Niebla Zatarain 156

Volume 15, Issue 1, August 2018

Book review: Artificial Intelligence and Legal

Analytics: New Tools for Law Practice in the
Digital Age

Kevin D. Ashley
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2017. 426 pages.
ISBN 9781316622810. £34.99.

Reviewed by Jesus Manuel Niebla Zatarain*

© 2018 Jesus Manuel Niebla Zatarain

Licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-
NoDerivatives 4.0 International (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0) license

DOI: 10.2966/scrip.150118.156

* Professor and researcher, Faculty of Law, Autonomous University of

Sinaloa, Mazatlán, Sinaloa, Mexico. Email: [email protected]
(2018) 15:1 SCRIPTed 156 157

Can we fully represent cognitive legal processes through computational models?

This is perhaps one of the most complex yet fascinating questions experts in the

area of legal artificial intelligence are trying to solve. In this context, Kevin

Ashley’s Artificial Intelligence and Legal Analytics: New Tools for Law Practice in the

Digital Age delivers a comprehensive study aimed at understanding the

evolution of this interdisciplinary field. The author begins by presenting a

description of early artificial intelligence developments implemented in the legal

sphere which, regardless the fact they did not perform legal reasoning per se, led

to the development of new applications.

An example of the latter are legal AI expert systems. These developments

operate in a specific area of legal knowledge and construct a legal outcome

through the direct interaction with its user. Nonetheless, these early devices had

three primary downsides: first, they did not possess the capacity to represent

uncertainty, which leads to incomplete legal data. Second, the process of

providing the device with legal rules was time consuming and resource

intensive, limiting their potential use. Third, this produced a bottleneck that

could not be solved through text analytics. To increase the level of

comprehension of this section of the text, further explanation along with

additional illustration would have been convenient.

In relation to the previous point, the author clearly describes how

researchers in AI and the law complemented the open texture approach

implemented by early devices with computational models of legal reasoning

(CMLR). This resulted in arguments that included legal text input, prediction of

the problem’s outcome, and an explanation in terms that were comprehensible

by legal professionals with no technical background. Overall, this allowed legal

AI to represent human legal knowledge in terms that can be used to develop

relevant intelligent tools for the legal field.

Niebla Zatarain 158

On a first look, it is established that the law itself is a domain of rules,

susceptible to being presented through computational code interpretable

through artificial reasoning. However, features such as vagueness and the open-

texture of statutory provisions need to be addressed to create accurate legal

reasoning. An approach that delivers this is the emulation of how courts provide

their rulings. The process is decomposed into three parts: first, a theory based on

previously existing cases that resemble the one currently being analysed is

created. Second, these recently created patterns are used to strengthen or weaken

an argument. Third, example-based explanations illustrate why an argument can

or cannot be applied. It is within this scope that the first section of the book is

presented.

The second section of the book addresses a technical aspect – the

development of legal tools. Here the author proposes the use of ontologies to

properly describe relevant relations within a specific area of the law. This is

combined with machine learning techniques, which allows learning from the

input received to maximise legal accuracy and operational efficiency. The result

of this is evidence that supports the notion that argument-related data could be

implemented to support conceptual legal information retrieval through

computational platforms.

Here, the author makes a crucial contribution: if models of legal reasoning

and argumentation are to have a greater impact on legal practice, they will likely

need to do so by including pre-existing commercial and institutional approaches

to full-text legal information retrieval and e-discovery (p. 210). The cooperation

between legal AI and pre-existing approaches allows the management and

processing of case decisions, statutes, and other relevant legal documents,

providing tools that may be beneficial for practitioners and students.

In relation to legal documents as source of legal knowledge the

importance of machine learning techniques is highlighted by the author. Here,

(2018) 15:1 SCRIPTed 156 159

the device detects relevant patterns to find correlations in new inputs. By this

mechanism correlations between the instant case and similar precedents can be

established. This by itself is a significant advance: unlike traditional predictive

methods that were designed to operate only on Supreme Court decisions, this

new approach is capable to represent features obtained from private litigation.

This technical approach supports the development of cognitive computing,

which functions not by solving the problem presented by one of the plaintiffs but

by providing new forms of relevant information that can assist in solving a

specific situation. To apply machine learning techniques to legal texts a three-

step method is implemented: first, collecting and processing raw data. Second,

transforming the raw data into a uniform linguistic element. Third, delivering

the document as a feature vector that recognizes particular features in the legal

text.

Regardless of the apparent benefits of this approach, at the time of the

book’s publication, there had not yet been any developments that fully

implement the method described. One of the reasons for this is the actual design

limitation that legally relevant devices face. To illustrate this, the author

discusses two systems, Watson and Debater. The first operates on corpus of text,

gathering relevant information that it uses to provide an answer for the question

it receives. A downside of this approach is that it only operates on the text

provided, which is likely to be too narrow for complex implementations.

Additionally, in law it is crucial to provide an argument (the logical description

of the reasoning process) that led to an outcome, something that is also not

provided by this system. In relation to Debater, it is presented as an improved

version of Watson, capable of constructing relevant legal arguments. Apart from

this, the author also proposes further adaptation of Watson’s operative aspects

in order to enhance its operation when applied to the legal field.

Niebla Zatarain 160

At this point, the author establishes that understanding regulatory texts is

a fundamental requirement to properly apply the legal rules provided by the

legislator. This makes the insertion of legal AI a natural step towards the

extraction and correct interpretation of relevant legal data in a large textual

corpus. In this scenario, the implementation of different technological methods

to obtain relevant data and the use of rule-based approaches to classify statutory

provisions from relevant sources are proposed. In this sense, chapter 9 addresses

the extraction of logical rules from statements and regulations by implementing

deductive and defeasible approaches. Here, the author uses environmental

designs to deliver a view of how these techniques operate (through a compliant

design).

The third and last section of this book presents the LUIMA (Legal

Unstructured Information Management Architecture) design, evaluating its

composition and the contribution it makes to any full text legal information

system. The outcome provided by this platform outperforms those developed

under traditional approaches, since it addresses semantic elements contained in

legal documents. This means that the system can distinguish between sentences

that represent a rule and sentences that state findings of fact.

Finally, the author recognizes that regardless the current advances and the

on-going effort to extract rules from regulatory texts, they are still far from ideal.

Nonetheless, the advances obtained are being used in other applications, such as

construction of legal abstracts or statutory provisions and the relation between

relevant agents according to the nature of the data contained in these texts. A

positive aspect of this work is that it properly illustrates the suitability of

emulating human cognitive processes and their use in the development of

functional legal technology.

In relation to the composition of this book, it provides a comprehensive

and user-friendly description of this interdisciplinary area, focusing on the

(2018) 15:1 SCRIPTed 156 161

suitability of developing legal devices based on artificial intelligence. The

structure of the work allows users to analyse how representation of legal logic

knowledge occurs, and its suitability for computational implementations (pp.

173-175). On this matter, the author provides relevant and understandable

illustrations that facilitate the linkage between theory and the development of

the techno legal implementations. In this aspect, is worth mentioning the form in

which relevant technological approaches, such as machine learning and the

extraction of argument related information, were addressed. The author also

makes the transition to current technology in a continuous and reader-friendly

form, highlighting current methods of information retrieval that increase the

quality of the legal outcome provided. However, some recommendations can be

proposed to this work. To increase the clarity of the illustrations provided,

further explanation is suggested, especially for audiences that lack a computer

science background.

In summary, Artificial Intelligence and Legal Analytics: New Tools for Law

Practice in the Digital Age is a fundamental work for those of us who are interested

in the intersection between intelligent technology and the legal field, and its

promising future.