Judicial Support Systems: Ideas
for a Privacy Ontology-Based
Case Analyzer
Yan Tang
VUB STAR lab
1st Nov. 2005
Overviews
•
•
•
•
•
Introduction and Backgrounds
Law and Privacy Ontology Construct
Privacy Ontology Capture Methodology
Discussion and Future Work
Conclusion
1. Introduction and
Backgrounds
• Privacy
– Definition:
• The ability of an individual or group to prevent information
about themselves from becoming known to people
– Mainly deal with Data Privacy
– Privacy Applications:
•
•
•
•
•
Identity Management Systems
Location Based Services Application
E-Science
E-Shopping
Etc.
2. Privacy Ontology
Construct
2.1. Privacy Ontology in
DOGMA framework
• DOGMA (Developing Ontology-Guided
Mediation for Agents)
– Ontology Base
• Sets of lexons that represent the entities of conceptualization
• <γ, t1, r1, r2, t2>, where γ∈Γ, t1, t1∈T, r1, r2∈R.
– Ontological Commitments
• contain the lexon selection, organization, instantiation and
system context
• Privacy Ontology
– Fact Lexons
– Privacy Directives Commitments
2.2. Principle MetaOntology
2.3. Application Design
• Application based on privacy ontology:
•
•
•
•
•
•
E-court
E-science
E-shopping
E-government
Disaster management systems
Etc.
• Applications based on legal ontology
•
•
•
•
Law retrieval systems
Legal abstractor
Case parser
Etc.
2.3.1 Applications based on
legal ontology
• Legal Abstractor (under research)
– An expert system to help to extract cases into facts
– Privacy Case Describing Standards (still under research in
PRIME)
– Classical manual way: abstraction by lawyers
• Case Parser (under research)
– A tool still under developing
– Functionality:
• General: to parse a case into sets of lexons and commitment
relations with the aide of legal abstractor (an intelligent agent)
• More details: need to be discovered
• Law retrieval system
– A system uses legal abstractor and case parser
3. Privacy Ontology Capture
Methodology
Formulate Vision Conduct
Preparation and
Project
Statement Feasibility study Management
Scoping
Domain Conceptualization
Meta-lexons are still
under extraction
Construct
Construct
lexon and
commitment
meta-lexon
layer
layer
Application Specification
4. Conclusion, Discussion
and Future Work
• Conclusion:
– how to build legal ontology in DOGMA framework and how it can be
contributed into many sub legal domains, such as privacy.
• Future work:
– Legal ontology capture methodology (might be based on Privacy
ontology capture methodology)
– Case parser (an assistant tool, or expert system) development
– Abstractor (an assistant tool, or expert system) development
– Rule based and case based reasoning will be visualized in meta-lexon
Layer (or commitment layer if it’s possible)
– XML based law retrieval system development
• Discussion:
–
–
–
–
How to build a general legal ontology
How to mount legal applications based on legal ontology
How to capture legal ontology from lawyers in different law domains
How to bring privacy ontology as an entrance to the whole legal
ontology realm
References
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
1. T. R. Gruber. A translation approach to portable ontologies. Knowledge Acquisition, 5(2):199-220, 1993.
2. T. R. Gruber. Toward principles for the design of ontologies used for knowledge sharing. Workshop on Formal
Ontology, Padova, Italy, 1992.
3. P. De Leenheer & A. De Moor, Context-driven Disambiguation in Ontology Elicitation. In, P. Shvaiko & J.
Euzenat,(eds.), Context and Ontologies: Theory, Practice and Applications, AAAI Technical Report WS-05-01, pp.
17 - 24, AAAI Press, 2005.
4. R. Meersman, Ontologies and Databases: More than a Fleeting Resemblance. In, A.D'Atri & M. Missikoff,(eds.),
OES/SEO 2001 Rome Workshop, Luiss Pub., 2001.
5. J. A. Holland, J. S. Webb, Learning legal rules, Oxford university press, 2003
6. L. Woolf, substantial change of civil court rule in UK, 1999.
7. R. Summers, Two types of substantive reasons: the core of a theory of common law justification, 63 Cornell Law
Review 707, 1978.
8. P. Verheyden, J. De Bo & R. Meersman, Semantically unlocking database content through ontology-based
mediation . In, C. Bussler, V. Tannen & I. Fundulaki,(eds.), Semantic Web and Databases: 2nd Int’l Workshop,
SWDB 2004, Toronto ,Canada, 2004, Revised Selected Papers, LNCS 3372, pp. 109 - 126, Springer Verlag,
2005.
9. P. De Leenheer & R. Meersman, Towards a formal foundation of DOGMA Ontology Part I: Lexon Base and
Concept Definition Server. Technical Report STAR-2005-06, STARLab, Brussel, 2005.
10. J. Dumortier, C. Goemans, Roadmap for European legal research in privacy and identity management, K.U.
Leuven, 2003.
11. T. A. Halpin. Information Modeling and Relational Databases: From Conceptual Analysis to Logical Design,
San Francisco, California, Morgan Kaufman Publishers, 2001.
12. A. Valente, J. Breuker, Ontology: the missing link between legal theory and AI & law, in A. Soeteman (eds.),
Legal knowledge based systems JURIX 94: Lelystad, Koninklijke Vermande, 1994.
13. B. Niblett, computer science and law: an introductory discussion, in B. Niblett (ed.), computer science and law:
an advanced course, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1980.