Navegar

Colección

Datos Estadísticas

Artículo

Estamos trabajando para incorporar este artículo al repositorio
Consulte el artículo en la página del editor
Consulte la política de Acceso Abierto del editor

Abstract:

We present a formalization of Kanger's types of rights in the context of interacting two-party systems, such as contracts. We show that in this setting basic rights such as claim, freedom, power and immunity can be expressed in terms of (possibly negated) permissions and obligations over presence or absense of actions. Another way of saying this is that, at least in the context of contracts, neither claim, nor power, nor freedom nor immunity are foundational modalities, as they can be defined in terms of others. We also show that the set of atomic type rights is different from Kanger's original proposal. © 2012 The authors and IOS Press. All rights reserved.

Registro:

Documento: Artículo
Título:Types of rights in two-party systems: A formal analysis
Autor:Pace, G.J.; Schapachnik, F.
Filiación:University of Malta, Malta
Departamento de Computación, FCEyN, Universidad de Buenos Aires, Buenos Aires, Argentina
Palabras clave:Automated Legislative Drafting; Contract Verification; Kanger's Types; Artificial intelligence; Automated Legislative Drafting; Formal analysis; Kanger's Types; Laws and legislation
Año:2012
Volumen:250
Página de inicio:105
Página de fin:114
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.3233/978-1-61499-167-0-105
Título revista:Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence and Applications
Título revista abreviado:Front. Artif. Intell. Appl.
ISSN:09226389
Registro:https://bibliotecadigital.exactas.uba.ar/collection/paper/document/paper_09226389_v250_n_p105_Pace

Referencias:

  • Arnold, A., Nivat's processes and their synchronization (2002) Theor. Comput.Sci., 281, pp. 31-36. , June
  • Hohfeld, W.N., Some fundament allegal conceptions a sapplied in judicial reasoning (1913) Yale Lj, 23, p. 16
  • Jones, A.J.I., Sergot, M., A formal characterisation of institutionalised power (1996) Logic Journal of IGPL, 4 (3), p. 427
  • Kanger, S., Kanger, H., Rights and parliamentarism (1966) Theoria, 32 (2), pp. 85-115
  • Lindahl, L., (1977) Position and Change: A Study in Law and Logic, 112. , Springer
  • Makinson, D., On the formal representation of rights relations (1986) Journal of Philosophical Logic, 15 (4), pp. 403-425
  • Pace, G., Schapachnik, F., Contracts for interacting two-party systems (2012) FLACOS 2012: Sixth Workshop on Formal Languages and Analysis of Contract-Oriented Software, , sep
  • Pace, G., Schapachnik, F., (2012) Types of Rights in Interacting Two-party System: A Formal Analysis, , http://tinyurl.com/8yfshtw, Technical report, FCEy N, Universidad de Buenos Aires, feb
  • Sartor, G., Fundamental legal concepts: A formal and teleological characterisation (2006) Artificial Intelli- Genceand Law, 14 (1), pp. 101-142
  • Sergot, M., A computational theory of normative positions (2001) ACM Transactions on Computational Logic (TOCL), 2 (4), pp. 581-622

Citas:

---------- APA ----------
Pace, G.J. & Schapachnik, F. (2012) . Types of rights in two-party systems: A formal analysis. Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence and Applications, 250, 105-114.
http://dx.doi.org/10.3233/978-1-61499-167-0-105
---------- CHICAGO ----------
Pace, G.J., Schapachnik, F. "Types of rights in two-party systems: A formal analysis" . Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence and Applications 250 (2012) : 105-114.
http://dx.doi.org/10.3233/978-1-61499-167-0-105
---------- MLA ----------
Pace, G.J., Schapachnik, F. "Types of rights in two-party systems: A formal analysis" . Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence and Applications, vol. 250, 2012, pp. 105-114.
http://dx.doi.org/10.3233/978-1-61499-167-0-105
---------- VANCOUVER ----------
Pace, G.J., Schapachnik, F. Types of rights in two-party systems: A formal analysis. Front. Artif. Intell. Appl. 2012;250:105-114.
http://dx.doi.org/10.3233/978-1-61499-167-0-105