多司法管辖区定义的比较与分析

S. Ghanavati, T. Breaux
{"title":"多司法管辖区定义的比较与分析","authors":"S. Ghanavati, T. Breaux","doi":"10.1109/RELAW.2015.7330211","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Regulatory definitions establish the scope and boundary for legal statements and provide software designers with means to assess the coverage of their designs under the law. However, the number of phrases that serve to define this boundary in a legal statement are usually large and often a simple legal statement contains or is affected by up to 10 definition-related phrases. In addition, software designers may need to design their software to operate under multiple jurisdictions, which may not use the same terminology to express conditions. Thus, it is necessary for designers to keep track of definitions in one or more regulations and to compare these definitions across jurisdictions. In this paper we report a study to develop a method to analyze and compare natural language definitions across legal texts and how to analyze the legal statements with respect to definitions. Our method helps reduce the number of comparison between definitions across multiple jurisdictions as well as allows software designers keep track of several inter-related definitions in a systematic way.","PeriodicalId":130029,"journal":{"name":"2015 IEEE Eighth International Workshop on Requirements Engineering and Law (RELAW)","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2015-08-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparing and analyzing definitions in multi-jurisdictions\",\"authors\":\"S. Ghanavati, T. Breaux\",\"doi\":\"10.1109/RELAW.2015.7330211\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Regulatory definitions establish the scope and boundary for legal statements and provide software designers with means to assess the coverage of their designs under the law. However, the number of phrases that serve to define this boundary in a legal statement are usually large and often a simple legal statement contains or is affected by up to 10 definition-related phrases. In addition, software designers may need to design their software to operate under multiple jurisdictions, which may not use the same terminology to express conditions. Thus, it is necessary for designers to keep track of definitions in one or more regulations and to compare these definitions across jurisdictions. In this paper we report a study to develop a method to analyze and compare natural language definitions across legal texts and how to analyze the legal statements with respect to definitions. Our method helps reduce the number of comparison between definitions across multiple jurisdictions as well as allows software designers keep track of several inter-related definitions in a systematic way.\",\"PeriodicalId\":130029,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"2015 IEEE Eighth International Workshop on Requirements Engineering and Law (RELAW)\",\"volume\":\"1 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2015-08-25\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"2015 IEEE Eighth International Workshop on Requirements Engineering and Law (RELAW)\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1109/RELAW.2015.7330211\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"2015 IEEE Eighth International Workshop on Requirements Engineering and Law (RELAW)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1109/RELAW.2015.7330211","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

摘要

监管定义确立了法律声明的范围和边界,并为软件设计人员提供了在法律下评估其设计范围的方法。然而,在法律声明中用于定义这一边界的短语数量通常很大,通常一个简单的法律声明包含或受多达10个定义相关短语的影响。此外,软件设计者可能需要设计他们的软件,使其在多个管辖范围内运行,这些管辖范围可能不使用相同的术语来表达条件。因此,设计人员有必要跟踪一个或多个法规中的定义,并在不同的司法管辖区比较这些定义。在本文中,我们报告了一项研究,旨在开发一种方法来分析和比较法律文本中的自然语言定义,以及如何分析法律声明中的定义。我们的方法有助于减少跨多个司法管辖区的定义之间的比较数量,并允许软件设计师以系统的方式跟踪几个相互关联的定义。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Comparing and analyzing definitions in multi-jurisdictions
Regulatory definitions establish the scope and boundary for legal statements and provide software designers with means to assess the coverage of their designs under the law. However, the number of phrases that serve to define this boundary in a legal statement are usually large and often a simple legal statement contains or is affected by up to 10 definition-related phrases. In addition, software designers may need to design their software to operate under multiple jurisdictions, which may not use the same terminology to express conditions. Thus, it is necessary for designers to keep track of definitions in one or more regulations and to compare these definitions across jurisdictions. In this paper we report a study to develop a method to analyze and compare natural language definitions across legal texts and how to analyze the legal statements with respect to definitions. Our method helps reduce the number of comparison between definitions across multiple jurisdictions as well as allows software designers keep track of several inter-related definitions in a systematic way.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信