바로가기메뉴

본문 바로가기 주메뉴 바로가기

Journal of the Korean Society for Library and Information Science

  • P-ISSN1225-598X
  • E-ISSN2982-6292

Article Contents

Prev Next
e-Submission

Vol.45 No.2

Citation Share

Developing and Evaluating an Ontology-based Legal Retrieval System

Journal of the Korean Society for Library and Information Science / Journal of the Korean Society for Library and Information Science, (P)1225-598X; (E)2982-6292
2011, v.45 no.2, pp.345-366
https://doi.org/10.4275/KSLIS.2011.45.2.345

(2011). Developing and Evaluating an Ontology-based Legal Retrieval System. Journal of the Korean Society for Library and Information Science, 45(2), 345-366, https://doi.org/10.4275/KSLIS.2011.45.2.345

Abstract

The law affects our daily lives, and hence, constitutes a crucial information resource. However, electronic access to legal information using keyword-based retrieval systems appears to provide users with limited satisfaction. There are many factors behind this inadequacy. First, the discrepancies between formal legal terms and their counterparts in common language are quite large. Second, the situation is further confounded by frequent abbreviations in legal terms. Third, even though there is a constant deluge of legal information, users’ needs have evolved to demand more Q and A type searches. All of these factors make the existing retrieval systems inefficient and ineffective. This article suggests an ontology-based system as a means to deal with such difficulties. To that end, a legal retrieval system(experimental system), built on the basis of a newly-constructed law ontology, was tested against a keyword-based legal retrieval system(existing one), yielding data on their relative effectiveness in retrieval and user satisfaction.

keywords
법률 온톨로지, 온톨로지 기반 법률 검색시스템, 검색 성능 평가, 이용자 만족도 평가, Legal Ontology, Ontology-based Legal Information Retrieval System, Measures of Retrieval Effectiveness, Measures of User Satisfactions, Legal Ontology, Ontology-based Legal Information Retrieval System, Measures of Retrieval Effectiveness, Measures of User Satisfactions

Reference

1.

김재호, 이경순, 오종훈, 장두성, 최기선. 2001. KorQATeC 2.0 질의/응답 시스템의 성능 평가를위한 평가집합 구축. 한국정보과학회 언어공학연구회 01 제13회 한글 및 한국어 정보처리 학술대회 , 12: 397-404.

2.

Benjamins, V. R., Casanovas, P., Breuker, J., & Gangemi, A. 2005a. “An introduction.” Lawand the Semantic Web. 1-17. [New York]: Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg.

3.

Benjamins, V. R., Casanovas, P., Contreras, J., & Lopez Cobo, J. M. 2005b. “Iuriservice: Anintelligent frequently asked questions system to assist newly appointed judges.” Law andthe Semantic Web. 201-217. [New York]: Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg.

4.

Boella, G., Lesmo, L., & Damiano, R. 2005. “On the ontological status of norms.” Law andthe Semantic Web, 125-141. [New York]: Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg.

5.

Breuker, J., Casanovas, P., & Klein Michel C. A. 2009. Law, Ontologies and the SemanticWeb: Channelling the Legal Information Flood. Nieuwe Hemweg: IOS Press.

6.

Breuker, J., Hoekstra, R., Boer, A., & van den Berg, K. 2007. OWL Ontology of Basic LegalConcepts(LKIF-Core) Deliverable 1.4. [S.l.]: Information Society Technologies.

7.

Breuker, J., Valente, A. and Winkels, R. 2004. “Legal ontologies in knowledge engineeringand information management.” Artificial Intelligence and Law, 12: 241-277.

8.

Casanovas, P., Casellas, N., & Valbé, J-J. 2009. An Ontology-Based Decision Support Systemfor Judges. 165-175. Amsterdam: IOS Press.

9.

Gangemi, A., Sagri, M-T., & Tiscornia, D. 2005. “A constructive framework for legalontologies." Law and the Semantic Web, 97-124. [New York]: Springer-Verlag BerlinHeidelberg.

10.

Hoekstra, R., Breuker, J., Di Bello, M., & Boer, A. 2009. LKIF-Core: Principled OntologyDevelopment for the Legal Domain. 21-52. [Amsterdam]: IOS Press.

11.

Kingston, J., Schafer, B., & Vandenberghe, W. 2005. “No model behaviour: ontologies forfraud detection." Law and the Semantic Web, 233-248. [New York]: Springer-VerlagBerlin Heidelberg.

12.

Lame, G. 2005. “Using NLP techniques to identify legal ontology components: conceptsand relations." Law and the Semantic Web, 169-184. [New York]: Springer-Verlag BerlinHeidelberg.

13.

Lehmann, J., Breuker, J., & Brouwer, B. 2005. “CAUSATIONT: modeling causation in AI &Law." Law and the Semantic Web, 77-96. [New York]: Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg.

14.

McCarty, L. T. 1989. “A language for legal discourse: I. Basic features.” Proceedings of theSecond International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Law, 180-189. Vancouver,Canada.

15.

Noy, N. F., & McGuinness, D. L. 2001. Ontology Development 101: A Guide to CreatingYour First Ontology. Stanford, CA: Stanford University.

16.

Stamper, K. R. 1991. “The role of semantics in legal expert systems and legal reasoning.”Ratio Juris, 4(2): 219-244.

17.

Valente, A. 1995. Legal Knowledge Engineering: A Modelling Approach. Amsterdam:University of Amsterdam; IOS Press.

18.

van Laarschot, Ronny. 2005. Ontology-Based Knowledge Modelling in Dutch Civil Law. MScthesis, Department of Artificial Intelligence, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam.

Journal of the Korean Society for Library and Information Science

e-Submission OA Policy