By Pompeu Casanovas, Giovanni Sartor, Núria Casellas, Rossella Rubino
Details expertise has now pervaded the felony region, and the very glossy strategies of e-law and e-justice exhibit that automation procedures are ubiquitous. eu guidelines on transparency and data society, particularly, require using know-how and its regular improvement.Some of the revised papers offered during this e-book originate from a workshop held on the eu collage Institute of Florence, Italy, in December 2006. The workshop used to be dedicated to the dialogue of the several methods of knowing and explaining modern legislations, for the aim of creating computable types of it — specifically versions permitting the advance of laptop purposes for the criminal area. throughout the process the subsequent 12 months, numerous new contributions, supplied by means of a few ongoing (or lately complete) eu initiatives on computation and legislations, have been acquired, mentioned and reviewed to accomplish the survey.This publication provides 20 completely refereed revised papers at the sizzling issues lower than learn in numerous european initiatives: legislative XML, criminal ontologies, semantic net, seek and meta-search engines, net providers, method structure, dialectic platforms, discussion video games, multi-agent structures (MAS), criminal argumentation, criminal reasoning, e-justice, and on-line dispute solution. The papers are geared up in topical sections on wisdom illustration, ontologies and XML legislative drafting; wisdom illustration, criminal ontologies and knowledge retrieval; argumentation and felony reasoning; normative and multi-agent platforms; and on-line dispute solution.
Read or Download Computable models of the law: languages, dialogues, games, ontologies PDF
Similar jurisprudence books
Early sleek literature performed a key function within the formation of the felony justification for imperialism. because the English colonial firm constructed, the prevailing felony culture of universal legislations not solved the ethical dilemmas of the hot global order, during which England had turn into, rather than a sufferer of Catholic enemies, an competitive strength with its personal in another country territories.
This file makes an attempt to provide an explanation for the paradoxes and strength of Jamaica's fiscal heritage, and concludes that one attainable reason for Jamaica's low progress in GDP is that its GDP has been understated. The file proposes an method of reforms for sustained development, arguing that an method in accordance with social discussion and consensus development is key to create possession for destiny reforms between all stakeholders.
- The Laws of Genocide: Prescriptions for a Just World (PSI Reports)
- Econometrics: Legal, Practical and Technical Issues - antitrust law
- Shipping Law, Fourth Edition
- A Crime Called Freedom: The Writings of Os Cangaceiros, Volume One
Additional resources for Computable models of the law: languages, dialogues, games, ontologies
A bibliographic work, expression, manifestation, and item are bibliographic objects. – A bibliographic work is a bibliographic object, realized by one or more expressions, and created by one or more persons in a single creative process. We recognize the work through individual expressions of the work, but the work itself exists only in the commonality of content between and among the various expressions of the work. org 24 A. Boer, R. Winkels, and F. Vitali – An bibliographic expression is a realization of one bibliographic work in the form of signs, words, sentences, paragraphs, etc.
Parts of LKIF, its rule semantics and its ontology, were described earlier in [4,5,6]. This publication gives an overview of project results sofar. 1 Interface between LKIF and MetaLex LKIF naturally interfaces with MetaLex, although it can be used with any document format that identiﬁes sources of law and their relevant parts with identifying URI on the expression level. Both LKIF and MetaLex metadata are accessible as RDF data: MetaLex metadata is therefore directly accessible in an LKIF processing environment and does not have to be duplicated.
The argumentation schemes can be presumed to be less reusable out of the original context than the ontology, at least if used this way, but are on the other hand a much closer ﬁt to the actual behaviour of LKBS. The concept of burden of proof in an adversarial setting provides us with good examples: if you for instance make a false claim that may harm someone’s reputation, you are guilty of defamation, unless you made it in good faith and the reasonable belief that it was true. Logically speaking the unless could be easily replaced with a (but) not, and turned into a terminological axiom, but by doing so you fail to take account of implied burden of proof: it is up to the plaintiﬀ to argue that the claim is false and harmful, up to the defendant to argue it was made in good faith, and up to the plaintiﬀ that it was not reasonable to believe that it was true.