Reflections on the design, applications and implementations of the normative specification language eFLINT
- URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2511.12276v1
- Date: Sat, 15 Nov 2025 16:09:31 GMT
- Title: Reflections on the design, applications and implementations of the normative specification language eFLINT
- Authors: L. Thomas van Binsbergen, Christopher A. Esterhuyse, Tim Müller,
- Abstract summary: Legal practices involve subjective processes such as interpretation and qualification.<n> computational reasoning with laws requires a cross-disciplinary process involving both legal and software expertise.<n>This paper reflects on the domain-specific software language eFLINT developed to experiment with novel solutions.
- Score: 0.764671395172401
- License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
- Abstract: Checking the compliance of software against laws, regulations and contracts is increasingly important and costly as the embedding of software into societal practices is getting more pervasive. Moreover, the digitalised services provided by governmental organisations and companies are governed by an increasing amount of laws and regulations, requiring highly adaptable compliance practices. A potential solution is to automate compliance using software. However, automating compliance is difficult for various reasons. Legal practices involve subjective processes such as interpretation and qualification. New laws and regulations come into effect regularly and laws and regulations, as well as their interpretations, are subjected to constant revision. In addition, computational reasoning with laws requires a cross-disciplinary process involving both legal and software expertise. This paper reflects on the domain-specific software language eFLINT developed to experiment with novel solutions. The language combines declarative and procedural elements to reason about situations and scenarios respectively, explicates and formalises connections between legal concepts and computational concepts, and is designed to automate compliance checks both before, during and after a software system runs. The various goals and applications areas for the language give rise to (conflicting) requirements. This paper reflects on the current design of the language by recalling various applications, the requirements they imposed, and subsequent design decisions. As such, this paper reports on results and insights of an investigation that can benefit language developers within the field of automated compliance.
Related papers
- LegalOne: A Family of Foundation Models for Reliable Legal Reasoning [54.57434222018289]
We present LegalOne, a family of foundational models specifically tailored for the Chinese legal domain.<n>LegalOne is developed through a comprehensive three-phase pipeline designed to master legal reasoning.<n>We publicly release the LegalOne weights and the LegalKit evaluation framework to advance the field of Legal AI.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2026-01-31T10:18:32Z) - SWE-Compass: Towards Unified Evaluation of Agentic Coding Abilities for Large Language Models [59.90381306452982]
evaluating large language models (LLMs) for software engineering has been limited by narrow task coverage, language bias, and insufficient alignment with real-world developer.<n>We introduce SWE-1, a comprehensive benchmark that unifies heterogeneous code-related evaluations into a structured and production-aligned framework.<n>SWE- spans 8 task types, 8 programming scenarios, and 10 programming languages, with 2000 high-quality instances curated from authentic GitHub pull requests.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2025-11-07T18:01:32Z) - From Legal Text to Tech Specs: Generative AI's Interpretation of Consent in Privacy Law [0.0]
This study employs a three-step pipeline that involves using an LLM to classify software use cases for compliance.<n>By benchmarking LLMs against real-world use cases, this research provides insights into leveraging AI-driven solutions to enhance legal compliance of software.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2025-07-05T23:36:05Z) - Specification languages for computational laws versus basic legal principles [0.0]
We speak of a textitcomputational law when that law is intended to be enforced by software through an automated decision-making process.<n>In this paper, we investigate how certain legal principles fare in both scenarios: computational law written in natural language or written in formal language.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2025-03-12T07:39:27Z) - Metamorphic Debugging for Accountable Software [8.001739956625483]
Translating legalese into formal specifications is one challenge.
Lack of a definitive 'truth' for queries (the oracle problem) is another.
We propose that these challenges can be tackled by focusing on relational specifications.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-09-24T14:45:13Z) - Legal Requirements Analysis [2.3349787245442966]
We explore a variety of methods for analyzing legal requirements and exemplify them on representations.
We describe possible alternatives for creating machine-analyzable representations from regulations.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2023-11-23T09:31:57Z) - SAILER: Structure-aware Pre-trained Language Model for Legal Case
Retrieval [75.05173891207214]
Legal case retrieval plays a core role in the intelligent legal system.
Most existing language models have difficulty understanding the long-distance dependencies between different structures.
We propose a new Structure-Aware pre-traIned language model for LEgal case Retrieval.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2023-04-22T10:47:01Z) - Lessons from Formally Verified Deployed Software Systems (Extended version) [65.69802414600832]
This article examines a range of projects, in various application areas, that have produced formally verified systems and deployed them for actual use.
It considers the technologies used, the form of verification applied, the results obtained, and the lessons that the software industry should draw regarding its ability to benefit from formal verification techniques and tools.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2023-01-05T18:18:46Z) - Transparency, Compliance, And Contestability When Code Is(n't) Law [91.85674537754346]
Both technical security mechanisms and legal processes serve as mechanisms to deal with misbehaviour according to a set of norms.
While they share general similarities, there are also clear differences in how they are defined, act, and the effect they have on subjects.
This paper considers the similarities and differences between both types of mechanisms as ways of dealing with misbehaviour.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2022-05-08T18:03:07Z) - Lawformer: A Pre-trained Language Model for Chinese Legal Long Documents [56.40163943394202]
We release the Longformer-based pre-trained language model, named as Lawformer, for Chinese legal long documents understanding.
We evaluate Lawformer on a variety of LegalAI tasks, including judgment prediction, similar case retrieval, legal reading comprehension, and legal question answering.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2021-05-09T09:39:25Z) - A Dataset for Statutory Reasoning in Tax Law Entailment and Question
Answering [37.66486350122862]
This paper investigates the performance of natural language understanding approaches on statutory reasoning.
We introduce a dataset, together with a legal-domain text corpus.
We contrast this with a hand-constructed Prolog-based system, designed to fully solve the task.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2020-05-11T16:54:42Z)
This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.
This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.