Advertisement

Developing Rule-Based Expert System for People with Disabilities – The Case of Succession Law

  • Michał Araszkiewicz
  • Maciej Kłodawski
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 10791)

Abstract

This paper presents the features of a moderately simple legal expert system devoted to solving the most frequent legal problems of disabled persons in Poland. The authors focused on the structure of legal expert system and methodology used for the sake of its development. The succession law of Poland has been selected in the paper as the illustrative domain, because the modelling of the succession procedures delivers sufficient material to reveal the most important issues concerning project of the legal expert system.

Keywords

Legal expert system Legal problems of disabled persons Rule-based reasoning Succession law 

References

  1. 1.
    Aleven, V.: Teaching case-based argumentation through a model and examples. Ph.D. Dissertation, University of Pittsburgh, Graduate Program in Intelligent Systems (1997)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Ashley, K.: Modeling Legal Argument: Reasoning with Cases and Hypotheticals. MIT Press, Cambridge (1990)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Bench-Capon, T.: What makes a system a legal expert? In: Schäfer, B. (ed.) Twenty-Fifth Annual Conference Legal Knowledge and Information Systems, JURIX 2012, pp. 11–20. IOS Press, Amsterdam (2012)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Gardner, A.L.: An Artificial Intelligence Approach to Legal Reasoning. MIT Press, Cambridge (1987)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Sergot, M., Sadri, F., Kowalski, R., Kriwaczek, F., Hammond, P., Cory, H.T.: The British nationality act as a logic program. Commun. ACM 29, 370–386 (1986)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Skalak, D., Rissland, E.: Arguments and cases: an inevitable intertwining. Artif. Intell. Law 1, 3–44 (1992)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Walton, D., Sartor, G., Macagno, F.: Contested cases of statutory interpretation. Artif. Intell. Law 24, 51–91 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Yoshino, H., et al.: Legal expert system—LES-2. In: Wada, E. (ed.) LP 1986. LNCS, vol. 264, pp. 34–45. Springer, Heidelberg (1987).  https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-18024-9_20CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Żurek, T., Araszkiewicz, M.: Modelling teleological interpretation. In: Verheij, B., Francesconi, E., Gardner, A.L. (eds.) Proceedings of the Fourteenth Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Law, ICAIL 2013, pp. 160–168. ACM, New York (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Sartor, G., Walton, D., Macagno, F., Rotolo, A.: Argumentation schemes for statutory interpretation: a logical analysis. In: Hoekstra, R. (ed.) Twenty-Seventh Annual Conference Legal Knowledge and Information Systems, JURIX 2014, pp. 11–20. IOS Press, Amsterdam (2014)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Macagno, F., Sartor, G., Walton, D.: Argumentation schemes for statutory interpretation. In: Araszkiewicz, M., Myška, M., Smejkalová, T., Šavelka, J., Škop, M. (eds.) International Conference on Alternative Methods of Argumentation in Law, ARGUMENTATION 2012, pp. 31–44. Masaryk University, Brno (2012)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Araszkiewicz, M.: Towards systematic research on statutory interpretation in AI and law. In: Ashley, K. (ed.) Twenty-Sixth Annual Conference Legal Knowledge and Information Systems, JURIX 2013, pp. 15–24. IOS Press, Amsterdam (2013)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Schäfer, B.: Formal models of statutory interpretation in multilingual legal systems. Statut. Law Rev. 38(3), 310–328 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Legal Theory, Faculty of Law and AdministrationJagiellonian UniversityKrakówPoland
  2. 2.Department of Legal Theory, Faculty of Law and AdministrationUniversity of Zielona GóraZielona GóraPoland

Personalised recommendations