Skip to main content

The Definition of Legal Relations in a BDI Multiagent Framework

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
AI*IA 2001: Advances in Artificial Intelligence (AI*IA 2001)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNAI,volume 2175))

Included in the following conference series:

Abstract

This paper aims at linking the AI notion of multi agent system with the notion of LEGAL RELATION [Allen & Saxon 95]. The paper is based on the idea that legal rules concern actions to accomplish or to exclude and states to achieve or to avoid or actions for changing existing legal relations. The body of the rule establishes who and under which conditions must respect the obligation. The notion of ‘obligation’ has been defined elsewhere [Boella & Lesmo 01] and will be reviewed here. In this paper it is used as an ontological basis to define the LEGAL RELATIONS appearing in the A-Hohfeld language, and the concepts of ‘bearer of the obligation’ (who undergoes the rule) and of ‘normative agent’ (who watches on the rule) are connected to an ontology of legal entities.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. L.E. Allen, C.S. Saxon: “Better Language, Better Thought, Better Communication: The A-HOHFELD Language for Legal Analysis.” Proc. 5th Int. Conf. on AI and Law, College Park, Md., 219–228 (1995)

    Google Scholar 

  2. L.E. Allen, C.S. Saxon: “The Legal Argument Game of LEGAL RELATIONS.” E Law—Murdoch Univ. Electronic J. Of Law, 5, n.3 (1998).

    Google Scholar 

  3. L.E. Allen, C.S. Saxon: “Application of Enriched Deontic LEGAL RELATIONS: Federal Rules of Civil Procedure Rule 7(a), Pleadings.” Proc. 7th Int. Conf. on AI and Law, Oslo, 80–89 (1999)

    Google Scholar 

  4. L. Ardissono, G. Boella, L. Lesmo: “Plan Based Agent Architecture for Interpreting Natural Language Dialogue., Int. J. Of Human-Computer Studies 52, (2000)

    Google Scholar 

  5. R. Axelrod: “An Evolutionary Approach to Norms., American Political Science Review 80, 4, 1095–1111 (1986).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. G. Boella: Cooperation among Economically Rational Agents. PhD thesis. Univ. of Torino (2000)

    Google Scholar 

  7. G. Boella, R. Damiano, L. Lesmo, L. Ardissono: “Conversational Cooperation: the Leading Role of Intentions.. Proc. Amstelogue.99 Workshop, Amsterdam (1999)

    Google Scholar 

  8. G. Boella, L. Lesmo: “Deliberate Normative Agents., in R. Conte and C. Dellarocas: Social Order in multi-agent systems, Kluwer (to appear)

    Google Scholar 

  9. C. Boutilier: “Multiagent Systems: Challenges and Opportunities for Decision-Theoretic Planning.” AI magazine 20, 35–43 (1999)

    Google Scholar 

  10. S. Carberry: Plan Recognition in Natural Language. MIT Press (1990).

    Google Scholar 

  11. C. Castelfranchi: “Modeling social action for agents.” Artificial Intelligence 103, 157–182 (1998).

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  12. P.R. Cohen, H.J. Levesque: “Intention is Choice with Commitment.” Artificial Intelligence 42, 213–261 (1990)

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  13. R. Conte, C. Castelfranchi: Cognitive and Social Action. UCL Press (1995)

    Google Scholar 

  14. F. Dignum: “Autonomous agents and social norms.. Proc. of ICMAS’96 Workshop on Norms, Obligations and Conventions (1996)

    Google Scholar 

  15. P.J. Gmytrasiewicz, E.H. Durfee: “Rational Coordination in Multi-Agent Environments.” Autonomous Agents and Multi-Agent Systems 3, 319–350 (2000)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. E. Goffman, Strategic Interaction, Basic Blackwell, Oxford (1970)

    Google Scholar 

  17. P. Haddawy, S. Hanks: “Utility models for goal-directed, decisiontheoretic planners.” Computational Intelligence 14, 392–429 (1998)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  18. H. Herrestad, C. Krogh: “Obligations Directed from Bearers to Counterparties.” Proc. 5th Int. Conf. on AI and Law, College Park, Md., 210–218 (1995)

    Google Scholar 

  19. N.R. Jennings: “On Agent-Based Software Engineering”. Artificial Intelligence 117, 277–296 (2000)

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  20. N.R. Jennings, K. Sycara, M. Wooldridge: “A Roadmap of Agent Research and Development., Autonomous Agents and Multi-Agent Systems 1, 275–306 (1998).

    Google Scholar 

  21. A. Jones, M.J. Sergot: “A Formal Characterisation of Institutionalised Power.” Journal of IGPL 4(3), 429–455 (1996)

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  22. G. Sartor: “Why Agents Comply with Norms, and why they Should., in R. Conte and C. Dellarocas: Social Order in multi-agent systems, Kluwer (to appear)

    Google Scholar 

  23. M.J. Sergot, Normative positions. In P. McNamara, H. Prakken (eds): Norms, Logics and Information Systems. IOS Press (1998)

    Google Scholar 

  24. D. Tiscornia, F. Turchi: “Formalization of Legislative Documents Based on a Functional Model.” Proc. 6th Int. Conf. on AI and Law, Melbourne, 63–71 (1997)

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2001 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this paper

Cite this paper

Boella, G., Lesmo, L., Favali, L. (2001). The Definition of Legal Relations in a BDI Multiagent Framework. In: Esposito, F. (eds) AI*IA 2001: Advances in Artificial Intelligence. AI*IA 2001. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 2175. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-45411-X_23

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-45411-X_23

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-540-42601-1

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-540-45411-3

  • eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive

Publish with us

Policies and ethics