English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Ontology is a popular method for knowledge representation in differentdomains, including the legal domain, and description logics (DL) is commonlyused as its description language. To handle reasoning based on inconsistentDL-based legal ontologies, the current paper presents a structuredargumentation framework particularly for reasoning in legal contexts on thebasis of ASPIC+, and translates the legal ontology into formulas and rules ofan argumentation theory. With a particular focus on the design of autonomousvehicles from the perspective of legal AI, we show that using this combinedtheory of formal argumentation and DL-based legal ontology, acceptableassertions can be obtained based on inconsistent ontologies, and thetraditional reasoning tasks of DL ontologies can also be accomplished. Inaddition, a formal definition of explanations for the result of reasoning ispresented.

An Argumentation-Based Legal Reasoning Approach for DL-Ontology