Monday 18th Dec :: Tuesday 19th Dec (morning) :: Tuesday 19th Dec (afternoon) :: Wednesday 20th Dec (morning) :: Wednesday 20th Dec (afternoon)

Monday 18th December

09:00 - 17:00. Workshops and Doctoral Consortium

  • Workshop 1: ALP 2023: AI, Law, and Philosophy (09.30-17.00)
  • Workshop 2: AI & A2J 2023: AI & Access to Justice workshop (09.00-17.00)
  • Workshop 3: AI4Legs-II workshop (09.00-14.00)
  • Workshop 4: Legal Annotation workshop (09.00-17.00)
  • Workshop 5: Doctoral Consortium (14.00-17.00)

For more detail, see the program of all workshops.

17:15 - 18:15. Keynote Speech by Jaap Hage, professor in Legal Theory (Maastricht University). (moved to Wednesday)

17:15 - 20:00. Reception

Tuesday 19th December, morning (parallel sessions)

08:30 - 09:00: registration

09:00 - 09:15. opening: Welcome from Maastricht University and from the conference organizers

09:15 - 10:30. session 1A: Formal approaches (I) (chair: Antonino Rotolo)

  • 09:15 - 09:40: Trevor Bench-Capon. A Note on Hierarchical Constraints
  • 09:40 - 10:05: Ilaria Canavotto and John Horty. The importance of intermediate factors
  • 10:05 - 10:20: Adam Wyner and Tomasz Zurek. On Legal Teleological Reasoning
  • 10:20 - 10:35: Agata Ciabattoni, Xavier Parent and Giovanni Sartor. Permissions in a Kelsenian perspective

09:15 - 10:30. session 1B: Natural Language Processing (I) (chair: Hannes Westermann)

  • 09:15 - 09:40: Morgan Gray, Jaromir Savelka, Wesley Oliver and Kevin Ashley. Can GPT Alleviate the Burden of Annotation?
  • 09:40 - 10:05: May Myo Zin, Ha Thanh Nguyen, Ken Satoh, Saku Sugawara and Fumihito Nishino. Information Extraction from Lengthy Legal Contracts: Leveraging Query-Based Summarization and GPT-3.5
  • 10:05 - 10:20: Youssef Al Mouatamid, Jihad Zahir, Marie Bonnin and Hajar Mousannif. Assessing Ocean’s legal protection using AI: A new dataset and a BERT-based classifier
  • 10:20 - 10:35: Tomer Libal and Aleksander Smywiński-Pohl. Giving Examples Instead of Answering Questions: Introducing Legal Concept-Example Systems

10:30 - 11:00. coffee break

11:00 - 12:30. session 2A: Formal approaches (II) (chair: Ilaria Canavotto)

  • 11:00 - 11:25: Cecilia Di Florio, Xinghan Liu, Emiliano Lorini, Antonino Rotolo and Giovanni Sartor. Inferring New Classifications in Legal Case-based Reasoning
  • 11:25 - 11:50: Kees van Berkel, Reka Markovich, Christian Strasser and Leon van der Torre. Arguing About Choosing a Normative System: Conflict of Laws
  • 11:50 - 12:05: Kathrin Hanauer, Tereza Novotná and Matteo Pascucci. Assisted Normative Reasoning with Aristotelian Diagrams
  • 12:05 - 12:20: Michał Araszkiewicz. Conceptual Structures in Statutory Interpretation

11:00 - 12:30. session 2B: Natural Language Processing (II) (chair: Ha Thanh Nguyen)

  • 11:00 - 11:25: Samyar Janatian, Hannes Westermann, Jinzhe Tan, Jaromir Savelka and Karim Benyekhlef. From Text to Structure: Using Large Language Models to Support the Development of Legal Expert Systems
  • 11:25 - 11:50: Ren-Der Sun, Chia-Hui Chang and Kuo-Chun Chien. New Horizons of Legal Judgement Predication via Multi-Task Learning and LoRA
  • 11:50 - 12:05: Huihui Xu and Kevin Ashley. A Question-Answering Approach to Evaluate Legal Summaries
  • 12:05 - 12:20: Marton Ribary, Eugenio Vaccari, Paul Krause, Thomas Wood and Miklos Orban. Prompt engineering and provision of context in domain specific use of GPT

12:30 - 13:30. lunch break

Tuesday 19th December, afternoon (plenary)

13:30 - 14:30. Keynote Speech by Piek Vossen, professor in Computational Lexicology (VU University Amsterdam), head of the Computational Linguistics & Text Mining Lab.

ChatGPT: what it is, what it can do, cannot do and should not do

OpenAI has set a new standard by making complex AI tools and systems available to the general public through a natural language interface. No need to program complex systems, just ask your question or send your request to ChatGPT. In this presentation, I dive deeper into the workings of ChatGPT to explain what it can do and what it cannot do. Finally, I discuss its potential future as a technology solution: as Artificial General Intelligence or as natural language interface to technology.

14:30 - 15:45. session 3: Mixed session (chair: Katie Aktinson)

  • 14:30 - 14:55: Daphne Odekerken, Floris Bex and Henry Prakken. Precedent-based reasoning with incomplete cases
  • 14:55 - 15:20: Ludi van Leeuwen, Bart Verheij, Rineke Verbrugge and Silja Renooij. Evaluating Methods for Setting a Prior Probability of Guilt
  • 15:20 - 15:45: Anas Belfathi, Nicolas Hernandez and Laura Monceaux. Harnessing GPT-3.5-turbo for Rhetorical Role Prediction in Legal Cases

15:45 - 16:30. coffee break + demos

Teaser videos are available online (including additional demos).

  • Ha-Thanh Nguyen, Randy Goebel, Francesca Toni, Kostas Stathis and Ken Satoh. LawGiBa - Combining GPT, Knowledge Bases, and Logic Programming in a Legal Assistance System
  • Suzan Zuurmond, Annemarie Borg, Matthijs van Kempen and Remi Wieten. Human-centred explanation of rule-based decision-making systems
  • Daniele Theseider Dupre. Answer Set Programming for Legal Decision Support and Explanation
  • Samuel Dahan, Rohan Bhambhoria, David Liang and Xiaodan Zhu. A Global Open-source Legal Language Model
  • Kevin Bönisch, Giuseppe Abrami, Sabine Wehnert and Alexander Mehler. Bundestags-Mine: Natural Language Processing for Extracting Key Information from Government Documents

16:30 - 18:00. session 4: Mixed session (chair: Monica Palmirani)

  • 16:30 - 16:55: Cor Steging, Silja Renooij and Bart Verheij. Improving Rationales with Small, Inconsistent and Incomplete Data
  • 16:55 - 17:20: Jakub Drápal, Hannes Westermann and Jaromir Savelka. Using Large Language Models to Support Thematic Analysis in Empirical Legal Studies
  • 17:20 - 17:35: Jack Mumford, Katie Atkinson and Trevor Bench-Capon. Human Performance on the AI Legal Case Verdict Classification Task
  • 17:35 - 17:50: Guilherme Paulino-Passos and Francesca Toni. Learning Case Relevance in Case-Based Reasoning with Abstract Argumentation

19:00 - 22:30. Dinner

Wednesday 20th December, morning (parallel sessions)

09:00 - 10:30. session 5A: Formal approaches (III) (chair: Reka Markovich)

  • 09:00 - 09:25: Wijnand van Woerkom, Davide Grossi, Henry Prakken and Bart Verheij. Hierarchical a Fortiori Reasoning with Dimensions
  • 09:25 - 09:40: Trevor Bench-Capon and Katie Atkinson. Dimensions and Precedential Constraint: Factors Deriving From Multiple Dimensions
  • 09:40 - 09:55: Claudio Novelli, Guido Governatori and Antonino Rotolo. Automating Business Process Compliance for the EU AI Act
  • 09:55 - 10:10: Seng Joe Watt, Oliver Goodenough and Meng Weng Wong. Deontics and time in contracts: An executable semantics for the L4 DSL
  • 10:10 - 10:25: Milen Girma Kebede, Thomas van Binsbergen, Tom van Engers and Dannis van Vuurden. Towards a Purpose-Based Access Control Model derived from the purpose limitation principle

09:00 - 10:30. session 5B: Natural Language Processing (III) (chair: Jaromir Savelka)

  • 09:00 - 09:25: Ha-Thanh Nguyen, Wachara Fungwacharakorn and Ken Satoh. LogiLaw Dataset towards Reinforcement Learning from Logical Feedback (RLLF)
  • 09:25 - 09:50: Andrea Lombardi, Domenico Alfano and Roberto Abbruzzese. Legal Text Segmentation through Breakpoint Detection
  • 09:50 - 10:05: Monica Palmirani, Chiara Catizone, Giulia Venditti and Salvatore Sapienza. Multilevel Hate Speech Classification Based on Multilingual Case-Law
  • 10:05 - 10:20: Gabriela Argüelles Terrón, Patricia Martín Chozas and Víctor Rodríguez Doncel. Event Extraction from Spanish Workers’ Statute using Large Language Models

10:30 - 11:00. coffee break + demos

11:00 - 12:30. session 6A: Formal approaches (IV) and hybrid approaches (chair: Tomasz Zurek)

  • 11:00 - 11:15: Wachara Fungwacharakorn, Kanae Tsushima, Hiroshi Hosobe, Hideaki Takeda and Ken Satoh. Connecting Rule-Based and Case-Based Representations of Soft-Constraint Norms
  • 11:15 - 11:30: Preston Carlson and Michael Genesereth. Insurance Portfolio Analysis as Containment Testing
  • 11:30 - 11:45: Harshvardhan J. Pandit, Paul Ryan, Georg Philip Krog, Martin Crane and Rob Brennan. Towards a Semantic Specification for GDPR Data Breach Reporting
  • 11:45 - 12:00: Tien-Hsuan Wu, Ben Kao and Michael M.K. Cheung. Judgment Retrieval Made Easier through Query Analysis

11:00 - 12:30. session 6B: Natural Language Processing (IV) and OCR (chair: Enrico Francesconi)

  • 11:00 - 11:15: Mads Skipanes, Tollef Emil Jørgensen and Katrin Franke. Advancing Knowledge Discoveries in Criminal Investigations with Semantic Textual Similarity
  • 11:15 - 11:30: Akito Shimbo, Yuta Sugawara, Hiroaki Yamada and Takenobu Tokunaga. Nearest Neighbor Search for Summarization of Japanese Judgment Documents
  • 11:30 - 11:45: Irene Benedetto, Luca Cagliero, Francesco Tarasconi, Giuseppe Giacalone and Claudia Bernini. Benchmarking Abstractive Models for Italian Legal News Summarization
  • 11:45 - 12:00: Henrik Palmer Olsen, Nicolas Garneau, Yannis Panagis, Johan Lindholm and Anders Søgaard. Re-framing Case Law Citation Prediction from a Paragraph Perspective
  • 12:00 - 12:15: Roberto Abbruzzese, Domenico Alfano and Andrea Lombardi. REMOAC: A Retroactive Explainable Method for OCR Anomalies Correction in legal domain

12:30 - 13:30. lunch break

Wednesday 20th December, afternoon (plenary)

13:30 - 14:30. Keynote Speech by Jaap Hage, professor in Legal Theory (Maastricht University).

Explainable Legal AI

With the increasing popularity of AI based on machine learning, the ideal that AI programs can explain their outputs becomes more difficult to realise. There is no reason why this would be different for legal AI. However natural the demand for explicability may seem, it is not at all obvious what precisely is asked for. There seem to be two kinds of explanation, which can ideally be combined but which in practice do not always go together. The one kind describes the process through which the explanandum came about, physically or – in the law – logically. The other kind is a tool to create understanding in the audience. Psychological research has shown that people are often not capable to explain their own behaviour in the first way, and that when they explain it in the second way, the explanation may very well be false. This has also be shown to hold for legal decisions. If naturally intelligent lawyers are not always capable of explaining their own decisions – but may be under the illusion that they are – should we then demand from AI legal decisions makers that they do what human legal decision makers often cannot do? What can we under these circumstances expect from the explanations that AI systems give of their legal decisions? For some, the answer may come as a surprise.

13:30 - 14:30. Keynote Speech by Iris van Rooij, professor in Computational Cognitive Science (Radboud University) and PI at the Donders Institute for Brain, Cognition and Behaviour (canceled)

14:30 - 16:00. Session 7: Emerging topics (chair: Floris Bex)

  • 14:30 - 14:55: Gijs van Dijck, Benjamin Rodrigues de Miranda and Chloé Crombach. Centrality Scores and Precedent Value in Legal Network Analysis
  • 14:55 - 15:10: Yiwei Lu, Zhe Yu, Yuhui Lin, Burkhard Schafer, Andrew Ireland and Lachlan Urquhart. A Legal System to Modify Autonomous Vehicle Designs in Transnational Contexts
  • 15:10 - 15:25: Łukasz Górski and Shashishekar Ramakrishna. Challenges in Adapting LLMs for Transparency: Complying with Art. 14 EU AI Act
  • 15:25 - 15:40: Hilmy Hanif, Jorge Constantino, Marie-Therese Sekwenz, Michel van Eeten, Jolien Ubacht, Ben Wagner and Yury Zhauniarovich. Tough Decisions? Supporting System Classification According to the AI Act

16:00 - 17:00. Closing remarks + Open discussion?