Newsgroups: comp.ai
Path: cantaloupe.srv.cs.cmu.edu!das-news2.harvard.edu!oitnews.harvard.edu!purdue!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!uwm.edu!vixen.cso.uiuc.edu!news.uoregon.edu!gatech!swrinde!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!oleane!univ-lyon1.fr!swidir.switch.ch!newsfeed.ACO.net!Austria.EU.net!EU.net!news.eunet.fi!KremlSun!satisfy.kiae.su!carrier.kiev.ua!news.ts.kiev.ua!tele!intes!news-server
From: 	"Vitaliy S.Lozovskiy (7:0482) 24-6184" <loz@loz.intes.odessa.ua>
Subject: Re: AI and Law, c/o esp. B.Kovsky, S.Fahlman, F.Lehman
X-Return-Path: loz.intes.odessa.ua!loz@loz.intes.odessa.ua
Reply-To: loz@loz.intes.odessa.ua
Organization: Institute of Market Economy, Ukr. Acad. Sci.
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 1995 07:04:52 GMT
Message-ID: <ABKgp5my3D@loz.intes.odessa.ua>
Lines: 49
Sender: news-server@intes.odessa.ua

Hi, gentlemen, look here!

This thread reminds me an old joke when two sides came to rabbi;
- You are right, - said rabbi after listening to the first party.
Then he listened to the opposing one, -
- You are also right, - repeated he.
- But how comes it!? It is impossible, - they are opponents!,
  - exclaimed his wife, Sarah.
Rabbi patiently listened to her, - And you also are right ... , -
  repeated he.

Now about law and AI. As I understand, law explications are full
of informalities and inconsistencies; there are many situations where
no solution is specified, and judges or jurors should apply to their
voices from inside or their feelings about the affair. At least, our
Soviet and post-Soviet history is full of examples when one law is
(partially) contradicting to other; there is no System in law creation
activities.

What do you, think about bringing the system to Law?

Lawers themselves cannot perform this - history has proved it. But
probably we could classify different aspects of life for people
(including human rights, "pursuit for happiness ...", family relations),
interactons between organizations, countries, e.t.c. Is it possible to
formalise notions of crime, punishment, alibi, presumption of
innocence?

The formal skeleton in this domain would facilitate creation of good
data and knowledge bases, consistent inference procedures. For sure,
the gross volume of this knowledge will be minimized, and we could
automate using such machine as useful DSS in legal problems. Of course,
lawers and all official state bodies still will be dealing with creation
and adjustment of laws, but even their activity could become more
science-looking ... Eh?

Then goes the problem of investigaton. All subjects act in time and
space, they obey to physical (and of course all other laws and social
norms). It looks like consistent semiotic + qualitatve + naive physics
- what else! - model could help in simulation of actions of persons
subjected to investigaton. I understand how complicated this approach
could be, and probably now we are not ready to undertake efforts of
such sort: lack of instrumentation, paradigmatisation, ergonomics, and
so on. But?...

Vitaliy Lozovskiy



