Skip to main content
Log in

Systematisierung und gegenwärtige Grenzen von Legal Tech

  • Schwerpunkt
  • Systematisierung und Grenzen von Legal Tech
  • Published:
Wirtschaftsinformatik & Management Aims and scope

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

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Abb. 1

Literatur

  1. Aggarwal, C. C. (2018). Machine Learning for Text. Cham: Springer International Publishing.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  2. Vgl. OLG Köln v. 19.06.2020–6 U 263/19, Der Betrieb 2020, S. 1563.

  3. Caliskan, A., Brayson, J., & Narayanan, A. (2017). Semantics derived automatically from language corpora contain human-like biases. Science, https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aal4230.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Aletras, N., Tsarapatsanis, D., & Preotiuc-Pietro, D. (2016). Predicting judicial decisions of the European Court of Human Rights: a Natural Language Processing perspective. PeerJ—Computer Science Journal, https://doi.org/10.7717/peerj-cs.93.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. https://www.zeit.de/digital/internet/2016-06/the-dao-blockchain-ether-hack. Zugegriffen 31. Aug 2020.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Matthias Blank.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Krug, P., Blank, M. Systematisierung und gegenwärtige Grenzen von Legal Tech. Wirtsch Inform Manag 12, 404–409 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1365/s35764-020-00303-w

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1365/s35764-020-00303-w

Navigation