Abstract
We present a novel approach to gaining a machine understanding of a legal document and then modelling the logic of that document in an integrated process. This paper describes a smart editor that uses a declarative language to represent both the ontology and logic models of a legal document. A document is incrementally elaborated in a fixed sequence of steps beginning with an ontology discovery step that identifies the explicit and implicit artefacts and applicable constraints. This information is used to generate code representations paired with words and icons which provide the foundation required for modelling the legal logic. The pairing with words and icons achieves a formal correspondence that allows logic modelling via either a textual or a graphical means. Similarly, this mechanism also supports both verbal and visual user feedback, enhancing user understanding. The tree of rules produced during this process is embedded in the original legal document, which can then be used as a smart contract on a modified blockchain. The integrated use of a declarative language auto-generated from a smart user interface for modelling both the ontology and the logic of a legal document, provides a simplicity and agility that enables domain experts to create and test custom smart contracts.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Working with Contracts, Practical assistance for small business managers (2019). https://treasury.gov.au/sites/default/files/2019-03/WorkingWithContractsGuide.pdf
Levi, S., Lipton, A.: An introduction to smart contracts and their potential and inherent limitations. Forum on Corporate Governance (2018). https://corpgov.law.harvard.edu/2018/05/26/an-introduction-to-smart-contracts-and-their-potential-and-inherent-limitations/
Brewka, G., Eiter, T., Truszczynski, M.: Answer set programming at a glance. Commun. ACM 54(12), 92–103 (2011)
Eiter, T., Ianni, G., Krennwallner, T.: Answer set programming: a primer. In: Tessaris, S., et al. (eds.) Reasoning Web 2009. LNCS, vol. 5689, pp. 40–110. Springer, Heidelberg (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-03754-2_2
Thompson Reuters: HighQ Document Automation (2021). https://legal.thomsonreuters.com/en/products/highq/document-automation
Solidity. https://docs.soliditylang.org/en/v0.8.9/
OpenZeppelin. Build Secure Smart Contracts in Solidity. https://openzeppelin.com/contracts/
Potassco. clingo and gringo (2021). http://potassco.org/clingo/
Febbraro, O., et al.: ASPIDE: integrated development environment for answer set programming. University of Calabria. (2021) https://www.mat.unical.it/ricca/aspide/index.html
Grigg I.: The Ricardian contract. In: Proceedings of First IEEE International Workshop on Electronic Contracting, San Diego, CA, USA, pp. 25–31 (2004). https://doi.org/10.1109/WEC.2004.1319505
Choudhury, O., et al.: Auto-generation of smart contracts from domain-specific ontologies and semantic rules (2018). https://doi.org/10.1109/Cybermatics_2018.2018.00183
Maedche, A., Staab, S.: The TEXT-TO-ONTO Ontology Learning Environment. Institute AIFB, University of Karlsruhe (2000)
Konys, A.: Knowledge Repository of Ontology Learning Tools from Text. Procedia Comput. Sci. 159, 1614–1628 (2019)
Falkner, A., et al.: Industrial applications of answer set programming. KI - Künstliche Intelligenz 32(2–3), 165–176 (2018)
Kloimüllner, C., et al.: Kara: a system for visualising and visual editing of interpretations for answer set programs. In: Proceedings INAP. arXiv:1109.4095. (2011)
Calimeri, F., et al.: ASP-core-2 input language format. Theory Pract. Logic Program. 20(2), 294–309 (2019)
Wood, G.: Ethereum: a secure decentralised generalised transaction ledger. EIP-150 Revision (2017). http://www.gavwood.com/paper.pdf
Hjort, R.: Formally verifying webassembly with KWasm (2020). https://odr.chalmers.se/handle/20.500.12380/300761
Moritz, D.: Clingo WebAssembly (2021). https://github.com/domoritz/clingo-wasm
Batsakis, S., et al.: Legal representation and reasoning in practice: a critical comparison. In: JURIX, pp. 31–40 (2018)
Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (2021). https://plato.stanford.edu/contents.html
Purnell, K., Schwitter, R.: Towards Declarative Smart Contracts. In: Proceedings of The 4th Symposium on Distributed Ledger Technology (2019). https://symposium-dlt.org/SDLT2019-FinalProceedings.pdf
Getty Research Institute (2021). https://www.getty.edu/research/publications/electronic_publications/intro_controlled_vocab/what.pdf
Giordano, L., Dupré, D.T.: Enriched modeling and reasoning on business processes with ontologies and answer set programming (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-98651-7_5
Sergot, M., et al.: The British nationality act as a logic program. Commun. ACM 29, 370–386 (1986). https://doi.org/10.1145/5689.5920
Norman, D., Nielsen, J.: Nielsen norman group. beyond the NPS: measuring perceived usability with the SUS, NASA-TLX, and the single ease question after tasks and usability tests (2018). https://www.nngroup.com/articles/measuring-perceived-usability/
Salik, I., Ashurst, J.V.: Closed loop communication training in medical simulation (2019). https://www.statpearls.com/articlelibrary/viewarticle/63796/
Rodrigues, C., et al.: Legal ontologies over time: a systematic mapping study. Expert Syst. Appl. 130, 12–30 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2019.04.009
Bench-Capon, T., et al.: A history of AI and Law in 50 papers: 25 years of the international conference on AI and law. ICAIL 20, 215–319 (2012) https://www.csc.liv.ac.uk/%20tbc/publications/ICAIL25AuthorsVersion.pdf
Antoniou, G.: Nonmonotonic rule systems on top of ontology layers. In: Horrocks, I., Hendler, J. (eds.) ISWC 2002. LNCS, vol. 2342, pp. 394–398. Springer, Heidelberg (2002). https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-48005-6_30
Herrestad, H.: Norms and formalization. In: Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Law. ICAIL 1991, pp. 175–184, May 1991. https://doi.org/10.1145/112646.112667
SDEv4: Smart Document Editor v4 prototype (2022). http://130.56.246.229
Panagiotidi, S., Nieves, J., Vázquez-Salceda, J.: A framework to model norm dynamics in answer set programming. In: CEUR Workshop Proceedings, vol. 494 (2009)
De Vos, M., Padget, J., Satoh, K.: Legal modelling and reasoning using institutions. In: Onada, T., Bekki, D., McCready, E. (eds.) JSAI-isAI 2010. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 6797, pp. 129–140. Springer, Heidelberg (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-25655-4_12
Sileno, G., Boer, A., van Engers, T.: A petri net-based notation for normative modeling: evaluation on deontic paradoxes. In: Pagallo, U., Palmirani, M., Casanovas, P., Sartor, G., Villata, S. (eds.) AICOL 2015-2017. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 10791, pp. 89–104. Springer, Cham (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-00178-0_6
Kowalski, R., Satoh, K.: Obligation as optimal goal satisfaction. J. Philos. Log. 47(4), 579–609 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10992-017-9440-3
Lam, H., Governatori, G., Riveret, R.: On ASPIC+ and defeasible logic (2016). https://doi.org/10.3233/978-1-61499-686-6-359
Governatori, G., Casanovas, P., Koker, L.: On the formal representation of the Australian spent conviction scheme (2020). https://doi.org/10.26181/6073968f457d2
Schwitter, R.: Specifying and verbalising answer set programs in controlled natural language. Theory Pract. Logic Program. 18, 691–705 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1017/S1471068418000327
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2023 Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this paper
Cite this paper
Purnell, K., Schwitter, R. (2023). User-Guided Machine Understanding of Legal Documents. In: Yada, K., Takama, Y., Mineshima, K., Satoh, K. (eds) New Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence. JSAI-isAI 2021. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 13856. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-36190-6_2
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-36190-6_2
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-031-36189-0
Online ISBN: 978-3-031-36190-6
eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)