Advertisement

PROLEG: An Implementation of the Presupposed Ultimate Fact Theory of Japanese Civil Code by PROLOG Technology

  • Ken Satoh
  • Kento Asai
  • Takamune Kogawa
  • Masahiro Kubota
  • Megumi Nakamura
  • Yoshiaki Nishigai
  • Kei Shirakawa
  • Chiaki Takano
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 6797)

Abstract

In this paper, we propose a legal reasoning system called PROLEG (PROlog based LEGal reasoning support system) based on the Japanese “theory of presupposed ultimate facts” (called “Yoken-jijitsu-ron” in Japanese, the JUF theory, in short). The theory is used for decision making by judges under incomplete information. Previously, we proposed a translation of the theory into logic programming. However, it turns out that the knowledge representation in logic programming is difficult for lawyers to understand. So, in this paper, we change knowledge representation of rules in the JUF theory in PROLEG so that we reflect lawyers’ reasoning using the idea of “openness” proposed by a judge who is a main investigator of the JUF theory.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Dung, P.M.: On the Acceptability of Arguments and its Fundamental Role in Nonmonotonic Reasoning, Logic Programming and n-Person Games. Artif. Intell. 77(2), 321–358 (1995)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Gordon, T.F., Prakken, H., Walton, D.: The Carneades Model of Argument and Burden of Proof. Artif. Intell. 171(10-15), 875–896 (2007)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Ito, S.: Lecture Series on Ultimate Facts. Shojihomu (2008) (in Japanese)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    McCarty, L.T., Sridharan, N.S., Sangster, B.C.: The Implementation of TAXMAN II: An Experiment in Artificial Intelligence and Legal Reasoning. Report LRP-TR-2, Rutgers University (1979)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Prakken, H.: Logical Tools for Modelling Legal Argument: A Study of Defeasible Reasoning in Law. Law and Philosophy Library 32 (1997)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Prakken, H., Sartor, G.: Formalising Arguments about the Burden of Persuasion. In: Proc. of ICAIL 2007, pp. 97–106 (2007)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Satoh, K., Kubota, M., Nishigai, Y., Takano, C.: Translating the Japanese Presupposed Ultimate Fact Theory into Logic Programming. In: Proc. of JURIX 2009, pp. 162–171 (2009)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Sergot, M.J., Sadri, F., Kowalski, R.A., Kriwaczek, F., Hammond, P., Cory, H.T.: The British Nationality Act as a Logic Program. CACM 29(5), 370–386 (1986)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Yoshino, H.: On the Logical Foundations of Compound Predicate Formulae for Legal Knowledge Representation, vol. 5(1-2), pp. 77–96 (1997)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  • Ken Satoh
    • 1
  • Kento Asai
    • 1
  • Takamune Kogawa
    • 1
  • Masahiro Kubota
    • 1
  • Megumi Nakamura
    • 1
  • Yoshiaki Nishigai
    • 1
  • Kei Shirakawa
    • 1
  • Chiaki Takano
    • 1
  1. 1.National Institute of Informatics and SokendaiJapan

Personalised recommendations