The Experts below are selected from a list of 270 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform

Adrian Paschke - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

  • kr4iplaw judgment miner case law mining for Legal Norm annotation
    AICOL, 2015
    Co-Authors: Shashishekar Ramakrishna, łukasz Gorski, Adrian Paschke
    Abstract:

    The use of pragmatics in applying the law is hard to deal with for a Legal knowledge engineer who needs to model it in a precise KR for (semi-)automated Legal reasoning systems. The negative aspects of pragmatics is due to the difficulty involved in separating their concerns. When representing a Legal Norm for (semi-)automated reasoning, an important step/aspect is the annotation of Legal sections under consideration. Annotation in the context of this paper refers to identification, segregation and thereafter representation of the content and its associated context. In this paper we present an approach and provide a proof-of-concept implementation for automatizing the process of identifying the most relevant judgment pertaining to a Legal section and further transforming them into a formal representation format. The annotated Legal section and its related judgments can then be mapped into a decision model for further down the line processing.

  • the role of pragmatics in Legal Norm representation
    arXiv: Computation and Language, 2015
    Co-Authors: Shashishekar Ramakrishna, Lukasz Gorski, Adrian Paschke
    Abstract:

    Despite the 'apparent clarity' of a given Legal provision, its application may result in an outcome that does not exactly conform to the semantic level of a statute. The vagueness within a Legal text is induced intentionally to accommodate all possible scenarios under which such Norms should be applied, thus making the role of pragmatics an important aspect also in the representation of a Legal Norm and reasoning on top of it. The notion of pragmatics considered in this paper does not focus on the aspects associated with judicial decision making. The paper aims to shed light on the aspects of pragmatics in Legal linguistics, mainly focusing on the domain of patent law, only from a knowledge representation perspective. The philosophical discussions presented in this paper are grounded based on the Legal theories from Grice and Marmor.

  • rule reasoning for Legal Norm validation of fstp facts
    arXiv: Artificial Intelligence, 2014
    Co-Authors: Naouel Karam, Shashishekar Ramakrishna, Adrian Paschke
    Abstract:

    {naouel.karam@fu-berlin.de} Extended Abstract Non-obviousness or inventive step is a general requirement for patentability in most patent law systems. An invention should be at an adequate distance beyond its prior art in order to be patented. Fulfilling a minimum measurement limit would enable a patent applicant to have its invention patented. Based on this fact, we proposed a method for nonobviousness analysis of a patent over its prior arts, Hased oﾐ highest Iou�t’s p�eIedeﾐts, Ialled the F“TP

Shashishekar Ramakrishna - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

  • kr4iplaw judgment miner case law mining for Legal Norm annotation
    AICOL, 2015
    Co-Authors: Shashishekar Ramakrishna, łukasz Gorski, Adrian Paschke
    Abstract:

    The use of pragmatics in applying the law is hard to deal with for a Legal knowledge engineer who needs to model it in a precise KR for (semi-)automated Legal reasoning systems. The negative aspects of pragmatics is due to the difficulty involved in separating their concerns. When representing a Legal Norm for (semi-)automated reasoning, an important step/aspect is the annotation of Legal sections under consideration. Annotation in the context of this paper refers to identification, segregation and thereafter representation of the content and its associated context. In this paper we present an approach and provide a proof-of-concept implementation for automatizing the process of identifying the most relevant judgment pertaining to a Legal section and further transforming them into a formal representation format. The annotated Legal section and its related judgments can then be mapped into a decision model for further down the line processing.

  • the role of pragmatics in Legal Norm representation
    arXiv: Computation and Language, 2015
    Co-Authors: Shashishekar Ramakrishna, Lukasz Gorski, Adrian Paschke
    Abstract:

    Despite the 'apparent clarity' of a given Legal provision, its application may result in an outcome that does not exactly conform to the semantic level of a statute. The vagueness within a Legal text is induced intentionally to accommodate all possible scenarios under which such Norms should be applied, thus making the role of pragmatics an important aspect also in the representation of a Legal Norm and reasoning on top of it. The notion of pragmatics considered in this paper does not focus on the aspects associated with judicial decision making. The paper aims to shed light on the aspects of pragmatics in Legal linguistics, mainly focusing on the domain of patent law, only from a knowledge representation perspective. The philosophical discussions presented in this paper are grounded based on the Legal theories from Grice and Marmor.

  • rule reasoning for Legal Norm validation of fstp facts
    arXiv: Artificial Intelligence, 2014
    Co-Authors: Naouel Karam, Shashishekar Ramakrishna, Adrian Paschke
    Abstract:

    {naouel.karam@fu-berlin.de} Extended Abstract Non-obviousness or inventive step is a general requirement for patentability in most patent law systems. An invention should be at an adequate distance beyond its prior art in order to be patented. Fulfilling a minimum measurement limit would enable a patent applicant to have its invention patented. Based on this fact, we proposed a method for nonobviousness analysis of a patent over its prior arts, Hased oﾐ highest Iou�t’s p�eIedeﾐts, Ialled the F“TP

Lasse Baaner - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

  • good ecological status of surface water technical provision or Legal Norm
    2011
    Co-Authors: Lasse Baaner
    Abstract:

    This article addresses the Water Framework Directive and the Legal Norm ‘good ecological status’ with respect to the ecological quality of bodies of surface water, and examines the connections between ecology and law in this regard. The Legal Norm ‘good ecological status’ refers to the structure and function of ecosystems. In terms of ecology, the concepts of good structure and functioning of an ecosystem reflect a resilient ecosystem of high quality, with a high level of adaptive capacity. However, further Legal provisions of the Directive, concerning assessment of the status of surface waters, compromise this concept. The Directive’s approach assumes that taking a given body of water, and quantifying certain fixed biological elements in this body on the basis of the Directive’s guidelines and the national classification systems developed from those guidelines, it is possible to accurately assess the structure and function of the body of water. This approach is Legally manageable, but highly contestable from an ecological perspective, which suggests the necessity of reconsidering the Directive’s approach.

  • ‘Good Ecological Status of Surface Water’ – Technical Provision or Legal Norm?
    SSRN Electronic Journal, 2011
    Co-Authors: Lasse Baaner
    Abstract:

    This article addresses the Water Framework Directive and the Legal Norm ‘good ecological status’ with respect to the ecological quality of bodies of surface water, and examines the connections between ecology and law in this regard. The Legal Norm ‘good ecological status’ refers to the structure and function of ecosystems. In terms of ecology, the concepts of good structure and functioning of an ecosystem reflect a resilient ecosystem of high quality, with a high level of adaptive capacity. However, further Legal provisions of the Directive, concerning assessment of the status of surface waters, compromise this concept. The Directive’s approach assumes that taking a given body of water, and quantifying certain fixed biological elements in this body on the basis of the Directive’s guidelines and the national classification systems developed from those guidelines, it is possible to accurately assess the structure and function of the body of water. This approach is Legally manageable, but highly contestable from an ecological perspective, which suggests the necessity of reconsidering the Directive’s approach.

Abrak Saati - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

Gregory Shaffer - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

  • transnational Legal process and state change
    Law and Social Inquiry-journal of The American Bar Foundation, 2012
    Co-Authors: Gregory Shaffer
    Abstract:

    Although the terms transnational law and state transformations are increasingly used, we need clearer conceptual work and more empirical study. This Article sets forth and applies a socio-Legal approach to the study of transnational Legal processes and their effects within countries. First, the Article clarifies the concepts of transnational law, transnational Legal process, transnational Legal order, state change and transformation, and recursivity. Second, it provides a typology of five dimensions of state change that we can assess empirically - changes in substantive law and practice; broader shifts in the boundary between the state, the market and other forms of social ordering; changes in the architecture and allocations of authority among state institutions; the shaping of markets for professional expertise and expertise’s role in governance; and shifts in Normative frameworks and the accountability mechanisms and associational patterns that convey them. Third, it explains the factors that determine the variable effects of transnational Legal processes and organizes these factors into three clusters, which are: the character of the transnational Legal Norm and order; the relation of the transnational Legal order to the receiving state in terms of power and the place of intermediaries; and the affinity of the transnational Legal Norm with demands of domestic elites and other constituencies in light of domestic political struggles and the extent of change at stake. Fourth, it introduces five empirical studies of transnational Legal processes’ differential effects in six regulatory areas in Asia, Africa and South America that illustrate these points. Together they provide a guide of how to study the interaction of transnational and national Legal processes, and the extent and limits of transnational Legal processes’ effects.