Sartor G, Tiscornia D (eds) Legal knowledge and information systems. IOS Press, Amsterdam, pp 78–87

  17. Corcho O, Fernández-lópez M, Gómez-pérez A, López A (2005) Building legal ontologies with METHONTOLOGY and WebODE. In: Law and the semantic web: legal ontologies, methodologies, legal information retrieval, and applications. Springer, pp 142–157

  18. De Vries BR, Leenes R, Zeleznikow J (2005) Fundamentals of providing negotiation support online: the need for developing BATNAs. In: Proceedings of the second international ODR workshop. Wolf Legal, Tilburg, pp 59–67

  19. Forsyth R (1986) The anatomy of expert systems. In: Yazdani M (eds) Artificial intelligence: principles and applications, ch. 8. Chapman & Hall, London, pp 186–187

  20. Greinke A (1994) Legal expert systems—a humanistic critique of mechanical legal inference. Murdoch Univ Electron J Law 1(4)

  21. Gruber TR (1993) A translation approach to portable ontologies. Knowl Acquis 5(2): 199–220

  22. Guasco MP, Robinson PR (2007) Principles of negotiation. Entrepreneur Press, Newburgh, New York

  23. Harmon P, King D (1985) Expert systems: artificial intelligence in business. Wiley, New York

  24. Hayes-Roth F, Waterman DA, Lenat DB (1983) Building expert systems. Addison-Wesley, Boston

  25. Jackson P (1990) Introduction to expert systems. Addison-Wesley, Boston

  26. Katsh E, Rifkin J, Gaitenby A (1999) E-commerce, E-disputes, and E-dispute resolution: in the shadow of eBay law. Ohio State J Disput Resolut 15: 705

  27. Katsh E, Rifkin J (2001) Online dispute resolution—resolving conflicts in cyberspace. Jossey-Bass Wiley Company, San Francisco

  28. Kolodner JL (1992) An introduction to case-based reasoning. Artif Intell Rev 6(1): 3–34. doi:10.1007/BF00155578

  29. Kolodner JL (1993) Case-based reasoning. Morgan Kaufmann, San Francisco

  30. Landes WM, Posner RA (1976) Legal precedent: a theoretical and empirical analysis. J Law Econ 19: 249

  31. Lodder A, Thiessen E (2003) The role of artificial intelligence in online dispute resolution. In workshop on online dispute resolution at the international conference on artificial intelligence and law. Edinburgh, UK

  32. Lodder AR (2006) The third party and beyond. An analysis of the different parties, in particular the fifth, involved in online dispute resolution. Inf Commun Technol Law 15(2): 143–155

  33. Lodder AR, Zeleznikow J (2010) Enhanced dispute resolution through the use of information technology. Cambridge Unversity Press, Cambridge, UK

  34. Matthijssen L (1995) An intelligent interface for legal databases. In: Proceedings of the 5th international conference on Artificial intelligence and law. ACM, New York

  35. Matthijssen L (1999) Interfacing between lawyers and computers: an architecture for knowledge-based interfaces to legal databases (law and electronic commerce). Kluwer Law International, The Netherlands

  36. Notini J (2005) Effective alternatives analysis in mediation: “BATNA/WATNA” analysis demystified. Available at . Accessed in 05/2005

  37. Olson GM, Malone TW, Smith JB (eds) (2001) Coordination theory and collaboration technology. Erlbaum, Mahwah

  38. Oskamp A, Tragter M, Groendijk C (1995) AI and law: what about the future?. Artif Intell Law 3(3): 209–215

  39. Parunak HVD (1997) Go to the ant: engineering principles from natural multi-agent systems. Ann Oper Res 75: 69–102

  40. Peruginelli G, Chiti G (2002) Artificial intelligence in alternative dispute resolution. In: Proceedings of the workshop on the law of electronic agents–LEA 2002

  41. Popple J (1991) Legal expert systems: the inadequacy of a rule-based approach. Australian Comput J 23(1): 11–16

  42. Popple J (1996) A pragmatic legal expert system. Applied legal philosophy series. Ashgate, Dartmouth

  43. Rahwan, I, Simari, G (eds) (2009) Argumentation in artificial intelligence. Springer, Berlin

  44. Raiffa H (2002) The art and science of negotiation. Harvard University Press, Harvard, USA

  45. Salton G, Wong A, Yang CS (1975) A vector space model for automatic indexing. Commun ACM 18(11): 613–620

  46. Searle JR (1980) Minds, brains and programs. Behav Brain Sci 3(3): 417–457

  47. Sowa JF (2000) Knowledge representation: logical, philosophical, and computational foundations. MIT Press, Cambridge

  48. Span G (1993) LITES, an intelligent tutoring system for legal problem solving in the domain of Dutch civil law. In: Proceedings of the 4th international conference on Artificial intelligence and Law. ACM, New York, pp 76–81

  49. Steinbach, M, Tan, PN, Kumar, V (eds) (2005) Introduction to data mining. Pearson Addison Wesley, Reading

  50. Susskind R (1987) Expert systems in law: a jurisprudential inquiry. Clarendon Press, Oxford

  51. Sycara K (1993) Machine learning for intelligent support of conflict resolution. Decis Support Syst 10: 121–136

  52. Thiessen EM (1993) ICANS: An interactive computer-assisted multi-party negotiation support system. PhD Dissertation, School of Civil & Environmental Engineering, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY

  53. Thiessen EM, Fraser K (2003) Mobile ODR with SmartSettle. In: Proceedings of the UNECE forum on ODR

  54. Turban E (1993) Decision support and expert systems: management support systems. Prentice Hall, NJ

  55. Turing AM (1950) Computing machinery and intelligence. Mind 59: 433–460

  56. Tyler C (2005) 115 and counting: the state of ODR 2004. In: Conley Tyler M, Katsh E, Choi D (eds) Proceedings of the third annual forum on online dispute resolution. International conflict resolution centre, University of Melbourne in collaboration with the United Nations Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific

  57. Velasquez JD (1997) Modeling emotions and other motivations in synthetic agents. In: Proceedings of the national conference on artificial intelligence. Wiley, pp 10–15

  58. Visser PRS, Bench-Capon TJM (1998) A comparison of four ontologies for the design of legal knowledge systems. Artif Intell Law 6(1): 27–57

  59. Waterman DA, Peterson M (1980) Rule-based models of legal expertise. In: The proceedings of the first national conference on artificial intelligence. Stanford University

  60. Watson I (1997) Applying case-based reasoning: techniques for enterprise systems. Morgan Kaufmann, CA

  61. Walton PRE, McKersie RB (1991) A behavioral theory of labor negotiations. Cornell University Press

  62. Wooldridge M (2002) An introduction to multiagent systems. Wiley

  63. Wooldridge M, Jennings NR (1995) Intelligent agents: theory and practice. Knowl Eng Rev 10(2): 115–152

  64. Zeleznikow J, Hunter D (1994) Building intelligent legal information systems: representation and reasoning in law. Kluwer Computer/Law Series, Deventer-Boston, pp 230–237

  65. Zeleznikow J, Stranieri A (1995) The split-up system: integrating neural networks and rule-based reasoning in the legal domain. In: Proceedings of the 5th international conference on artificial intelligence and law. pp 185–194

  66. Zeleznikow J, Bellucci E (2003) Family_Winner: integrating game theory and heuristics to provide negotiation support. In: Proceedings of sixteenth international conference on legal knowledge based system, pp 21–30

  67. Zeleznikow J, Bellucci E (2004) Building negotiation decision support systems by integrating game theory and heuristics. In: Proceedings of the IFIP international conference on decision support systems

  68. Zweigert K, Kötz H (1998) An introduction to comparative law, 3rd edn. Clarendon Press, Oxford

Download references

Author information

Correspondence to Paulo Novais.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Carneiro, D., Novais, P., Andrade, F. et al. Online dispute resolution: an artificial intelligence perspective. Artif Intell Rev 41, 211–240 (2014).

Download citation


  • Alternative dispute resolution
  • Online dispute resolution
  • Artificial intelligence