Pub Date : 2022-08-08DOI: 10.1007/s10506-022-09326-7
Giovanni Sartor, Michał Araszkiewicz, Katie Atkinson, Floris Bex, Tom van Engers, Enrico Francesconi, Henry Prakken, Giovanni Sileno, Frank Schilder, Adam Wyner, Trevor Bench-Capon
The first issue of Artificial Intelligence and Law journal was published in 1992. This paper provides commentaries on nine significant papers drawn from the Journal’s second decade. Four of the papers relate to reasoning with legal cases, introducing contextual considerations, predicting outcomes on the basis of natural language descriptions of the cases, comparing different ways of representing cases, and formalising precedential reasoning. One introduces a method of analysing arguments that was to become very widely used in AI and Law, namely argumentation schemes. Two relate to ontologies for the representation of legal concepts and two take advantage of the increasing availability of legal corpora in this decade, to automate document summarisation and for the mining of arguments.
{"title":"Thirty years of Artificial Intelligence and Law: the second decade","authors":"Giovanni Sartor, Michał Araszkiewicz, Katie Atkinson, Floris Bex, Tom van Engers, Enrico Francesconi, Henry Prakken, Giovanni Sileno, Frank Schilder, Adam Wyner, Trevor Bench-Capon","doi":"10.1007/s10506-022-09326-7","DOIUrl":"10.1007/s10506-022-09326-7","url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>The first issue of <i>Artificial Intelligence and Law</i> journal was published in 1992. This paper provides commentaries on nine significant papers drawn from the Journal’s second decade. Four of the papers relate to reasoning with legal cases, introducing contextual considerations, predicting outcomes on the basis of natural language descriptions of the cases, comparing different ways of representing cases, and formalising precedential reasoning. One introduces a method of analysing arguments that was to become very widely used in AI and Law, namely argumentation schemes. Two relate to ontologies for the representation of legal concepts and two take advantage of the increasing availability of legal corpora in this decade, to automate document summarisation and for the mining of arguments.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":51336,"journal":{"name":"Artificial Intelligence and Law","volume":"30 4","pages":"521 - 557"},"PeriodicalIF":4.1,"publicationDate":"2022-08-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45410239","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-08-06DOI: 10.1007/s10506-022-09324-9
Michał Araszkiewicz, Trevor Bench-Capon, Enrico Francesconi, Marc Lauritsen, Antonino Rotolo
The first issue of Artificial Intelligence and Law journal was published in 1992. This paper discusses several topics that relate more naturally to groups of papers than a single paper published in the journal: ontologies, reasoning about evidence, the various contributions of Douglas Walton, and the practical application of the techniques of AI and Law.
{"title":"Thirty years of Artificial Intelligence and Law: overviews","authors":"Michał Araszkiewicz, Trevor Bench-Capon, Enrico Francesconi, Marc Lauritsen, Antonino Rotolo","doi":"10.1007/s10506-022-09324-9","DOIUrl":"10.1007/s10506-022-09324-9","url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>The first issue of <i>Artificial Intelligence and Law</i> journal was published in 1992. This paper discusses several topics that relate more naturally to groups of papers than a single paper published in the journal: ontologies, reasoning about evidence, the various contributions of Douglas Walton, and the practical application of the techniques of AI and Law.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":51336,"journal":{"name":"Artificial Intelligence and Law","volume":"30 4","pages":"593 - 610"},"PeriodicalIF":4.1,"publicationDate":"2022-08-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s10506-022-09324-9.pdf","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42051099","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-08-04DOI: 10.1007/s10506-022-09323-w
Clement Guitton, Aurelia Tamò-Larrieux, Simon Mayer
The field of computational law has increasingly moved into the focus of the scientific community, with recent research analysing its issues and risks. In this article, we seek to draw a structured and comprehensive list of societal issues that the deployment of automatically processable regulation could entail. We do this by systematically exploring attributes of the law that are being challenged through its encoding and by taking stock of what issues current projects in this field raise. This article adds to the current literature not only by providing a needed framework to structure arising issues of computational law but also by bridging the gap between theoretical literature and practical implementation. Key findings of this article are: (1) The primary benefit (efficiency vs. accessibility) sought after when encoding law matters with respect to the issues such an endeavor triggers; (2) Specific characteristics of a project—project type, degree of mediation by computers, and potential for divergence of interests—each impact the overall number of societal issues arising from the implementation of automatically processable regulation.
{"title":"Mapping the Issues of Automated Legal Systems: Why Worry About Automatically Processable Regulation?","authors":"Clement Guitton, Aurelia Tamò-Larrieux, Simon Mayer","doi":"10.1007/s10506-022-09323-w","DOIUrl":"10.1007/s10506-022-09323-w","url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>The field of computational law has increasingly moved into the focus of the scientific community, with recent research analysing its issues and risks. In this article, we seek to draw a structured and comprehensive list of societal issues that the deployment of automatically processable regulation could entail. We do this by systematically exploring attributes of the law that are being challenged through its encoding and by taking stock of what issues current projects in this field raise. This article adds to the current literature not only by providing a needed framework to structure arising issues of computational law but also by bridging the gap between theoretical literature and practical implementation. Key findings of this article are: (1) The primary benefit (efficiency vs. accessibility) sought after when encoding law matters with respect to the issues such an endeavor triggers; (2) Specific characteristics of a project—project type, degree of mediation by computers, and potential for divergence of interests—each impact the overall number of societal issues arising from the implementation of automatically processable regulation.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":51336,"journal":{"name":"Artificial Intelligence and Law","volume":"31 3","pages":"571 - 599"},"PeriodicalIF":4.1,"publicationDate":"2022-08-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s10506-022-09323-w.pdf","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43740456","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-08-01DOI: 10.1007/s10506-022-09320-z
Rachel F. Adler, Andrew Paley, Andong L. Li Zhao, Harper Pack, Sergio Servantez, Adam R. Pah, Kristian Hammond, SCALES OKN Consortium
We implemented a user-centered approach to the design of an artificial intelligence (AI) system that provides users with access to information about the workings of the United States federal court system regardless of their technical background. Presently, most of the records associated with the federal judiciary are provided through a federal system that does not support exploration aimed at discovering systematic patterns about court activities. In addition, many users lack the data analytical skills necessary to conduct their own analyses and convert data into information. We conducted interviews, observations, and surveys to uncover the needs of our users and discuss the development of an intuitive platform informed from these needs that makes it possible for legal scholars, lawyers, and journalists to discover answers to more advanced questions about the federal court system. We report on results from usability testing and discuss design implications for AI and law practitioners and researchers.
{"title":"A user-centered approach to developing an AI system analyzing U.S. federal court data","authors":"Rachel F. Adler, Andrew Paley, Andong L. Li Zhao, Harper Pack, Sergio Servantez, Adam R. Pah, Kristian Hammond, SCALES OKN Consortium","doi":"10.1007/s10506-022-09320-z","DOIUrl":"10.1007/s10506-022-09320-z","url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>We implemented a user-centered approach to the design of an artificial intelligence (AI) system that provides users with access to information about the workings of the United States federal court system regardless of their technical background. Presently, most of the records associated with the federal judiciary are provided through a federal system that does not support exploration aimed at discovering systematic patterns about court activities. In addition, many users lack the data analytical skills necessary to conduct their own analyses and convert data into information. We conducted interviews, observations, and surveys to uncover the needs of our users and discuss the development of an intuitive platform informed from these needs that makes it possible for legal scholars, lawyers, and journalists to discover answers to more advanced questions about the federal court system. We report on results from usability testing and discuss design implications for AI and law practitioners and researchers.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":51336,"journal":{"name":"Artificial Intelligence and Law","volume":"31 3","pages":"547 - 570"},"PeriodicalIF":4.1,"publicationDate":"2022-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s10506-022-09320-z.pdf","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42775697","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-07-25DOI: 10.1007/s10506-022-09322-x
Hal Ashton
This article introduces definitions for direct, means-end, oblique (or indirect) and ulterior intent which can be used to test for intent in an algorithmic actor. These definitions of intent are informed by legal theory from common law jurisdictions. Certain crimes exist where the harm caused is dependent on the reason it was done so. Here the actus reus or performative element of the crime is dependent on the mental state or mens rea of the actor. The ability to prosecute these crimes is dependent on the ability to identify and diagnose intentional states in the accused. A certain class of auto didactic algorithmic actor can be given broad objectives without being told how to meet them. Without a definition of intent, they cannot be told not to engage in certain law breaking behaviour nor can they ever be identified as having done it. This ambiguity is neither positive for the owner of the algorithm or for society. The problem exists over and above more familiar debates concerning the eligibility of algorithms for culpability judgements that mens rea is usually associated with. Aside from inchoate offences, many economic crimes with elements of fraud or deceit fall into this category of crime. Algorithms operate in areas where these crimes could be plausibly undertaken depending on whether the intent existed in the algorithm or not.
{"title":"Definitions of intent suitable for algorithms","authors":"Hal Ashton","doi":"10.1007/s10506-022-09322-x","DOIUrl":"10.1007/s10506-022-09322-x","url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>This article introduces definitions for direct, means-end, oblique (or indirect) and ulterior intent which can be used to test for intent in an algorithmic actor. These definitions of intent are informed by legal theory from common law jurisdictions. Certain crimes exist where the harm caused is dependent on the reason it was done so. Here the actus reus or performative element of the crime is dependent on the mental state or mens rea of the actor. The ability to prosecute these crimes is dependent on the ability to identify and diagnose intentional states in the accused. A certain class of auto didactic algorithmic actor can be given broad objectives without being told how to meet them. Without a definition of intent, they cannot be told not to engage in certain law breaking behaviour nor can they ever be identified as having done it. This ambiguity is neither positive for the owner of the algorithm or for society. The problem exists over and above more familiar debates concerning the eligibility of algorithms for culpability judgements that mens rea is usually associated with. Aside from inchoate offences, many economic crimes with elements of fraud or deceit fall into this category of crime. Algorithms operate in areas where these crimes could be plausibly undertaken depending on whether the intent existed in the algorithm or not.\u0000</p></div>","PeriodicalId":51336,"journal":{"name":"Artificial Intelligence and Law","volume":"31 3","pages":"515 - 546"},"PeriodicalIF":4.1,"publicationDate":"2022-07-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s10506-022-09322-x.pdf","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42138451","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
From 2010 to 2020, Indonesia’s tax-to-gross domestic product (GDP) ratio has been declining. A tax-to-GDP ratio trend of this magnitude indicates that the tax authority lacks the capacity to collect taxes. The tax administration system’s modernization utilizing information technology is thus deemed necessary. Artificial intelligence (AI) technology may serve as a solution to this issue. Using the theoretical frameworks of innovations in tax compliance, the cost of taxation, success factors for information technology governance (SFITG), and AI readiness, this study aims to analyze the costs and benefits, the enablers and inhibitors, and the readiness of the government and related parties to apply AI to modernize the tax administration system in Indonesia. This study used qualitative approaches for the data’s collection and analysis. The data were obtained through a literature study and in-depth interviews. The findings show that AI application in the field of taxation can assist tax authorities in enforcing the law, provide taxpayers with convenience in fulfilling their tax obligations, improve justice for all taxpayers, and reduce tax compliance costs. The openness of Indonesia to technological developments, as evidenced by the AI National Strategy, is a supporting factor in the application of AI in Indonesia, particularly for the modernization of the tax administration system. The absence of specific regulations governing AI adoption, as well as a lack of human resources that can help the tax administration process, data, and infrastructure already support, are the impediments to implementing AI for the modernization of the tax administration system in Indonesia.
{"title":"The potential of an artificial intelligence (AI) application for the tax administration system’s modernization: the case of Indonesia","authors":"Arfah Habib Saragih, Qaumy Reyhani, Milla Sepliana Setyowati, Adang Hendrawan","doi":"10.1007/s10506-022-09321-y","DOIUrl":"10.1007/s10506-022-09321-y","url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>From 2010 to 2020, Indonesia’s tax-to-gross domestic product (GDP) ratio has been declining. A tax-to-GDP ratio trend of this magnitude indicates that the tax authority lacks the capacity to collect taxes. The tax administration system’s modernization utilizing information technology is thus deemed necessary. Artificial intelligence (AI) technology may serve as a solution to this issue. Using the theoretical frameworks of innovations in tax compliance, the cost of taxation, success factors for information technology governance (SFITG), and AI readiness, this study aims to analyze the costs and benefits, the enablers and inhibitors, and the readiness of the government and related parties to apply AI to modernize the tax administration system in Indonesia. This study used qualitative approaches for the data’s collection and analysis. The data were obtained through a literature study and in-depth interviews. The findings show that AI application in the field of taxation can assist tax authorities in enforcing the law, provide taxpayers with convenience in fulfilling their tax obligations, improve justice for all taxpayers, and reduce tax compliance costs. The openness of Indonesia to technological developments, as evidenced by the AI National Strategy, is a supporting factor in the application of AI in Indonesia, particularly for the modernization of the tax administration system. The absence of specific regulations governing AI adoption, as well as a lack of human resources that can help the tax administration process, data, and infrastructure already support, are the impediments to implementing AI for the modernization of the tax administration system in Indonesia.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":51336,"journal":{"name":"Artificial Intelligence and Law","volume":"31 3","pages":"491 - 514"},"PeriodicalIF":4.1,"publicationDate":"2022-07-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44388272","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-07-13DOI: 10.1007/s10506-022-09318-7
Karl Branting, Sarah McLeod, Sarah Howell, Brandy Weiss, Brett Profitt, James Tanner, Ian Gross, David Shin
Online dispute resolution (ODR) is an alternative to traditional litigation that can both significantly reduce the disadvantages suffered by litigants unable to afford an attorney and greatly improve court efficiency and economy. An important aspect of many ODR systems is a facilitator, a neutral party who guides the disputants through the steps of reaching an agreement. However, insufficient availability of facilitators impedes broad adoption of ODR systems. This paper describes a novel model of facilitation that integrates two distinct but complementary knowledge sources: cognitive task analysis of facilitator behavior and corpus analysis of ODR session transcripts. This model is implemented in a decision-support system that (1) monitors cases to detect situations requiring immediate attention and (2) automates selection of standard text messages appropriate to the current state of the negotiations. This facilitation model has the potential to compensate for shortages of facilitators by improving the efficiency of experienced facilitators, assisting novice facilitators, and providing autonomous facilitation.
{"title":"A computational model of facilitation in online dispute resolution","authors":"Karl Branting, Sarah McLeod, Sarah Howell, Brandy Weiss, Brett Profitt, James Tanner, Ian Gross, David Shin","doi":"10.1007/s10506-022-09318-7","DOIUrl":"10.1007/s10506-022-09318-7","url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Online dispute resolution (ODR) is an alternative to traditional litigation that can both significantly reduce the disadvantages suffered by litigants unable to afford an attorney and greatly improve court efficiency and economy. An important aspect of many ODR systems is a facilitator, a neutral party who guides the disputants through the steps of reaching an agreement. However, insufficient availability of facilitators impedes broad adoption of ODR systems. This paper describes a novel model of facilitation that integrates two distinct but complementary knowledge sources: cognitive task analysis of facilitator behavior and corpus analysis of ODR session transcripts. This model is implemented in a decision-support system that (1) monitors cases to detect situations requiring immediate attention and (2) automates selection of standard text messages appropriate to the current state of the negotiations. This facilitation model has the potential to compensate for shortages of facilitators by improving the efficiency of experienced facilitators, assisting novice facilitators, and providing autonomous facilitation.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":51336,"journal":{"name":"Artificial Intelligence and Law","volume":"31 3","pages":"465 - 490"},"PeriodicalIF":4.1,"publicationDate":"2022-07-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s10506-022-09318-7.pdf","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48168582","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-07-04DOI: 10.1007/s10506-022-09317-8
Enrico Francesconi, Guido Governatori
This paper presents an approach for legal compliance checking in the Semantic Web which can be effectively applied for applications in the Linked Open Data environment. It is based on modeling deontic norms in terms of ontology classes and ontology property restrictions. It is also shown how this approach can handle norm defeasibility. Such methodology is implemented by decidable fragments of OWL 2, while legal reasoning is carried out by available decidable reasoners. The approach is generalised by presenting patterns for modeling deontic norms and norms compliance checking.
{"title":"Patterns for legal compliance checking in a decidable framework of linked open data","authors":"Enrico Francesconi, Guido Governatori","doi":"10.1007/s10506-022-09317-8","DOIUrl":"10.1007/s10506-022-09317-8","url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>This paper presents an approach for legal compliance checking in the Semantic Web which can be effectively applied for applications in the Linked Open Data environment. It is based on modeling deontic norms in terms of ontology classes and ontology property restrictions. It is also shown how this approach can handle norm defeasibility. Such methodology is implemented by decidable fragments of OWL 2, while legal reasoning is carried out by available decidable reasoners. The approach is generalised by presenting patterns for modeling deontic norms and norms compliance checking.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":51336,"journal":{"name":"Artificial Intelligence and Law","volume":"31 3","pages":"445 - 464"},"PeriodicalIF":4.1,"publicationDate":"2022-07-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s10506-022-09317-8.pdf","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47586580","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-06-19DOI: 10.1007/s10506-022-09316-9
Alicja Kowalewska, Rafal Urbaniak
When we talk about the coherence of a story, we seem to think of how well its individual pieces fit together—how to explicate this notion formally, though? We develop a Bayesian network based coherence measure with implementation in R, which performs better than its purely probabilistic predecessors. The novelty is that by paying attention to the network structure, we avoid simply taking mean confirmation scores between all possible pairs of subsets of a narration. Moreover, we assign special importance to the weakest links in a narration, to improve on the other measures’ results for logically inconsistent scenarios. We illustrate and investigate the performance of the measures in relation to a few philosophically motivated examples, and (more extensively) using the real-life example of the Sally Clark case.
{"title":"Measuring coherence with Bayesian networks","authors":"Alicja Kowalewska, Rafal Urbaniak","doi":"10.1007/s10506-022-09316-9","DOIUrl":"10.1007/s10506-022-09316-9","url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>When we talk about the coherence of a story, we seem to think of how well its individual pieces fit together—how to explicate this notion formally, though? We develop a Bayesian network based coherence measure with implementation in <b><span>R</span></b>, which performs better than its purely probabilistic predecessors. The novelty is that by paying attention to the network structure, we avoid simply taking mean confirmation scores between all possible pairs of subsets of a narration. Moreover, we assign special importance to the weakest links in a narration, to improve on the other measures’ results for logically inconsistent scenarios. We illustrate and investigate the performance of the measures in relation to a few philosophically motivated examples, and (more extensively) using the real-life example of the Sally Clark case.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":51336,"journal":{"name":"Artificial Intelligence and Law","volume":"31 2","pages":"369 - 395"},"PeriodicalIF":4.1,"publicationDate":"2022-06-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46786857","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-06-06DOI: 10.1007/s10506-022-09315-w
Corinna Coupette, Dirk Hartung, Janis Beckedorf, Maximilian Böther, Daniel Martin Katz
Building on the computer science concept of code smells, we initiate the study of law smells, i.e., patterns in legal texts that pose threats to the comprehensibility and maintainability of the law. With five intuitive law smells as running examples—namely, duplicated phrase, long element, large reference tree, ambiguous syntax, and natural language obsession—, we develop a comprehensive law smell taxonomy. This taxonomy classifies law smells by when they can be detected, which aspects of law they relate to, and how they can be discovered. We introduce text-based and graph-based methods to identify instances of law smells, confirming their utility in practice using the United States Code as a test case. Our work demonstrates how ideas from software engineering can be leveraged to assess and improve the quality of legal code, thus drawing attention to an understudied area in the intersection of law and computer science and highlighting the potential of computational legal drafting.
{"title":"Law Smells","authors":"Corinna Coupette, Dirk Hartung, Janis Beckedorf, Maximilian Böther, Daniel Martin Katz","doi":"10.1007/s10506-022-09315-w","DOIUrl":"10.1007/s10506-022-09315-w","url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Building on the computer science concept of <i>code smells</i>, we initiate the study of <i>law smells</i>, i.e., patterns in legal texts that pose threats to the comprehensibility and maintainability of the law. With five intuitive law smells as running examples—namely, duplicated phrase, long element, large reference tree, ambiguous syntax, and natural language obsession—, we develop a comprehensive law smell taxonomy. This taxonomy classifies law smells by when they can be detected, which aspects of law they relate to, and how they can be discovered. We introduce text-based and graph-based methods to identify instances of law smells, confirming their utility in practice using the United States Code as a test case. Our work demonstrates how ideas from software engineering can be leveraged to assess and improve the quality of <i>legal</i> code, thus drawing attention to an understudied area in the intersection of law and computer science and highlighting the potential of computational legal drafting.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":51336,"journal":{"name":"Artificial Intelligence and Law","volume":"31 2","pages":"335 - 368"},"PeriodicalIF":4.1,"publicationDate":"2022-06-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s10506-022-09315-w.pdf","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42037535","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}