About: Artificial Intelligence and Law is an academic journal published by Springer Science+Business Media. The journal publishes majorly in the area(s): Philosophy of law & Computer science. It has an ISSN identifier of 0924-8463. Over the lifetime, 516 publications have been published receiving 13844 citations. The journal is also known as: AIL.
TL;DR: This work synthesizes ideas from multiagent systems, particularly the idea of social context, with ideas from ethics and legal reasoning, specifically that of directed obligations in the Hohfeldian tradition, to capture normative concepts such as obligations, taboos, conventions, and pledges as different kinds of commitments.
Abstract: Social commitments have long been recognized as an important concept for multiagent systems. We propose a rich formulation of social commitments that motivates an architecture for multiagent systems, which we dub spheres of commitment. We identify the key operations on commitments and multiagent systems. We distinguish between explicit and implicit commitments. Multiagent systems, viewed as spheres of commitment (SoComs), provide the context for the different operations on commitments. Armed with the above ideas, we can capture normative concepts such as obligations, taboos, conventions, and pledges as different kinds of commitments. In this manner, we synthesize ideas from multiagent systems, particularly the idea of social context, with ideas from ethics and legal reasoning, specifically that of directed obligations in the Hohfeldian tradition.
TL;DR: This work investigates how natural language processing tools can be used to analyse texts of the court proceedings in order to automatically predict (future) judicial decisions, and demonstrates that it can achieve a relatively high classification performance when predicting outcomes based only on the surnames of the judges that try the case.
Abstract: When courts started publishing judgements, big data analysis (i.e. large-scale statistical analysis of case law and machine learning) within the legal domain became possible. By taking data from the European Court of Human Rights as an example, we investigate how natural language processing tools can be used to analyse texts of the court proceedings in order to automatically predict (future) judicial decisions. With an average accuracy of 75% in predicting the violation of 9 articles of the European Convention on Human Rights our (relatively simple) approach highlights the potential of machine learning approaches in the legal domain. We show, however, that predicting decisions for future cases based on the cases from the past negatively impacts performance (average accuracy range from 58 to 68%). Furthermore, we demonstrate that we can achieve a relatively high classification performance (average accuracy of 65%) when predicting outcomes based only on the surnames of the judges that try the case.
TL;DR: It is shown that difficulties in holding “electronic persons” accountable when they violate the rights of others outweigh the highly precarious moral interests that AI legal personhood might protect.
Abstract: Conferring legal personhood on purely synthetic entities is a very real legal possibility, one under consideration presently by the European Union. We show here that such legislative action would be morally unnecessary and legally troublesome. While AI legal personhood may have some emotional or economic appeal, so do many superficially desirable hazards against which the law protects us. We review the utility and history of legal fictions of personhood, discussing salient precedents where such fictions resulted in abuse or incoherence. We conclude that difficulties in holding "electronic persons" accountable when they violate the rights of others outweigh the highly precarious moral interests that AI legal personhood might protect.
TL;DR: The Pleadings Game is a normative formalization and computational model of civil pleading, founded in Roberty Alexy's discourse theory of legal argumentation, modelled using Geffner and Pearl's nonmonotonic logic, conditional entailment.
Abstract: The Pleadings Game is a normative formalization and computational model of civil pleading, founded in Roberty Alexy's discourse theory of legal argumentation. The consequences of arguments and counterarguments are modelled using Geffner and Pearl's nonmonotonic logic,conditional entailment. Discourse in focussed using the concepts of issue and relevance. Conflicts between arguments can be resolved by arguing about the validity and priority of rules, at any level. The computational model is fully implemented and has been tested using examples from Article Nine of the Uniform Commercial Code.
TL;DR: A study of the early adaptation of Deep Learning in legal analytics focusing on three main fields; text classification, information extraction, and information retrieval focuses on the semantic feature representations, a key instrument for the successful application of deep learning in natural language processing.
Abstract: Deep Learning has been widely used for tackling challenging natural language processing tasks over the recent years. Similarly, the application of Deep Neural Networks in legal analytics has increased significantly. In this survey, we study the early adaptation of Deep Learning in legal analytics focusing on three main fields; text classification, information extraction, and information retrieval. We focus on the semantic feature representations, a key instrument for the successful application of deep learning in natural language processing. Additionally, we share pre-trained legal word embeddings using the word2vec model over large corpora, comprised legislations from UK, EU, Canada, Australia, USA, and Japan among others.