Interpreting statutory predicates

  • Authors:

  • E. L. Rissland;D. B. Skalak

  • Affiliations:

  • Department of Computer & Information Science, University of Massachusetts, Amherst, MA;Department of Computer & Information Science, University of Massachusetts, Amherst, MA

  • Venue:
  • ICAIL '89 Proceedings of the 2nd international conference on Artificial intelligence and law
  • Year:
  • 1989

Quantified Score

Hi-index 0.00

Visualization

Abstract

In this paper we discuss a hybrid approach to the problem of statutory interpretation that involves combining our past approach to case-based reasoning (“CBA”), as exemplified in our previous HYPO and TAX-HYPO systems, with traditional rule-based reasoning (“RBR”), as exemplified by expert systems. We do not tackle the fullblown version of statutory interpretation, which would include reasoning with legislative intent or other normative aspects (the “ought”), but confine ourselves to reasoning with explicit cases and rules. We discuss strategies that can be used to guide interpretation, particularly the interleaving of CBR and RBR, and how they are used in an agenda-based architecture, called CABARET, which we are currently developing in a general way and experimenting with in the particular area of Section §280A(c)(1) of the U.S. Internal Revenue Code, which deals with the so called “home office deduction”.