Abstract
A modular extension of Arg-tuProlog, a light-weight argumentation tool, is here presented and discussed, highlighting how it enables reasoning with rules and interpretations of multiple legal systems. Its effectiveness is demonstrated with examples from different national private international law (PIL) laws, running in Arg-tuProlog. PIL addresses overlaps and conflicts between legal systems by distributing cases between the authorities of such systems (jurisdiction) and establishing what rules these authorities have to apply to each case (choice of law).
Roberta Calegari, Giuseppe Pisano and Giovanni Sartor have been supported by the H2020 ERC Project “CompuLaw” (G.A. 833647). Giuseppe Contissa and Galileo Sartor have been supported by the European Union’s Justice programme under Grant Agreement No. 800839 for the project “InterLex: Advisory and Training System for Internet-related private International Law”.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
Among these is the European project Interlex, aimed at developing a consultative and training system for internet-related PIL, making it available as an online platform. The platform will be composed of three modules: a Decision Support Module (DSM), a Find Law Module (FLM), and a Training Module (TM). In this context, the core component of the Decision Support Module (DSM) lies in a set of logic representations in Prolog, providing basic legal reasoning capabilities.
- 2.
Regulation (EU) No. 1215/2012 on jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters (recast) (the Brussels Regulation). The EU’s two other main PIL instruments are Regulation (EC) No. 593/2008 on the law applicable to contractual obligations (Rome I) and Regulation (EC) No. 864/2007 on the law applicable to noncontractual obligations (Rome II).
- 3.
- 4.
The theories used in the examples can be found at https://github.com/tuProlog/arg2p/tree/master/example-theories/IPL-brussels.
References
Baroni, P., Caminada, M., Giacomin, M.: An introduction to argumentation semantics. Knowl. Eng. Rev. 26(4), 365–410 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1017/S0269888911000166
Besnard, P., et al.: Introduction to structured argumentation. Argument Comput. 5(1), 1–4 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1080/19462166.2013.869764
Calegari, R., Contissa, G., Pisano, G., Sartor, G., Sartor, G.: Arg-tuProlog: a modular logic argumentation tool for PIL. In: Villata, S., Harašta, J., Křemen, P. (eds.) Legal Knowledge and Information Systems. JURIX 2020: The Thirty-third Annual Conference. Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence and Applications, vol. 334, pp. 265–268, 9–11 December 2020. https://doi.org/10.3233/FAIA200880
Calegari, R., Omicini, A., Sartor, G.: Computable law as argumentation-based mas. In: Proceedings of the 21th Workshop “From Objects to Agents”, WOA (2020)
Calegari, R., Pisano, G., Omicini, A., Sartor, G.: Arg2P: an argumentation framework for explainable intelligent systems. J. Log. Comput. 32, 369–401 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1093/logcom/exab089
Calegari, R., Sartor, G.: Burden of persuasion in argumentation. In: Proceedings 36th International Conference on Logic Programming (Technical Communications), ICLP 2020. EPTCS, 18–24 September 2020. Camera-ready sent
Dung, P.M.: On the acceptability of arguments and its fundamental role in nonmonotonic reasoning, logic programming and n-person games. Artif. Intell. 77(2), 321–358 (1995). https://doi.org/10.1016/0004-3702(94)00041-X
Dung, P.M., Sartor, G.: The modular logic of private international law. Artif. Intell. Law 19(2–3), 233–261 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10506-011-9112-5
Modgil, S., Prakken, H.: The ASPIC\({}^{\text{+ }}\) framework for structured argumentation: a tutorial. Argument Comput. 5(1), 31–62 (2014)
Pisano, G., Calegari, R., Omicini, A., Sartor, G.: A mechanism for reasoning over defeasible preferences in Arg2P. In: Monica, S., Bergenti, F. (eds.) CILC 2021 - Italian Conference on Computational Logic. Proceedings of the 36th Italian Conference on Computational Logic. CEUR Workshop Proceedings, vol. 3002, pp. 16–30. CEUR-WS, Parma, 7–9 September 2021. http://ceur-ws.org/Vol-3002/paper10.pdf
Prakken, H.: An abstract framework for argumentation with structured arguments. Argument Comput. 1(2), 93–124 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1080/19462160903564592
Riveret, R., Rotolo, A., Sartor, G.: A deontic argumentation framework towards doctrine reification. J. Appl. Log.–IfCoLog J. Log. Their Appl. 6(5), 903–940 (2019). https://collegepublications.co.uk/ifcolog/?00034
tuProlog: Arg-tuprolog repository. https://github.com/tuProlog/arg2p-kt
tuProlog: Arg-tuprolog website. https://pika-lab.gitlab.io/argumentation/arg2p-kt/
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2022 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this paper
Cite this paper
Calegari, R., Contissa, G., Pisano, G., Sartor, G., Sartor, G. (2022). Modular Logic Argumentation in Arg-tuProlog. In: Bandini, S., Gasparini, F., Mascardi, V., Palmonari, M., Vizzari, G. (eds) AIxIA 2021 – Advances in Artificial Intelligence. AIxIA 2021. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 13196. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-08421-8_7
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-08421-8_7
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-031-08420-1
Online ISBN: 978-3-031-08421-8
eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)