An Intelligent Interface to Legal Data Bases Combining Logic Programming and Hypertext

  • Andreas Hamfelt
  • Jonas Barklund


We propose an architecture for building expert systems in which the main subsystems are distinct but communicating programs: a Prolog inference engine, a multimedia interface tool and a data base management system. We have used this architecture for constructing a legal expert system for labour law.

We propose a novel approach for capturing vague concepts. The vagueness is not represented in the sense that its extent is quantified but instead rules are given for evaluating the concept in a given situation. The method is analogous to legal practice; lawyers develop methods for judging whether vague concepts apply to fact situations. These methods are used for identifying the relevant sub-questions and legal text documents for analyzing the case in issue. Our system reflects this and other aspects of a lawyer’s practical work.


Expert System Logic Programming Text Document Legal Reasoning Computer Reasoning 
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.
    B. Atkinson, Hypercard (Cupertino, CA.: Apple Comp. Inc., 1987 ).Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    J. Barklund, A. Hamfelt, S.-A. Tärnlund, “A Legal Reasoning Assistant,” Council of Europe, report by Swedish delegation: 9th Symp. on Legal Data Processing in Europe, (Bonn 1989 ).Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    T. Bench-Capon, M. Sergot, “Toward a Rule-Based Representation of Open Texture in Law,” Computer Power and Legal Language (ed. C. Walter) (Westport, Conn.: Greenwood Press, 1988 ), 39–60.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    V. Bush “As we may think,” Atlantic Monthly (July 1945): 101–8.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    A. Colmerauer, H. Kanoui, M. van Caneghem, R. Pasero, P. Roussel, Un Système de Communication Homme-Machine en Francais (Marseille: Univ. Aix-Marseille I I, 1973 ).Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    D.C. Engelbart, W.K. English, “A research center for augmenting human intellect,” AFIPS Conf. Proc. 33 ( Montvale, N.J.: AFIPS Press, 1968 ).Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    A. Hamfelt, The Multilevel Structure of Legal Knowledge and its Representation, Uppsala Theses in Computing Science 8/90 ( Uppsala: Uppsala University, 1990 ).Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    A. Hamfelt, J. Barklund, “Meta Levels in Legal Knowledge and their Runnable Representation in Logic,” Proc. 3rd Intl. Congress-Logica, In format-lea, Diritto -Expert Systems in Law, (1989), 557–76.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    A. Hamfelt, J. Barklund, “Metaprogramming for Representation of Legal Principles,” Proc. Meta90 Workshop, (1990), 105–22.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    A. Hamfelt, P. Wahlgren, “Datorstödda beslutArtificiell Intelligens och juridik” AFIPS Conf. Proc. 33 (Stockholm, Univ. of Stockholm, 1988).Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    H. L. A. Hart, The Concept of Law ( Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1961 ).Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    P. J. Hayes, “Some Problems and Non-Problems in Representation Theory,” Proc. AISB Summer Conf., (1974), 63–79.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    N. K. Sundby, Om normer, ( Oslo-Bergen-Tromso: Universitetsforlaget, 1974 ).Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    J. Wünsche, Integrating Prolog and a Multimedia. Environment, MSc thesis ( Uppsala: Uppsala university, 1990 ).Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag/Wien 1990

Authors and Affiliations

  • Andreas Hamfelt
    • 1
  • Jonas Barklund
    • 1
  1. 1.UPMAIL, Computing Science Dept.Uppsala UniversityUppsalaSweden

Personalised recommendations