Advertisement

Artificial Intelligence and Law

, Volume 27, Issue 1, pp 93–111 | Cite as

Maintainable process model driven online legal expert systems

  • Johannes DimyadiEmail author
  • Sam Bookman
  • David Harvey
  • Robert Amor
Original Research

Abstract

Legal expert systems are computer applications that can mimic the consultation process of a legal expert to provide advice specific to a given scenario. The core of these systems is the experts’ knowledge captured in a sophisticated and often complex logic or rule base. Such complex systems rely on both knowledge engineers or system programmers and domain experts to maintain and update in response to changes in law or circumstances. This paper describes a pragmatic approach using process modelling techniques that enables a complex legal expert system to be maintained and updated dynamically by a domain expert such as a legal practitioner with little computing knowledge. The approach is illustrated using a case study on the design of an online expert system that allows a user to navigate through complex legal options in the domain of International Family Law.

Keywords

Legal expert system Process model Expert knowledge maintenance 

References

  1. Aikenhead M (1995) Legal knowledge-based systems: some observations on the future. Web J Curr Leg Issues 2:72Google Scholar
  2. Doogue CJJM (2017) Traversing the cross-border labyrinth: the development of the Hague Navigation Tool in New Zealand, pp 1–14Google Scholar
  3. Dove IL (1995) Legal expert systems: the end of jurisprudence? J Leg Stud Bus 5:1–28Google Scholar
  4. Franklin J (2012) Discussion paper: how much of commonsense and legal reasoning is formalizable? A review of conceptual obstacles. J Law Probab Risk 11(2–3):225–245.  https://doi.org/10.1093/lpr/mgs007 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Glennon P (2012) Neota logic. Internship reflection papers. 1052. https://digitalcommons.conncoll.edu/internreflect/1052. Accessed 3 Oct 2018
  6. Groothuis MM, Svensson JS (2000) Expert system support and juridical quality. In Legal knowledge and information systems, JURIX 2000: the thirteenth annual conference, pp 9–18Google Scholar
  7. Harvey D (2017) Artificial intelligence in practice. Auckland District Law Society. Retrieved 26 Feb 2018, from https://www.adls.org.nz/for-the-profession/news-and-opinion/2017/8/25/artificial-intelligence-in-practice/
  8. Konstantinou V, Sykes J, Yannopoulos GN (1994) Legal reasoning methodology: the missing link. Inf Commun Technol Law 3(1):29–46.  https://doi.org/10.1080/13600834.1994.9965690 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Object Management Group (2011) Business Process Model and Notation (BPMN), version 2, pp 1–538. http://www.omg.org/spec/BPMN/2.0/. Accessed 4 Oct 2018
  10. Stevens C, Barot V, Carter J (2010) The next generation of legal expert systems: new dawn or false dawn? In: SGAI conference proceedingsGoogle Scholar
  11. Susskind RE (1986) Expert systems in law: a jurisprudential approach to artificial intelligence and legal reasoning. Mod Law Rev 49(2):168–194.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2230.1986.tb01683.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Thomasset C, Paquin L-C (1989) Expert systems in law and the representation of legal knowledge: can we isolate it from the why and the who? In: Proceedings of the 3rd international congress on logica, informatica, diritto: legal experts systemsGoogle Scholar
  13. Zeleznikow J, Hunter D (1994) Building intelligent legal information systems: representation and reasoning in law (Kluwer computer law series, no. 13). In: Computer law series 13Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature B.V. 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Computer ScienceUniversity of AucklandAucklandNew Zealand
  2. 2.Harvard Law SchoolCambridgeUSA
  3. 3.New Zealand Centre for ICT LawUniversity of AucklandAucklandNew Zealand

Personalised recommendations