Retrieval of Case Law to Provide Layman with Information about Liability: Preliminary Results of the BEST-Project

  • Elisabeth M. Uijttenbroek
  • Arno R. Lodder
  • Michel C. A. Klein
  • Gwen R. Wildeboer
  • Wouter Van Steenbergen
  • Rory L. L. Sie
  • Paul E. M. Huygen
  • Frank van Harmelen
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 4884)

Abstract

This paper describes the experiments carried out in the context of the BEST-project, an interdisciplinary project with researchers from the Law faculty and the AI department of the VU University Amsterdam. The aim of the project is to provide laymen with information about their legal position in a liability case, based on retrieved case law. The process basically comes down to (1) analyzing the input of a layman in terms of a layman ontology, (2) mapping this ontology to a legal ontology, (3) retrieve relevant case law based, and finally (4) present the results in a comprehensible way to the layman. This paper describes the experiments undertaken regarding step 4, and in particular step 3.

Keywords

concept-based search case law information retrieval 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Bench-Capon, T.J.M., Sergot, M.J.: Towards a rulebased presentation of open texture in law. In: Walter, C. (ed.) Computer power and legal language, pp. 39–61. Qourum Books, New York (1988)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Bilgic, M.: Explanation for Recommender Systems: Satisfaction vs. Promotion. Computer Sciences Austin, University of Texas. Undergraduate Honors: 27 (2004)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Bing, J.: Designing text retrieval systems for “conceptual searching”. In: International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Law, Boston (1987)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    O’Donovan, J., Smyth, B.: Trust in recommender systems. In: International Conference on Intelligent User Interfaces, ACM Press, San Diego (2005)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Fabri, M., Contini, F. (eds.): Justice and technology in Europe: How ICT is changing the judicial business. Kluwer Law International, The Hague (2001)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Fluit, C., van Harmelen, F., Sabou, M.: Ontology-based Information Visualization: Towards Semantic Web Applications. In: Visualising the Semantic Web, 2nd edn. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Klein, M.C.A., van Steeenbergen, W., Uijttenbroek, E.M., Lodder, A.R., van Harmelen, F.: Thesaurus-based retrieval of case-law. In: Proceedings JURIX 2006, pp. 61–70 (2006)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Lodder, A.R.: Law, Logic, Rhetoric: a Procedural Model of Legal Argumentation. In: Rahman, S., Symons, J. (eds.) Logic, Epistemology, and the Unity of Science, ch.26. Logic, Epistemology, and the Unity of Science Series, vol. 1. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht (2004)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Lodder, A.R., Oskamp, A., Schmidt, A.H.J. (eds.): IT support of the Judiciary in Europe (ITeR deel 43), Den Haag: SDU 2001 (2001)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    McSherry, D.: Explanation in Recommender Systems. Artificial Intelligence Review 24(2), 179–197 (2005)MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    van Mulligen, E.M., van der Eijk, C., Kors, J.A., Schijvenaars, B.J., Mons, B.: Research for research: tools for knowledge discovery and visualization. In: Proceedings of the AMIA Symposium, pp. 835–839 (2002)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Oskamp, A., Lodder, A.R., Apistola, M. (eds.): IT support of the judiciary in Australia, Singapore, Venezuela, Norway, The Netherlands and Italy. IT & Law series no. 4. Cambridge University Press, TMC Asser Press (2004)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Salton, G.: Automatic text processing: the transformation, analysis, and retrieval of information bycomputer. Addison-Wesley Longman Publishing Co., Inc., Boston (1989)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Salton, G., Buckley, C.: Term weighting approaches in automatic text retrieval. Technical report, Ithaca, NY, USA (1987)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Stranieri, A., Zeleznikow, J.: Knowledge Discovery from Legal Databases, Law and Philosophy Library, vol. 69. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Stuckenschmidt, H., van Harmelen, F., de Waard, A., Scerri, T., Bhogal, R., van Buel, J., Crowlesmith, I., Fluit, C., Kampman, A., Broekstra, J., van Mulligen, E.: Exploring Large Document Repositories with RDF Technology: The DOPE Project. IEEE Intelligent Expert 19(3), 34–40Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Uijttenbroek, E.M., Klein, M.C.A., Lodder, A.R., van Harmelen, F., Huygen, P.: Semantic Case Law Retrieval – Findings and Challenges. In: Proceedings SW4Law workshop 2007 (2007)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Wildeboer, G.R., Klein, M.C.A., Uijttenbroek, E.M.: Explaining the Relevance of Court Decisions to Laymen. In: Lodder, A.R., Mommers, L. (eds.) Proceedings of JURIX 2007, Amsterdam, Berlin, etc, pp. 129–138. IOS Press, Amsterdam (2007)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  • Elisabeth M. Uijttenbroek
    • 1
  • Arno R. Lodder
    • 1
  • Michel C. A. Klein
    • 1
  • Gwen R. Wildeboer
    • 1
  • Wouter Van Steenbergen
    • 1
  • Rory L. L. Sie
    • 1
  • Paul E. M. Huygen
    • 1
  • Frank van Harmelen
    • 1
  1. 1.Centre of Electronic Dispute Resolution – CEDIRE.ORGVU University Amsterdam 

Personalised recommendations