Legal interpretation and AI: from expert systems to argumentation and LLMs
- URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2603.05392v1
- Date: Thu, 05 Mar 2026 17:22:56 GMT
- Title: Legal interpretation and AI: from expert systems to argumentation and LLMs
- Authors: Václav Janeček, Giovanni Sartor,
- Abstract summary: AI and Law research has encountered legal interpretation in different ways, in the context of its evolving approaches and methodologies.<n>Research on expert system has focused on legal knowledge engineering, with the goal of ensuring that human-generated interpretations can be transferred into knowledge-bases.<n>Research on argumentation has aimed at representing the structure of interpretive arguments, as well as their dialectical interactions.<n>Research on machine learning has focused on the automated generation of interpretive suggestions and arguments, through general and specialised language models.
- Score: 0.0
- License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/
- Abstract: AI and Law research has encountered legal interpretation in different ways, in the context of its evolving approaches and methodologies. Research on expert system has focused on legal knowledge engineering, with the goal of ensuring that human-generated interpretations can be precisely transferred into knowledge-bases, to be consistently applied. Research on argumentation has aimed at representing the structure of interpretive arguments, as well as their dialectical interactions, to assess of the acceptability of interpretive claims within argumentation frameworks. Research on machine learning has focused on the automated generation of interpretive suggestions and arguments, through general and specialised language models, now being increasingly deployed in legal practice.
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) - Argumentation-Based Explainability for Legal AI: Comparative and Regulatory Perspectives [0.9668407688201359]
Artificial Intelligence (AI) systems are increasingly deployed in legal contexts.<n>The so-called black box problem'' undermines legitimacy of automated decision-making.<n>XAI has proposed a variety of methods to enhance transparency.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2025-10-13T07:19:15Z) - On Verifiable Legal Reasoning: A Multi-Agent Framework with Formalized Knowledge Representations [0.0]
This paper introduces a modular multi-agent framework that decomposes legal reasoning into distinct knowledge acquisition and application stages.<n>In the first stage, specialized agents extract legal concepts and formalize rules to create verifiable intermediate representations of statutes.<n>The second stage applies this knowledge to specific cases through three steps: analyzing queries to map case facts onto the schema, performing symbolic inference to derive logically entailed conclusions, and generating final answers.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2025-08-31T06:03:00Z) - GLARE: Agentic Reasoning for Legal Judgment Prediction [60.13483016810707]
Legal judgment prediction (LJP) has become increasingly important in the legal field.<n>Existing large language models (LLMs) have significant problems of insufficient reasoning due to a lack of legal knowledge.<n>We introduce GLARE, an agentic legal reasoning framework that dynamically acquires key legal knowledge by invoking different modules.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2025-08-22T13:38:12Z) - The explanation dialogues: an expert focus study to understand requirements towards explanations within the GDPR [47.06917254695738]
We present the Explanation Dialogues, an expert focus study to uncover the expectations, reasoning, and understanding of legal experts and practitioners towards XAI.<n>The study consists of an online questionnaire and follow-up interviews, and is centered around a use-case in the credit domain.<n>We find that the presented explanations are hard to understand and lack information, and discuss issues that can arise from the different interests of the data controller and subject.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2025-01-09T15:50:02Z) - Automating Legal Interpretation with LLMs: Retrieval, Generation, and Evaluation [27.345475442620746]
ATRIE consists of a legal concept interpreter and a legal concept interpretation evaluator.<n>The quality of our interpretations is comparable to those written by legal experts, with superior comprehensiveness and readability.<n>Although there remains a slight gap in accuracy, it can already assist legal practitioners in improving the efficiency of legal interpretation.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2025-01-03T10:11:38Z) - Large Language Models and Explainable Law: a Hybrid Methodology [44.99833362998488]
The paper advocates for LLMs to enhance the accessibility, usage and explainability of rule-based legal systems.
A methodology is developed to explore the potential use of LLMs for translating the explanations produced by rule-based systems.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2023-11-20T14:47:20Z) - A Unifying Framework for Learning Argumentation Semantics [47.84663434179473]
We present a novel framework, which uses an Inductive Logic Programming approach to learn the acceptability semantics for several abstract and structured argumentation frameworks in an interpretable way.<n>Our framework outperforms existing argumentation solvers, thus opening up new future research directions in the area of formal argumentation and human-machine dialogues.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2023-10-18T20:18:05Z) - Interpretable Deep Learning: Interpretations, Interpretability,
Trustworthiness, and Beyond [49.93153180169685]
We introduce and clarify two basic concepts-interpretations and interpretability-that people usually get confused.
We elaborate the design of several recent interpretation algorithms, from different perspectives, through proposing a new taxonomy.
We summarize the existing work in evaluating models' interpretability using "trustworthy" interpretation algorithms.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2021-03-19T08:40:30Z)
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.