Pepijn R. S. Visser

A Comparison of Four Ontologies for the Design of Legal Knowledge Systems

There is a growing interest in how people conceptualise the legal domain for the purpose of legal knowledge systems. In this paper we discuss four such conceptualisations (referred to as ontologies): McCartys language for legal discourse, Stampers norma formalism, Valentes functional ontology of law, and the ontology of Van Kralingen and Visser. We present criteria for a comparison of the ontologies and discuss the strengths and weaknesses of the ontologies in relation to these criteria. Moreover, we critically review the criteria.

KRAFT: knowledge fusion from distributed databases and knowledge bases

The KRAFT project aims to investigate how a distributed architecture can support the transformation and reuse of a particular class of knowledge, namely constraints, and to fuse this knowledge so as to gain added value, by using it for constraint solving or data retrieval.

Ontologies in legal information systems; the need for explicit specifications of domain conceptualisations

In this paper we discuss the role of explicit specifications of domain conceptualisations now popularly called “ontologies” in legal information systems. We describe the advantages that accrue from producing an ontology for such systems, as well as the ontologies so far developed which are directed at the legal domain. We then illustrate how taking an ontological perspective can give insight into what is common and what is disparate in apparently different approaches. We conclude by offering some findings as to the nature of ontologies for legal information systems, and some ideas concerning the creation of a library of legal ontologies.

Resolving Ontological Heterogeneity in the KRAFT Project

KRAFT is an agent architecture for the integration of heterogeneous information systems. The focus in KRAFT is on the integration of knowledge in the form of constraints. In this article we describe the architecture from an ontological perspective. We start by introducing the agent architecture and illustrate its application in the telecommunication-network design. We then describe how we assess the ontological heterogeneity in the domain, which problems the integration of constraint knowledge pose, and how we construct a shared ontology. Also, we describe the mapping, functions that are used to translate information between the shared and the local ontologies. Finally, we look at the direction our research is taking hereafter.

A principled approach to developing legal knowledge systems

Abstract In this article we present a principled, four-phased approach to the development of legal knowledge systems. We set out from the well-studied CommonKADS method for the development of knowledge systems and tailor this method to the legal domain. In particular, we propose a generic legal ontology, and describe the creation of statute-specific ontologies to adopt the method for building legal systems. In the construction of these ontologies, we start from a theoretical analysis of the legal domain. The well-known example of the Imperial College Library Regulations (ICLR) is used to illustrate the method.

A method for the development of legal knowledge systems

In this article we present a four-phased method for the development of legal knowledge systems. We set out from the well-studied CommonKADS method for the development of knowledge systems and tailor this method to the legal domain. In particular, we propose a generic legal ontology, and describe the creation of statute-specific ontologies to make the method more suitable for our purposes. In the construction of these ontologies we start from a theoretical analysis of the legal domain. The well-known example of the Imperial College Library Regulations (ICLR) is used to illustrate the method.

On the reusability of ontologies in knowledge-system design

The authors describe a case study which supports the claim that ontologies are reusable components in the design of knowledge systems. An ontology documents important domain assumptions which would otherwise remain implicit. Whereas a conceptual (or formal) system specification differs between different knowledge systems (even in the same domain), they show the underlying ontology to be invariant. This makes ontologies reusable for knowledge-system design. They illustrate this by discussing how a single legal ontology has been used for the construction of both a planning and an assessment system and argue that the same ontology can be reused for other knowledge systems as well.

A Method for Conceptualising Legal Domains. An Example from the Dutch Unemployment Benefits Act

There has been much talk of the need to build intermediate models of the expertise required preparatory to constructing a knowledge-based system in the legal domain. Such models offer advantages for verification, validation, maintenance and reuse. As yet, however, few such models have been reported at a useful level of detail. In this paper we describe a method for conceptualising legal domains as well as its application to a substantial fragment of the Dutch Unemployment Benefits Act (DUBA).We first discuss the intermediate models (called expertise models), then present a three-stage method for their construction, drawing on the CommonKADS work in knowledge acquisition, conceptual models of statute law, and the KANT method of knowledge analysis. Subsequently, we describe how these techniques were applied to the DUBA, and provide detailed examples of the resulting model. Finally, conclusions on the framework and guidelines are given as well as means of recording and presenting the various design choices.

Open texture and ontologies in legal information systems

The problem of open texture is long established in legal information systems. It is pervasive and needs to be addressed by any system able to deal with cases which are not entirely straightforward. Many systems have tried to deal with this problem, and normally they are divided into rule based, case based and statistical approaches. We look at these systems from a different perspective, that of ontologies. We first say what ontologies and open texture are. Next we review a range of approaches to open texture, and the domain conceptualisations which underlie them. We then discuss two ontologies which have been proposed for use in legal information systems, with particular reference to their treatment of open texture. Finally we identify a number of choices, which help determine the approach to open texture, and which are orthogonal to the particular representation technique used.

A Generic Ontology for Spatial Reasoning

In this paper we describe a generic ontology to support N-dimensional spatial reasoning applications. The ontology is intended to support both quantitative and qualitative approaches and is expressed using set notation. Using the ontology; spatial domains of discourse, spatial objects and their attributes, and the relationships that can link spatial objects can be expressed in terms of sets, and sets of sets. The ontology has been developed through a series of application studies. For each study a directed application ontology was first developed which was then merged into the generic ontology. Application areas that have been investigated include: Geographic Information Systems (GIS), noise pollution monitoring, environmental impact assessment, shape fitting, timetabling and scheduling, and AI problems such as the N-queens problem.