skip to main content
10.1145/3463677.3463730acmotherconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication Pagesdg-oConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Legal Text Processing: Combing two legal ontological approaches through text mining

Published:09 June 2021Publication History

ABSTRACT

The globalization of communication networks and the possibilities offered by the information and communication technologies (ICTs) significantly change the public sector's operation and services. Digital Governance is now integrated into administrations' policies and programs at all levels: local, regional, national, European. At the national level, there is a requirement to provide electronic public services according to citizens' needs while, in the sense of globalization, at the European level, there are many programs (e.g., the Europe 2005 and i2010 program) emphasizing the Digital Governance world (or better Digital Governance community) that indicates rapid changes not only in the sense of the change in the public sector's systems but also in the mentality that the public sector operates. On the other hand, Digital Governance's evolution affects societies intensively, emphasizing the importance of cross-border interaction and information sharing between them. [6]. Concerning the legal informatics domain, this can result in changing governments' operations in many ways [2]. By now, the massive amount of each country's legal information currently remains fragmented across multiple national databases and systems or even better legal databases. Most of these legal databases result from the significant advancements in the “legal informatics” research field that observed since governments have started to promote the development of legal information systems [9]. This research contributes to this purpose by developing an open and automated legal system capable of providing any EU country's legal information based on the existing ontologies.

References

  1. What Is Globalization? (n.d.). Retrieved October 12, 2019, from https://www.piie.com/microsites/globalization/what-is-globalization.htmlGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. Loutsaris, M. A., & Charalabidis, Y. (2020, September). Legal informatics from the aspect of interoperability: a review of systems, tools and ontologies. In Proceedings of the 13th International Conference on Theory and Practice of Electronic Governance (pp. 731-737).Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  3. Hamner, K. J. (2001). The globalization of law: international merger control and competition law in the United States, the European Union, Latin America and China. J. Transnat'l L. & Pol'y, 11, 385.Reference placeholder, delete if not neededGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. Cassese, S. (2004). The globalization of law. NYUJ Int'l. L. & Pol., 37, 973.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  5. Lopes, N., Rao, H. R., McKenna, S. A., Yang, S., Estevez, E., & Nielsen, M. (2019, April). Pannel: Digital Transformation Impact on Society. In 2019 Sixth International Conference on eDemocracy & eGovernment (ICEDEG) (pp. 19- 21). IEEE.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  6. Wisitpongphan, N., & Khampachua, T. (2017, June). Impact of Globalization on Interoperability in Digital Government. In The Proceedings of 17th European Conference on Digital Government ECDG 2017 (p. 254)Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  7. Lachana, Z., Loutsaris, M. A., Alexopoulos, C., & Charalabidis, Y. (2020). Automated Analysis and Interrelation of Legal Elements Based on Text Mining. International Journal of E-Services and Mobile Applications (IJESMA), 12(2), 79-96.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  8. Nguyen, L. M., Bach, N. X., & Shimazu, A. (2011, July). Supervised and semi-supervised sequence learning for recognition of requisite part and effectuation part in law sentences. In Proceedings of the 9th International Workshop on Finite State Methods and Natural Language Processing (pp. 21-29). As-sociation for Computational Linguistics.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  9. Casanovas, P., Palmirani, M., Peroni, S., van Engers, T., & Vitali, F. (2016). Semantic web for the le-gal domain: the next step. Semantic Web, 7(3), 213-227Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  10. Christensen, J., Soderland, S., & Etzioni, O. (2011, June). An analysis of open information extraction based on semantic role labeling. In Proceedings of the sixth international conference on Knowledge capture (pp. 113-120). ACM.Reference placeholder, delete if not neededGoogle ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  11. Saxby, S. (1994). A jurisprudence for information technology law. Int'l JL & Info. Tech., 2, 1.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  12. Ordoñez, C. C., Ordoñez, J. A., Méndez, C., & Ordoñez, H. A. (2020). Evaluación e implementación de técnicas de clustering para un sistema de recuperación de documentos judiciales. Revista Ibérica de Sistemas e Tecnologias de Informação, (E33), 141-151.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  13. Sartor G. and E. Francesconi (2010). “Legal informatics and legal concepts”, Eurovoc Conference – 18-19 NovemberGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  14. Biasiotti, M., Francesconi, E., Palmirani, M., Sartor, G., & Vitali, F. (2008). Legal informatics and management of legislative documents. Global Center for ICT in Parliament Working Paper, 2.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  15. Hinson, C. L. (2005). Legal informatics: Opportunities for information science. Journal of education for library and information science, 134-153.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  16. Mommers, L., A.H.J. Schmidt, and E.W. Oskamp. 1997. Controversies in the ontology and law debate. In Proceedings of the 1st international workshop on legal ontologies, eds. P. Visser, and R. Winkels, 1–5, Melbourne, Australia, July 4 1997.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  17. Mommers, L. (2010). Ontologies in the legal domain. In Theory and Applications of Ontology: Philosophical Perspectives (pp. 265-276). Springer, Dordrecht.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  18. Valente A. (2005) Types and Roles of Legal Ontologies. In: Benjamins V.R., Casanovas P., Breuker J., Gangemi A. (eds) Law and the Semantic Web. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 3369. Springer, Berlin, HeidelbergGoogle ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  19. Lawson, C., Latsis, J. S., & Martins, N. (Eds.). (2013). Contributions to social ontology. Routledge.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  20. Van Engers, T., Boer, A., Breuker, J., Valente, A., & Winkels, R. (2008). Ontologies in the legal domain. In Digital Government (pp. 233-261). Springer, Boston, MA.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  21. Antoniou, G., & Van Harmelen, F. (2004). Web ontology language: Owl. In Handbook on ontologies (pp. 67-92). Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  22. Casellas, N. (2011). Legal Ontologies. Legal Ontology Engineering, 109–169. doi:10.1007/978-94-007-1497-7_4Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  23. Valente, A., Breuker, J., & Brouwer, B. (1999). Legal modeling and automated reasoning with ON-LINE. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 51(6), 1079-1125.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  24. Valente, A., & Breuker, J. (1995, May). ON-LINE: An architecture for modelling legal information. In Proceedings of the 5th international Conference on Artificial intelligence and Law (pp. 307-315).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  25. Breuker, J., & Hoekstra, R. (2004). Core concepts of law: taking common-sense seriously. In Proceedings of formal ontologies in information systems (FOIS-2004) (pp. 210-221).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  26. Breuker, J. A. P. J. (2004). Constructing a legal core ontology: LRI-Core.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  27. Hoekstra, R., Breuker, J., Di Bello, M., & Boer, A. (2007). The LKIF Core Ontology of Basic Legal Concepts. LOAIT, 321, 43-63.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  28. Breuker, J., Valente, A., & Winkels, R. (2005). Use and reuse of legal ontologies in knowledge engineering and information management. In Law and the Semantic Web (pp. 36-64). Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  29. Dann, J. (2014). European Legislation Identifier" ELI". tech. rep., European Commission.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  30. Francart, T., Dann, J., Pappalardo, R., Malagon, C., & Pellegrino, M. (2019). The European Legislation Identifier. Knowledge of the Law in the Big Data Age, 317, 137-148.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  31. Francesconi, E. (2006). The norme in rete project: Standards and tools for italian legislation. Int'l J. Legal Info., 34, 358.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  32. Boer, A., & Winkels, R. (2011). CEN MetaLex: Facilitating interchange in e-Government. na.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  33. Boer, A. CEN MetaLex.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  34. Boer, A.: MetaLex Naming Conventions and the Semantic Web. In: Governatori, G. (ed.) Jurix 2009: The Twenty-Second Annual Conference. IOS Press (December 2009)Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  35. Hoekstra, R. (2011, October). The MetaLex document server. In International Semantic Web Conference (pp. 128-143). Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  36. Ntoso, A. (2015). Akoma Ntoso-What is it.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  37. Palmirani, M., & Vitali, F. (2011). Akoma-Ntoso for legal documents. In Legislative XML for the semantic Web (pp. 75-100). Springer, Dordrecht.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  38. Hoekstra, R., Breuker, J., Bello, M. D., & Boer, A. (2009). Lkif core: Principled ontology development for the legal domain./Law, Ontologies and the Semantic Web. Vol. 188 of Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence and Applications.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  39. Boer, A., R. Winkels, and R. Hoekstra. 2001. The CLIME ontology. In Proceedings of the Second International Workshop on Legal Ontologies (LEGONT) in JURIX 2001, ed. R. Winkels, 37–47. Amsterdam: IOS Press.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  1. Legal Text Processing: Combing two legal ontological approaches through text mining

      Recommendations

      Comments

      Login options

      Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

      Sign in
      • Published in

        cover image ACM Other conferences
        DG.O'21: DG.O2021: The 22nd Annual International Conference on Digital Government Research
        June 2021
        600 pages
        ISBN:9781450384926
        DOI:10.1145/3463677

        Copyright © 2021 ACM

        Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

        Publisher

        Association for Computing Machinery

        New York, NY, United States

        Publication History

        • Published: 9 June 2021

        Permissions

        Request permissions about this article.

        Request Permissions

        Check for updates

        Qualifiers

        • research-article
        • Research
        • Refereed limited

        Acceptance Rates

        Overall Acceptance Rate150of271submissions,55%

      PDF Format

      View or Download as a PDF file.

      PDF

      eReader

      View online with eReader.

      eReader

      HTML Format

      View this article in HTML Format .

      View HTML Format