A learning technique for legal document analysis

ABSTRACT

More and more law is available freely on the Internet. The growing complexity of legal rules and the necessary adaptation to user needs requires better instruments than manual browsing and searching interfaces of the past. Information reconnaissance of an unknown text corpus would provide a major help. Our research on neural networks concerns adaptive learning techniques for information reconnaissance in legal document archives. Self-organising maps offer besides successful classification a promising tool for this purpose. The neural processing elements can be labeled with the most appropriate keywords to describe the contents of the documents. Applying the tools of refinement, our novel approach describes the most interesting features of the document. The user can choose properly between the various units in order to refine the next step of research. An integration of this tool of information reconnaissance into an intelligent agent is straightforward and will bring much benefit in a practical application.

References

1. 1.K. Ashley. Modeling Legal Argument: Reasoning with cases and hypotheticals. MIT-Press, Cambridge, MA, 1990.]]
2. 2.R. Belew. A connectionist approach to conceptual information retrieval. In Proc. Int. Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Law, 1987.]]
3. 3.T. Bench-Capon. Neural networks and open texture. In Proc. Int. Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Law, 1993.]]
4. 4.J. Bing. Hypertext - The deep structure. In Proc. Int. Conference on Database and Expert Systems Applications, 1999.]]
5. 5.S. Briininghaus and K. D. Ashley. Finding factors: Learning to classify case opinions under abstract fact categories. In Proc. Int. Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Law, 1997.]]
6. 6.J. P Callan and W. B. Croft. An evaluation of query processing strategies using the TIPSTER collection. In Proc. ACM SIGIR Int. Conference on R&D in Information Retrieval, 1993.]]
7. 7.J. P. Callan, W. B. Croft, and S. M. Harding. The INQUERY retieval system. In Proc. Int. Conference on Database and Expert Systems Applications, 1992.]]
8. 8.H. Chen, A. L. Houston, R. R. Sewell, and B. R. Schatz. Semantic search and semantic categorization. In Proc. Int. ACM SIGIR Conference on R&D in Information Retrieval, Philadelphia, PA, 1997.]]
9. 9.J. J. Daniels and E. L. Rissland. Finding legally relevant passages in case opinions. In Proc. Int. Conference on Artijcial Intelligence and Law, 1997.]]
10. 10.J. J. Daniels and E. L. Rissland. integrating IR and CBR to locate relevant text passages. In Proc. Int. Conference on Database and Expert Systems Applications, Workshop on Legal Systems, 1997.]]
11. 11.R. M. di Giorgi and R. Nannucci, editors. Special Issue: Hypertext and Hypermedia in the Law. lnformatica e Diritto, Edizioni Scientifiche Italiane, 1994.]]
12. 12.C. Groendijk. Neural schemata in automated judicial problem solving. In Proc. Int. Conference JURIX, 1992.]]
13. 13.T. Honkela, V. Pulkki, and T. Kohonen. Contextual relations of words in Grimm tales analyzed by self-organising maps. In Proc. Int. Conference on Artificial Neural Networks, Paris, France, 1995.]]
14. 14.Y. Jing and W. B. Croft. An association thesaurus for information retrieval. In Proc. Int. Conference RIAO'94, 1994.]]
15. 15.S, Keane, V. Ratnaike, and R. Wilkinson. Hierarchical news filtering. In Proc. Int. Conference on Practical Aspects of Knowledge Management, Basel, Switzerland, 1996.]]
16. 16.J. Kiniry and D. Zimmerman. A hands-on look at java mobile agents. IEEE Internet Computing, I(4), 1997.]]
17. 17.M. Klusch and W. Benn. Intelligente informationsagenten im internet (intelligent information agents on the internet). Kiinstliche bztelligenz, 3, 1998.]]
18. 18.T. Kohonen. Self-organized formation of topologically correct feature maps. Biological Cybernetics, 43, 1982.]]
19. 19.T. Kohonen. Self-organizing maps. Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1995.]]
20. 20.T. Kohonen. Self-organization of very large document collections: State of the art. In Proc. lnt. Conference on Artificial Neural Networks, Sk&de, Sweden, 1998.]]
21. 21.K. Lagus, T. Honkela, S. Kaski, and T. Kohonen. Selforganizing maps of document collections: A new approach to interactive exploration. In Proc. Int. Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining, Portland, OR, 1996.]]
22. 22.H. Lieberman. Beyond information retrieval: Information agents at the MIT media lab. Kiinstliche Intelligenz, 3, 1998.]]
23. 23.X. Lin, D. Soergel, and G. Marchionini. A self-organizing semantic map for information retrieval. In Proc. ACM SIGIR Int. Conference on R&D in Information Retrieval, Chicago, IL, 1991.]]
24. 24.G. Marchionini and B. Shneiderman. Finding facts vs. browsing in hypertext systems. IEEE Computer, 21 (I), 1988.]]
25. 25.D. Merkl. A connectionist view on document classification. In Proc. Australasian Database Conference, Adelaide, Australia, 1995.]]
26. 26.D. Merkl. Content-based document classification with highly compressed input data. In Proc. int. Conference on Artificial Neural Networks, Paris, France, 1995.]]
27. 27.D. Merkl. Exploration of text collections with hierarchical feature maps. In Proc. Int. ACM Conference on R&D in Information Retrieval, Philadelphia, PA, 1997.]]
28. 28.D. Merkl. Text classification with self-organizing maps: Some lessons learned. Neurocomputing, 2 I (I-3). I 998.]]
29. 29.D. Merkl and E. Schweighofer. The exploration of legal text corpora with hierarchical neural networks: A guided tour in public international law. In Proc. Int. Confererzce on Artificial Intelligence and Law, Melbourne, Australia, 1997.]]
30. 30.D. Merkl, E. Schweighofer, and W. Winiwarter. CONCAT: Connotation analysis of thesauri based on the interpretation of context meaning. In Proc. Int. Conference on Database and Expert Systems Applications, Athens, Greece, 1994.]]
31. 31.D. Merkl and A M. Tjoa. Data mining in large free-text document archives. In Proc. Int. Symposium on Cooperative Database Systems for Advanced Applications, Kyoto, Japan, 1996.]]
32. 32.J. Nielsen. Hypertext and Hypermedia. Academic Press, Boston, MA, 1993.]]
33. 33.L. Philipps. Are legal decisions based on the application of ruies or prototype recognition? Legal science on the way to neural network. In Pre-proceedings of the 3rd Int Conf on Logica, Informatica, Diritto, Florence, Italy, 1989.]]
34. 34.A. Rauber and D. Merkl. Creating an order in distributed digital libraries by integrating independent self-organizing maps. In Proc. Int. Conference on Arti$cial Neural Networks, Sk&de, Sweden, 1998.]]
35. 35.A. Rauber and D. Merkl. Automatic labeling of selforganizing maps: Making a treasure-map reveal its secrets. In Proc. Pacific Asia Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining, Beijing, China, 1999.]]
36. 36.H. Ritter and T. Kohonen. Self-organizing semantic maps. Biological Cybernetics, 6 I , 1989.]]
37. 37.D. E. Rose. A Symbolic und Connectionist Approach to Legal Information Retrieval. Lawrence Erlbaum, Hillsdale, NJ, 1994.]]
38. 38.D. E. Rose and R. K. Belew. Legal information retrieval: A hybrid approach. In Proc. Int. Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Law, 1989.]]
39. 39.D. Roussinov and M. Ramsey. Information forage through adaptive visualization. In Proc. Int. ACM Conference on Digital Libraries, Pittsburgh, PA, 1998.]]
40. 40.G. Salton. Automatic Text Processing: The Transformation, Analysis, and Retrieval of Information by Computer. Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA, 1989.]]
41. 41.E. Schweighofer. The revolution in legal information retrieval, or: The empire strikes back. In Proc. Conference The Law in the Information Society, Florence, Italy, 1998. lstituto per la documentazione giuridica de1 CNR, Conference Proceedings on CD-ROM.]]
42. 42.E. Schweighofer. Legal Knowledge Representation. Kluwer Law International, 1999.]]
43. 43.E. Schweighofer, W. Winiwarter, and D. Merkl. Information filtering: The computation of similarities in large corpora of legal texts. In Proc. Int. Conference on Artzjicial Intelligazce and Law, 1995.]]
44. 44.S. Simitis. Informationskrise des Rechts und Datenverarbeitung (Information Crisis of Law). Mtiller, Karlsruhe, Germany, 1970.]]
45. 45.D. B. Skalak and E. L. Rissland. Arguments moves in a ruleguided domain. In Proc. Izzt. Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Low, I99 I.]]
46. 46.H. Turtle. Natural language vs. boolean query evaluation: A comparison of retrieval performance. In Proc. ACM SfGlR Int. Conference on R&D in fnformation Retrieval, 1994.]]

Index Terms

• Computing methodologies

  • Artificial intelligence

    • Distributed artificial intelligence

  • Machine learning