Treatment of Legal Sentences Including Itemized and Referential Expressions – Towards Translation into Logical Forms
- 484 Downloads
This paper proposes a framework for analyzing legal sentences including itemized or referential expressions. Thus far, we have developed a system for translating legal documents into logical formulae. Although our system basically converts words and phrases in a target sentence into predicates in a logical formula, it generates some useless predicates for itemized and referential expressions. We propose a front end system which substitutes corresponding referent phrases for these expressions. Thus, the proposed system generates a meaningful text with high readability, which can be input into our translation system. We examine our system with actual data of legal documents. As a result, the system was 73.1% accurate in terms of removing itemized expressions in a closed test, and 51.4% accurate in an open test.
KeywordsNoun Phrase Logical Predicate Logical Formula Target Sentence Legal Document
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- 1.Katayama, T.: The current status of the art of the 21st COE programs in the information sciences field (2): Verifiable and evolvable e-society - realization of trustworthy e-society by computer science - (in Japanese). IPSJ (Information Processing Society of Japan) Journal 46(5), 515–521 (2005)Google Scholar
- 2.Katayama, T.: Legal engineering – an engineering approach to laws in e-society age. In: Proc. of the 1st Intl. Workshop on JURISIN (2007)Google Scholar
- 3.Katayama, T., Shimazu, A., Tojo, S., Futatsugi, K., Ochimizu, K.: e-Society and legal engineering (in Japanese). Journal of the Japanese Society for Artificial Intelligence 23(4), 529–536 (2008)Google Scholar
- 4.Hagiwara, S., Tojo, S.: Stable legal knowledge with regard to contradictory arguments. In: AIA 2006: Proceedings of the 24th IASTED international conference on Artificial intelligence and applications, Anaheim, CA, USA, pp. 323–328. ACTA Press (2006)Google Scholar
- 6.Hobbs, J.R., Stickel, M., Martin, P., Edwards, D.: Interpretation as abduction. In: Proceedings of the 26th annual meeting on Association for Computational Linguistics, Morristown, NJ, USA. Association for Computational Linguistics, pp. 95–103 (1988)Google Scholar
- 7.Mulkar, R., Hobbs, J.R., Hovy, E.: Learning from reading syntactically complex biology texts. In: Proceedings of the 8th International Symposium on Logical Formalizations of Commonsense Reasoning. Part of the AAAI Spring Symposium Series (2007)Google Scholar
- 8.Mulkar, R., Hobbs, J.R., Hovy, E., Chalupsky, H., Lin, C.Y.: Learning by reading: Two experiments. In: Proceedings of IJCAI 2007 workshop on Knowledge and Reasoning for Answering Questions (2007)Google Scholar
- 9.Tanaka, K., Kawazoe, I., Narita, H.: Standard structure of legal provisions - for the legal knowledge processing by natural language - (in Japanese). In: IPSJ Research Report on Natural Language Processing, pp. 79–86 (1993)Google Scholar
- 10.Nagai, H., Nakamura, T., Nomura, H.: Skeleton structure acquisition of Japanese law sentences based on linguistic characteristics. In: Proc. of NLPRS 1995, vol. 1, pp. 143–148 (1995)Google Scholar
- 11.Kurohashi, S., Nakamura, T., Matsumoto, Y., Nagao, M.: Improvements of Japanese morphological analyzer JUMAN. In: Proceedings of the Workshop on Sharable Natural Language Resources, pp. 22–28 (1994)Google Scholar
- 12.Kurohashi, S., Nagao, M.: KN parser: Japanese dependency/case structure analyzer. In: Proceedings of the Workshop on Sharable Natural Language Resources, pp. 48–55 (1994)Google Scholar