A Comparison of Four Ontologies for the Design of Legal Knowledge Systems

74Citations
Citations of this article
64Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.
Get full text

Abstract

There is a growing interest in how people conceptualise the legal domain for the purpose of legal knowledge systems. In this paper we discuss four such conceptualisations (referred to as ontologies): McCarty's language for legal discourse, Stamper's norma formalism, Valente's functional ontology of law, and the ontology of Van Kralingen and Visser. We present criteria for a comparison of the ontologies and discuss the strengths and weaknesses of the ontologies in relation to these criteria. Moreover, we critically review the criteria.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Visser, P. R. S., & Bench-Capon, T. J. M. (1998). A Comparison of Four Ontologies for the Design of Legal Knowledge Systems. Artificial Intelligence and Law, 6(1), 27–57. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1008251913710

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free