ABriefHistoryofAIandLaw

FransCoenenandTrevorBench-Capon12December2017AI&LawWorkshopBCSSGAIAI’17

Timeline  EarlyWork(<1980)  FoundationsofAnAI&LawCommunity(1987)  CaseBasedReasoningandHYPO(1987)  RuleBasedSystemsandTheMAKEProject(1990)  DeonticLogic(1991)  CABARET,aCBRandRuleBasedHybrid(1991)  Argumentation(1991)  LegalDocumentProcessingandFLEXICON(1993)  ArgumentationFrameworks(1995)  OntologyandONLINE(1995)  E-GovernmentandZENO(1997)

  LegalTextSummarisationandSALOMON(1998)  METAlex,TheE-PowerProjectandLegalXML(2003)  MachineLearningandDataMining(2005)  TheBurdenofProofandCARNEADES(2007)  OpinionMining,SocialMediaandAI&Law(2007)  LegalTextInformationRetrievalandTREC(2010)  MultiAgent-basedSystems,PADUAandPISA(2012)  AI&LawandtheeraofBigData(2013)  WhereNext---TwoExamples(2017)

AI&LawAIandLaw(LegalInformatics):TheapplicationandutilisationoftechniquesfromthecomputersciencedomainofArtificialIntelligencetothelegalapplicationdomain.

+

EarlyWork  PublicationsonwhatmightbenowbeconsideredtobeAIandLawcanbetracedbacktotheearly1950s---LaymanAllen(1956),"Symboliclogic:Arazor-edgedtoolfordraftingandinterpretinglegaldocuments".

  ThephraseAI&Lawstartedtobeusedinthe1970s---BruceBuchananandThomasHeadrick(1970),“Somespeculationaboutartificialintelligenceandlegalreasoning”.

OneearlysystemofnoteistheTAXMANsystem,afoundationformuchfuturework(TAXMANIIin1981)---ThorneMcCarty(1977),ReflectionsonTaxman:AnExperimentinArtificialIntelligenceandLegalReasoning.

  ThebirthofanAI&LawcommunitycanbearguedtobethefoundationoftheInternationalConferenceonAIandLAW(ICAIL)whichwasfirstheldinBostoninMay1987(the16thICAILwasheldthisyear).

  InEuropethefirstconferenceofthe“StichtingJuridischeKennissystemen”(JURIX),whichtranslatestothe”FoundationforLegalKnowledgeSystems”,washeldin1988.

FoundationsofAnAI&LawCommunity

FoundationsofAnAI&LawCommunitycont.

  InternationalAssociationforAIandLaw(IAAIL)wasinauguratedin1991.  TheJournalofArtificialIntelligenceandLawwaslaunchedin1992.  JURISINseriesofworkshopsstartedin2007inJapan.

CaseBasedReasoningandHYPO

  Workinthe1980swasdirectedat:(i)Informationextractionandinformationretrievalofvariouskinds,and(ii)theconstructionofexpertsystemsofvariouskinds.

  Therewasmuchdiscussionastowhetherrulebasedorcasebasedwasthebestwaytogo.

  InthecontextofCBRtheHYPOreasoningwithcasesand“hypotheticals”systemisofnote---EdwinaRisslandandKevinAshley(1987),“Acase-basedsystemfortradesecretslaw”.

  TheSignificanceofHYPOarethat:§  Itisthefirstsystemthatthereasonedwithcasesinthelegaldomain,and

§  Itwasthecatalystformanysubsequentsystems(CABARET,CATO,IBP).

RuleBasedSystemsandTheMAKEProject

  Rulebasedapproachestookafairlystandard(forthetime)expertsystemsapproach.

  TheToulminmethodofinformalreasoningwaspopular.

  Earlyexample---MarekSergotetal.(1986),TheBritishNationalityActasalogicprogram.

  Laterexample,theMAKEproject---Bench-Capon,T.J.M.andCoenen,F.P.(1994),TheMaintenanceofLegalKnowledgeBasedSystems.  CollaborativeprojectbetweenICL,BritishCoalandtheUniversityofLiverpool.  Focuson:

§  Industrialinjuryclaims,and§  Themaintenanceoflegalexpertsystems.

DeonticLogic(s)  Anotherfocusofthelate1980sandearly1990swasworkonvariouslogicalformalisms.  InparticularDeonticlogics,whichwaspopularisedwithintheAIandLawcommunityinthe1980s---HenningHerrestad(1991),Normsandformalization.  Usedthethenotation:

§  OA-itoughttobethecasethatA §  PA-itispermissiblethatA

  Addedthefollowingaxiomstostandardpropositionallogic:§  O(A->B) -> (OA->OB) §  PA -> (not O not A)

  Arguedtobesuitedtotherepresentationofdomainswherewehavenormsprovidingcompensationsforviolations,suchasinthecaseofcontactlaw.

CABARET,aCBRandRuleBasedHybrid

  FollowingonfromHYPO,CABARETAdoptedaCBRandRulebasehybridapproach---EdwinaRisslandandDavidSkalak(1989),Combiningcase-basedandrule-basedreasoning:aheuristicapproach.  Keyidea:Toplevela(argument)treederivedfromtherules,casesusedtoresolvetheleafnodes.  Essentiallyashellthatintegratedreasoningwithrulesandcaseswithanemphasisontheapplicationofrulescontainingill-definedterms.  Operatedusingacollectionofcontrolheuristicsdirectedatinterleavingcase-basedmethodsandrule-basedmethodstoconstructanargumenttosupportaparticularinterpretation.

Argumentation  Studyofhowconclusionsarereachedthroughlogicalreasoninginthecontextofdebate,dialogue,persuasionandnegotiation.  InthecontextofAI&lawtherelevanceiswithrespectto:(i)theexplanationoflegaldecisions,(ii)thestructureofargumentsinlegalcasesand(iii)therolethatargumentscanplayincase-basedreasoning.  Earlywork(1990s)featuredworkonstrategiesforgeneratingargumentsinthecontextoftheCABARETsystem---DavidSkalakandEdwinaRissland(1991),Argumentmovesinarule-guideddomain.  Thiswasafoundationforlaterworkfocusedonthecharacterisationandconstructionoflegalargumentdialoguegamesforlegalreasoning.

LegalDocumentProcessingandFLEXICON

  The1990ssawthestartofwork(ongoing)onintelligentlegaldocumentmanagementtools.  OnewelldocumentedexampleisFLEXICON---DaphneGelbartandJoeSmith(1993),FLEXICON:anevaluationofastatisticalrankingmodeladaptedtointelligentlegaltextmanagement.  Usedtosummariselegaltextssoastofacilitaterapidsearch.

  FLEXICONfeaturesthreeelements:(i)originaldocuments,(ii)multiplelexiconsand(iii)machinegeneratedformallexicalrepresentationsofeachdocument(FlexNotes).  ThequalityoftheFlexNotesdependsonthelexiconsandtheadoptedinformationextractionprocesses.

ArgumentationFrameworks  ArgumentationframeworkswerepopularisedwithintheAIcommunityfromthelate1990sononwards.  OfnoteisDung’sframework---PhanMinhDung(1995),Ontheacceptabilityofargumentsanditsfundamentalroleinnonmonotonicreasoning.  BroadlyanargumentationframeworkF=<AR>comprises:

§  AsetofabstractargumentsA,and§  AsetofbinaryattackrelationsR.

  ArangeofargumentationframeworkshavebeenproposedwithintheAI&Lawcommunity:(i)logicbased,(ii)valuebased,(ii)assumptionbased,(iv)…..  Muchsubsequentworkonargumentationframeworks,e.g.Zeno,ASPICandCarneades.

LegalTextSummarisationandSALOMON

  TheAI&Lawcommunityhasbeeninterestedinsummarisinglegaltextssinceitsfoundation.  OfnoteistheSALOMONsystem(project)---Marie-FrancisMoens(1997),Abstractingoflegalcases:theSALOMONexperience.  SummarisesBelgiancriminalcasesfromthecasetext.  Casecategoryfirstidentifiedbasedonthecasestructureandirrelevanttextunitswereidentifiedbasedonaknowledgebase.  Informativetextunitsoftheallegedoffencesandoftheopinionofthecourtextractedusingstatisticaltechniques.  Catalystformuchfurtherincludingargumentationmining.

OntologyandONLINE  “Anexplicitformalspecificationsofthetermsinthedomainandtherelationshipsthatexistamongthem”  TheconceptofontologieswasintroducedtoComputerScienceintheearly1990swiththeadventoftheSemanticWeb.  ThefirstlegalontologycanbearguedtobethatincorporatedintoONLINE---AndreValenteandJoostBreuker(1995),ON-LINE:anarchitectureformodellinglegalinformation.  Onlinewasalegalinformationmanagementsystemwithalegalreasoningfacilityprovidedbyalegalontology,the“FunctionalOntologyofLaw”.  Interestinglytheideaoflegalontologiesshiftslegalreasoningfromarules-orientedproblemtoaknowledgerepresentationproblem.  Seealso---TrevorBench-Capon(2004),Ontologiesinlegalinformationsystems;theneedforexplicitspecificationsofdomainconceptualisations.

E-GovernmentandZENO  Theconceptofe-Government(e-Democracy)wasbeginningtotherecognisedinthemid1990s.  Directedattheusageoftheinternettoprovidefordigitalinteractionbetweengovernmentsandcitizens.Forexamplee-Petitions.  Zenowasoneofthefirstattemptstodefineaformalmodelofargumentationtosupportonlineconsultationsystemsfore-government---TomGordonandNikosKaracapilidis(1997),TheZenoargumentationframework.  TheZenoframeworkprovidedthefoundationforanumberofsubsequentprojectssuchastheDelphiMediationOnlineSystem(DEMOS),Parmenedis---AnnMacintosh(2009),Providingargumentsupportfore-Participation.

METAlex,TheE-PowerProjectandLegalXML

  ThenotionoftheSemanticWebbegantobetakenseriouslywithintheAI&Lawcommunityintheearly2000swithattemptsatadoptingaSemanticWebapproachinthecontextoflegalresources,usingjurisdictionindependentXMLstandardstostructuredocuments.  EarlyexampleisMETAlex,anopenXMLstandardforthemarkupoflegaldocuments---RadboudWinkelsetal.(2003),Metalex:AnXMLstandardforlegaldocuments.  DevelopedaspartoftheEuropeane-Powerproject,meantasaninterchangeformatforlegaldocuments.  LedtoLegalXML,isanon-profitorganizationdevelopingopenstandardsforlegaldocumentsandrelatedapplications.

TheBurdenofProofandCARNEADES

  TheCarneadessystem,developedfromZeno.  Softwaresystemdevelopedforconstructing,evaluatingandvisualisingargumentsfromformalmodelsoflegalconcepts,rules,andcases----TomGordonetal.(2007),TheCarneadesmodelofargumentandburdenofproof.  Oneofthefirstapproachestoacknowledge,andtakeaccountofthe“burdenofproof”.  Ledtotheideaof“argumentativestorytelling”wherewehavetwocompeting/conflictingstories---FlorisBex(2011),Arguments,storiesandcriminalevidence:Aformalhybridtheory.

MachineLearningandDataMining

  Machinelearninganddatamininghavealonghistory.

  TheAIandLawcommunitywereslowtotakeuptheconceptswithfirstpapersappearinginthemid2000s.

  Firstexamplesweredirectedatlegaldocumentsummarisationutilisingtextminingtechniques---BenHacheyandClaireGrover(2005),Automaticlegaltextsummarisation:experimentswithsummarystructuring.

  Furtherworklookedat:

§  Theclassificationoflegaldocuments,

§  Opinionminingfromlawblogs…

OpinionMining,SocialMediaandAI&Law

  Theideaofopinionmininginthecontextofrecommendersystemswasasubjectofmuchresearchinthemachinelearningcommunityinthemid2000s.

  FirstexampleinthelegaldomainconsideredopinionmininginthecontextofLawblogs(“blawgs”thatexistinthe‘‘blawgosphere’’!)---JackConradandFrankSchilder(2007),Opinionmininginlegalblogs.

  ThesignificanceofConradandFrankisthatitwasthecatalystformuchsubsequentworkrelatingsocialmedialtothedomainofAI&Law.

LegalTextInformationRetrievalandTREC

  ThefirstTextREtrievalConference(TREC)washeldin1992.  EveryconferencefeaturesanumberofTracks(Workshops)eachdirectedatparticularcurrentretrievaldomain.  Eachtrackhasachallengecenteredongivendatasets.  From2006to2011TRECfeaturedaLegalTrack.  Anideathatresultedfromthis,thathashassignificantinfluencewithintheAIandLawise-Discoveryfoundedonrandomsampling---DouglasOardetal.(2010),EvaluationofinformationretrievalforE-discovery.

MultiAgent-basedSystems,PADUAandPISA

  InlinewiththeAI&Lawcommunity’spracticeofadoptingtechnologieswhenandwheretheyfittheaspirationsofthecommunitythemid2000ssawtheadoptionofMAS.  Theideaofagentsarguingfororagainstacase.  ExamplesincludethePADUAandPISAsystems---MayaWardehetal.(2012),PISA:AFrameworkforMultiagentClassificationUsingArgumentation.  BroughttogetherdataminingandargumentationundertheMASumbrella.  Examplesfoundedonhousingbenefitscenarios.

AI&LawandtheeraofBigData

  TheBigData(DataAnalytics)phenomenahittheheadlinesintheearly2010s.  Inthelegalcontextthiswasaccompaniedbytherealisationthatevenroutinecivillitigationcasesnowrequiredsearchingofextensivedigitalrepositories.  Bigdatatechnologyalsoallows:§  Largescalelegaloutcomepredictionin

themoldofmachinelearningbutusingdeeplearningtechniques(RNNs,etc.).

§  Provisionofevidenceextractedfrompublicdatasetsusingtechniquesfromdataanalytics.

§  Andmore

WhereNext,TwoExamples  AdefiningfeatureoftheBigDataeraisthefactthatithasseenextensiveinterestsanduptakefromindustry.ThishasbeenaccompaniedbyaresurgenceininterestinAI.Thelegalindustryisnoexception.  RiverviewLaw:Reasoningconcerningcontractrenewalstrategiesinthecontextofverylargenumbersofcontracts(tensofthousands)---MatiasGarcia-Constantinoetal.(2016),CLIEL:Context-BasedInformationExtractionfromCommercialLawDocuments.  Fletchers:Decisionmakingregardingmedicalnegligencecasesfoundedonmedicalrecordsandtranscripts.

TimelineRevisited  EarlyWork(<1980)  FoundationsofAnAI&LawCommunity(1987)  CaseBasedReasoningandHYPO(1987)  RuleBasedSystemsandTheMAKEProject(1990)  DeonticLogic(1991)  CABARET,aCBRandRuleBasedHybrid(1991)  Argumentation(1991)  LegalDocumentProcessingandFLEXICON(1993)  ArgumentationFrameworks(1995)  OntologyandONLINE(1995)  E-GovernmentandZENO(1997)

  LegalTextSummarisationandSALOMON(1998)  METAlex,TheE-PowerProjectandLegalXML(2003)  MachineLearningandDataMining(2005)  TheBurdenofProofandCARNEADES(2007)  OpinionMining,SocialMediaandAI&Law(2007)  LegalTextInformationRetrievalandTREC(2010)  MultiAgent-basedSystems,PADUAandPISA(2012)  AI&LawandtheeraofBigData(2013)  WhereNext---TwoExamples(2017)