Legal knowledge elicitation: from textual databases to expert systems

  • Claude Thomasset
  • François Blanchard
  • Louis-Claude Paquin


In this paper we intend to present the problems we encounter due to the textual nature of the knowledge in building an expert system for legal advice on Québec Housing Law. During the knowledge engineering process, we propose to take into consideration both the very textual aspects (morphology, syntax, discursive specificity e.g. legal) of the material and the reader’s expertise, for instance, the jurist. Some simple methodological steps of textual data analyses by computer could help us solve the problem of satisfactory knowledge elicitation.


Expert System Legal Reasoning Legal Document Legal Concept Legal Text 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. [1]
    THOMASSET, C., BLANCHARD, F., HEBERT, R. “L’informatisation du savoir juridique: conception d’un prototype de système expert en droit du logement.” in: Recueil des activités du CIEST, 1986–1988, publié sous la direction de A. Caron et A. Michaud, Montréal, UQAM, 1988, pp 301–314.Google Scholar
  2. THOMASSET, C. “Expert System and Legal Formalization: Evaluation of a prototype in Québec Housing Law”. Paper presented at the International Conference on “Intelligence and Society”,International Social Science Council, European Coordination Centre for Research and Documentation in Social Sciences, Vienna, March 1988, to be published by Reidel (Netherlands).Google Scholar
  3. THOMASSET, C., “Expert System in Québec Housing Law: from HOME-Expert Ito HOME-Expert II”, paper presented at the International Conference on Law and Artificial Intelligence: Expert Systems in Law. CIRFID, Bologna, May 3–5, 1989, 29 p.Google Scholar
  4. [2]
    THOMASSET, C. PAQUIN L. C. “Expert Systems in Law and the Representation of Legal Knowledge: Can We Isolate It from the Why and the Who?”, Proceedings of the Third International Congress on: Logica, Informatica, Diritto: Legal Experts Systems, Florence, 1989, Istituto per la documentazione giuridica, vol. 1, pp. 751–771.Google Scholar
  5. [3]
    SOWA, J. F. “Multi-Domain Semantic Theory” draft given by the author at a Montreal conference dated November 28, 1988. See also: SOWA, J. F. “There s More to Logic than the Predicate Calculus” draft given by the author at a Montreal conference dated November 28, 1988.Google Scholar
  6. [4]
    Routen, Tom. “ Hierachically Organised Formalisation.” The Second ICAIL. Vancouver, BC: ACM, 1989. p. 242–250.Google Scholar
  7. [5]
    Wahlgren, Peter. “ Legal Reasoning A Jurisprudential Description.” The Second ICAIL. Vancouver, BC: ACM, 1989. p. 147–156.Google Scholar
  8. [6]
    Toulmin, Stephen. The Uses of Argument, C.U.P. 1958.Google Scholar
  9. [7]
    Wroblewski, Jerzy. “Les langages juridiques: une typologie” Droit et société Revue internationale de théorie du droit et de sociologie juridique, No 8, 1988, p. 14Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag/Wien 1990

Authors and Affiliations

  • Claude Thomasset
    • 1
    • 3
  • François Blanchard
    • 1
    • 3
  • Louis-Claude Paquin
    • 2
    • 3
  1. 1.Groupe de Rercherche en Informatique et Droit (GRID)Université du Québec à MontréalCanada
  2. 2.Centre d’Analyse de Textes par Ordinateur(ATO)Université du Québec à MontréalCanada
  3. 3.Université du Québec à MontréalMontréalCanada

Personalised recommendations