The challenge of open-texture in law

Author:

Guitton ClementORCID,Tamò-Larrieux AureliaORCID,Mayer SimonORCID,van Dijck GijsORCID

Abstract

AbstractAn important challenge when creating automatically processable laws concerns open-textured terms. The ability to measure open-texture can assist in determining the feasibility of encoding regulation and where additional legal information is required to properly assess a legal issue or dispute. In this article, we propose a novel conceptualisation of open-texture with the aim of determining the extent of open-textured terms in legal documents. We conceptualise open-texture as a lever whose state is impacted by three types of forces: internal forces (the words within the text themselves), external forces (the resources brought to challenge the definition of words), and lateral forces (the merit of such challenges). We tested part of this conceptualisation with 26 participants by investigating agreement in paired annotators. Five key findings emerged. First, agreement on which words are open-texture within a legal text is possible and statistically significant. Second, agreement is even high at an average inter-rater reliability of 0.7 (Cohen’s kappa). Third, when there is agreement on the words, agreement on the Open-Texture Value is high. Fourth, there is a dependence between the Open-Texture Value and reasons invoked behind open-texture. Fifth, involving only four annotators can yield similar results compared to involving twenty more when it comes to only flagging clauses containing open-texture. We conclude the article by discussing limitations of our experiment and which remaining questions in real life cases are still outstanding.

Funder

Hasler Stiftung

University of St.Gallen

Publisher

Springer Science and Business Media LLC

Reference48 articles.

1. Ackerman BA (1986) Law, economics, and the problem of legal culture. Duke Law J 1986(6):929–947

2. Baldwin DA (1995) Security studies and the end of the cold war. World Politics 48:117–141

3. Benzmüller C, Fuenmayor D, Lomfeld B (2020) Encoding legal balancing: automating an abstract ethico-legal value ontology in preference logic. In: Freie Universität Empirical Legal Studies Center (FUELS) Working Paper, 5.

4. Beschwerde gegen den Entscheid des Obergerichts des Kantons Luzern, II. Kammer, vom 3. November 2010, (Bundesgericht 2011). https://www.bger.ch/ext/eurospider/live/de/php/aza/http/index.php?highlight_docid=aza%3A%2F%2F14-07-2011-6B_5-2011&lang=de&type=show_document&zoom=YES&

5. Bhatia J, Breaux TD, Reidenberg2 JR, Norton TB (2016) A theory of vagueness and privacy risk perception. In: 24th International Requirements Engineering Conference

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3