The Information Coding Classification (ICC) is a classification system covering almost all extant 6500 knowledge fields (knowledge domains). Its conceptualization goes beyond the scope of the well known library classification systems, such as Dewey Decimal Classification (DDC), Universal Decimal Classification (UDC), and Library of Congress Classification (LCC), by extending also to knowledge systems that so far have not afforded to classify literature. ICC actually presents a flexible universal ordering system for both literature and other kinds of information, set out as knowledge fields. From a methodological point of view, ICC differs from the above-mentioned systems along the following three lines: Its main classes are not based on disciplines but on nine live stages of development, so-called ontical levels. It breaks them roughly down into hierarchical steps by further nine categories which makes decimal number coding possible. The contents of a knowledge field is earmarked via a digital position scheme, which makes the first hierarchical step refer to the nine ontical levels (object areas as subject categories), and the second hierarchical step refer to nine functionally ordered form categories. Respective knowledge fields permit to step down by the same principle to a third and forth level, and even further to a fifth and sixth level. Finally, knowledge field subdivisions will have to conform to said digital position scheme. Hence, for a given knowledge field identical codes will mark identical categories under respective numbers of the coding system. This mnemotechnical aspect of the system helps memorizing and straightaway retrieving the whereabouts of respective interdisciplinary and transdisciplinary fields. The first two hierarchical levels may be regarded as a top- or upper ontology for ontologies and other applications. The terms of the first three hierarchical levels were set out in German and English in Wissensorganisation. Entwicklung, Aufgabe, Anwendung, Zukunft, on pp. 82 to 100. It was published in 2014 and available so far only in German. In the meantime, also the French terms of the knowledge fields have been collected. Competence for maintenance and further development rests with the German Chapter of the International Society for Knowledge Organization (ISKO) e.V. == Historical development == At the end of 1970, Prof. Alwin Diemer, Univ.of Düsseldorf proposed to Ingetraut Dahlberg to undertake a philosophical dissertation on The universal classification system of knowledge, its ontological, epistemological, and information theoretical foundations. Diemer had in mind an innovating ontological approach for such a system based on the whole spectrum of kinds of being and complying with epistemological requirements. The third requirement had already been taken up somehow in the Indian Colon Classification, yet it still called for explanations and additions. In 1974, the dissertation was published in German entitled Grundlagen universaler Wissensordnung. It started with conceptual clarifications, and why and how the term „universal“ was linked to knowledge, including knowledge fields, such as commodity science, artefacts, statistics, patents, standardization, communication, utility services et al. In chapter 3, six universal classification systems (DDC, UDC, LCC, BC, CC and BBK) were presented, analyzed and compared. While preparing the dissertation, Dahlberg started with elaborating the new universal system by first gleaning a lot of extant designations of knowledge fields from whatever available reference works. This was funded by the German Documentation Society (DGD) (1971-2) under the title of Order system of knowledge fields. In addition, the syllabuses of German universities and polytechniques were explored for relevant terms and documented (1975). Thereafter, it seemed necessary to add definitions from special dictionaries and encyclopediae; it soon appeared that the 12.500 terms included numerous synonyms, so that the whole collection boiled down to about 6.500 concept designations (Project Logstruktur, supported by the German Science Foundation (DFG) 1976-78). The outcome of this work was the formulation of 30 theses which ended up in 12 principles for the new system, published 40 years later under. These principles refer not only to theoretical foundations but also to structure and other organizational aspects of the whole array of knowledge fields. In 1974, the digital position scheme for field subdivision had already been developed to allow for classifying classification literature in the bibliographical section of the first issue of the Journal International Classification. In 1977, the entire ICC was ready for presentation at a seminar in Bangalore, India. A publication of the first three hierarchical levels appeared however only in 1982. It was applied to the bibliography of classification systems and thesauri in vol.1 of the International Classification and Indexing Bibliography; it has been updated. == Governing principles == These were published in full length in the book Wissensorganisation. Entwicklung, Aufgabe, Anwendung, Zukunft and the article Information Coding Classification. Geschichtliches, Prinzipien, Inhaltliches, hence it suffices to just mention their topics with some necessary additions. Principle 1: Concept theoretical approaches. Concepts are the contents of ICC, they are understood as being units of knowledge. The „birth“ of a concept. Where do the characteristics, the knowledge elements come from? How do conceptual relations arise? Principle 2: The four kinds of concept relations and their applications. Principle 3: Decimal numbers form the ICC codes as its universal language. Principle 4: The nine ontical levels of ICC. They were grouped under three captions: Prolegomena (1-3), life sciences (4-6) and human output (7-9): Structure and form Matter and energy Cosmos and earth Biosphere Anthroposphere Sociosphere Material products (economics and technology) Intellectual products (knowledge and information) Spiritual products (products of mind and culture) Principle 5: Knowledge fields are structured by categories, based on the Aristotelian form-categories, under a digital position scheme, a kind of scaling rule for subdividing a given field as follows: General area: problems, theories, principles (axiom and structure) Object area: objects, kinds, parts, properties of objects Activity area: methods, processes, activities Field properties or first characterization Persons or secondary characterization Societies or tertiary characterization Influences from outside Applications of the field to other fields Field information and synthesizing tasks The digital position scheme, called Systematifier, has also been used for structuring the entire system via the categories figuring on the upper zero level. An example of its application is the structure of the classification system for knowledge organization literature Gliederung der Klassifikationsliteratur. (A simplified version with an additional introduction is given in, p. 71) Principle 6: The ontical levels outlined under principle 4 conform to the „integrative level theory“ which means that every level is integrated in the following one. In addition, each knowledge area presumes the following one. Principle 7: The combination potential of knowledge fields (interdisciplinarity and transdisciplinarity)is determined by the digital position scheme. (Examples are given in, p. 103-4) Principle 8: The categories of the zero-level are general concepts, their possible subdivisions could once be used for classificatory statements. (These subdivisions still need elaboration) Principle 9 and 10: These relate to the combination potential of classificatory statements with space and time concepts. (Still to be elaborated) Principle 11: The system's mnemotechnical aspect relies on the fixed system position codes and on the 3x3 form- and subject-categories. Principle 12: The combination potential of system position 1, 8 and 9 make ICC to a self-networking system which complies with the present scientific development. == In matrix form == The first two levels of ICC can be represented by following matrix. The first hierarchical level of the 9 subject categories results from the first vertical array under codes 1-9. The second hierarchical level of subject categories is structured by the 9 functionally ordered form categories, listed in the first horizontal line under codes 01-09. Some exceptions are mentioned in principle 7. == Research == === Exploration of automatic classification === For classifying web documents as conceived by Jens Hartmann, University of Karlsruhe, Prof.Walter Koch, University of Graz, has explored in his Institute for Applied Information Technology Research Society (AIT) the application of ICC to automatically classifying metadata of some 350.000 documents. This was facilitated by data generated within the framework of an E
Linux Trace Toolkit
The Linux Trace Toolkit (LTT) is a set of tools that is designed to log program execution details from a patched Linux kernel and then perform various analyses on them, using console-based and graphical tools. LTT has been mostly superseded by its successor LTTng (Linux Trace Toolkit Next Generation). LTT allows the user to see in-depth information about the processes that were running during the trace period, including when context switches occurred, how long the processes were blocked for, and how much time the processes spent executing vs. how much time the processes were blocked. The data is logged to a text file and various console-based and graphical (GTK+) tools are provided for interpreting that data. In order to do data collection, LTT requires a patched Linux kernel. The authors of LTT claim that the performance hit for a patched kernel compared to a regular kernel is minimal; Their testing has reportedly shown that this is less than 2.5% on a "normal use" system (measured using batches of kernel makes) and less than 5% on a file I/O intensive system (measured using batches of tar). == Usage == === Collecting trace data === Data collection is Started by: trace 15 foo This command will cause the LTT tracedaemon to do a trace that lasts for 15 seconds, writing trace data to foo.trace and process information from the /proc filesystem to foo.proc. The trace command is actually a script which runs the program tracedaemon with some common options. It is possible to run tracedaemon directly and in that case, the user can use a number of command-line options to control the data which is collected. For the complete list of options supported by tracedaemon, see the online manual page for tracedaemon. === Viewing the results === Viewing the results of a trace can be accomplished with: traceview foo This command will launch a graphical (GTK+) traceview tool that will read from foo.trace and foo.proc. This tool can show information in various interesting ways, including Event Graph, Process Analysis, and Raw Trace. The Event Graph is perhaps the most interesting view, showing the exact timing of events like page faults, interrupts, and context switches, in a simple graphical way. The traceview command is a wrapper for a program called tracevisualizer. For the complete list of options supported by tracevisualizer, see the online manual page for tracevisualizer.
Yu-Gi-Oh! VRAINS
Yu-Gi-Oh! VRAINS (遊☆戯☆王VRAINS, Yū Gi Ō Vureinzu) is a Japanese anime series created and animated by Nihon Ad Systems (NAS) and Gallop. It is the fifth anime spin-off in the Yu-Gi-Oh! franchise. The series aired in Japan on TV Tokyo from May 10, 2017 to September 25, 2019. It was simulcast outside of Asia by Crunchyroll courtesy of Konami Cross Media NY. It premiered in the United States on November 3, 2020 on Pluto TV. The term 'VRAINS' derives from 'Virtual Reality' (VR), 'Artificial Intelligence' (AI), 'Network System' (NS). The series revolves around the exploits of the protagonist Yusaku within the virtual world named VRAINS. In addition to featuring previous summoning mechanics, VRAINS introduces the new "Link Summon" mechanic. The series was succeeded by Yu-Gi-Oh! Sevens, which premiered in Japan on April 4, 2020. == Plot == In a place known as Den City, thousands of duelists take part in a virtual reality space known as LINK VRAINS, created by SOL Technologies, where users can create unique avatars and participate in games of Duel Monsters with each other. As a mysterious hacker organization known as the Knights of Hanoi, led by Varis, threatens this world, a high-school student and hacking genius named Yusaku Fujiki battles against them under the guise of Playmaker. Both the Knights and SOL Technologies are also after a peculiar self-aware artificial intelligence program, who holds the key to a secret area inside the network named the Cyberse World, which the Knights of Hanoi seek to destroy. As the series begins, Yusaku sees the chance to capture this AI, which he names Ai, who sets off a digital maelstrom in LINK VRAINS known as the Data Storm. As the appearance of this storm gives birth to Speed Duels, in which duellists surf the wind as they duel, Yusaku battles against Hanoi in order to uncover the truth concerning an incident that happened to him 10 years ago. With the help of two Charisma Duellists, Go Onizuka (Japanese) and Skye Zaizen, who uses the alias Blue Angel (season 1), and Blue Maiden (season 2 onwards) online, Playmaker is able to defeat Varis, saving the entire network and part ways with Ai who decides to return to his own world, the Cyberse World. Three months after Hanoi's fall, Ai discovers the Cyberse World destroyed and his friends nowhere to be found, prompting him to return to Yusaku. Meanwhile, Yusaku once again fights as Playmaker after the consciousness of the younger brother of his friend, Cal Kolter, is stolen by a mysterious enemy named Bohman. In pursuit of Bohman, Yusaku and Ai are joined by Theodore Hamilton, a victim of the Lost Incident like Yusaku who uses the alias of Soulburner online and Ai's Fire Ignis friend based on Theodore, Flame. Aqua, the Water Ignis, follows soon after by becoming Skye's partner. At the same time, Varis revives Knights of Hanoi to fight against the new enemies. It's revealed that Bohman is a sentient AI created by the Light Ignis, Lightning, who reveals that he's the one who destroyed the Cyberse World and steals Cal's brother's consciousness. Deeming Ignis superior, he decides to destroy humanity. The Wind Ignis, Windy, also assists Lightning after his program was forcefully rewritten. To defeat Lightning's team, Yusaku and his friends join forces with Knights of Hanoi and enter Lightning's stronghold. Both sides fight until only Playmaker, Ai, and Bohman are left with the latter having absorbed all other Ignis. Before perishing, both Flame and Aqua give Ai the last of their powers, allowing him and Playmaker to defeat Bohman. After the fight against Bohman, LINK VRAINS is shut down and Ai disappear together with Yusaku's robot, Roboppi. Replacing LINK VRAINS, SOL Technology develops a humanoid robot SOLtis, which Ai and Roboppi uses to infiltrate SOL Technology and attack its high executive, Queen. Knowing he'll be the next target, Skye's older brother, Akira, enlists the help of Playmaker and his friends as well as Knights of Hanoi once more to protect him. Ai and Roboppi manage to defeat everyone except Playmaker, Soulburner, and Varis, who are forced to fight decoys. After defeating Akira and taking over SOL Technology, Ai reopens LINK VRAINS and delivers a message for Playmaker that tells the whereabout of his location. Yusaku confronts Ai alone, leading the two of them to duel. Ai explains that Lightning left behind a simulation that shows the world will be destroyed if Ai is the only Ignis left. Fearing that he'll become like Lightning and Bohman, Ai decides to end his life either by Playmaker's hand if he loses or by scattering his free will into the SOLtis if he wins. Despite Playmaker's attempt to dissuade Ai, he still refuses to back down, forcing Playmaker to defeat him. In his last moment, Ai reveals that within the simulations, Yusaku always ends up dying protecting him, which is a future that he wishes to avoid. Three months after the final battle, everyone moves on with their lives and Yusaku goes on a journey. Somewhere within the network, Ai is revealed to be alive. == Production == Yu-Gi-Oh! VRAINS was first announced on December 16, 2016. It began airing on TV Tokyo in Japan on May 10, 2017. The series is being directed by Masahiro Hosoda at Studio Gallop with screenplay by Shin Yoshida and character design by Ken'ichi Hara. It would be the final anime series in the franchise to be animated by Gallop; Bridge would animate future instalments beginning with Yu-Gi-Oh! Sevens. The series ended on September 25, 2019. The series is being simulcast with English subtitles outside of Asia by Crunchyroll. This makes it the first series in the Yu-Gi-Oh! franchise to receive an official simulcast alongside its Japanese broadcast. A localized English adaptation was produced by Konami Cross Media NY. The pilot episode was previewed along with a digitally remastered screening of Yu-Gi-Oh! The Movie: Pyramid of Light on March 11, 2018 and March 12, 2018 in the US, and on June 13, 2018 in the UK. The English dub began airing on Teletoon in Canada on September 1, 2018, and on 9Go! in Australia on April 6, 2019. In November 2020, Cinedigm announced that the streaming service Pluto TV has secured exclusive rights in multiple territories, including the United States and Latin America, to VRAINS. Pluto TV would launch a channel dedicated to the Yu-Gi-Oh! franchise, featuring episodes from the entire Yu-Gi-Oh! Duel Monsters metaseries, including VRAINS, available in English and dubbed in multiple languages. == Trading Card Game == Yu-Gi-Oh! VRAINS introduces new gameplay elements to the Yu-Gi-Oh! Trading Card Game. With the release of the "Link Strike Starter Deck", it introduced the New Master Rules (also known as Master Rule 4 in some countries) to the competitive field of play. Now, only one monster can be summoned directly from each player's Extra Deck at a time, which is placed in one of the two new zones in the middle of the field called the "Extra Monster Zone". Complementing this new gameplay element are the new Link Monsters, honey-comb blue colored monsters that go into your Extra Deck. They do not have "Levels" or "Ranks", but instead have a "Link Rating", which indicates the number of arrows on the card and the required number of monsters required to summon them. A Link Monster's Link Rating can also be used as a number of materials for a Link Summon depending on their rating, subtracted from the Link Monster the player wishes to summon. Link Monsters have a number of Link Arrows equal to their Link Rating that point either vertically, horizontally, and/or diagonally. These Link Arrows that point to an empty Main Monster Zone allow the player to summon monsters from the Extra Deck, which include face-up Pendulum Monsters. The two Pendulum Zones have been moved to the far ends of the Spell & Trap Zones, though they also double as regular Spell & Trap Zones should the player wish not to use them. In 2019, a new format exclusive to the TCG was introduced separate from the main game, known as Speed Duels. The rules are similar to the main game and parallel the formatting used in the mobile game Duel Links. A format meant as a beginner's introduction to the basics, both the field and each player's decks have been drastically simplified to reflect that. Decks contain only 20-30 cards, each player gets only three Main Monster zones, and a turn will immediately end following the Battle Phase. Exclusive to Speed Duels, each player is allowed one Skill Card, which a player places face down during the beginning of a duel and can use anytime. == Reception == The series ranked 52 in Tokyo Anime Award Festival in Best 100 TV Anime 2017 category. The series' rank rose up to 8 in the same award in 2020 with 28,369 votes.
The Machine That Won the War (short story)
"The Machine That Won the War" is a science fiction short story by American writer Isaac Asimov. The story first appeared in the October 1961 issue of The Magazine of Fantasy & Science Fiction, and was reprinted in the collections Nightfall and Other Stories (1969) and Robot Dreams (1986). It was also printed in a contemporary edition of Reader's Digest, illustrated. It is one of a loosely connected series of such stories concerning a fictional supercomputer called Multivac. == Plot summary == Three influential leaders of the human race meet in the aftermath of a successful war against the Denebians. Discussing how the vast and powerful Multivac computer was a decisive factor in the war, each of the men admits that in fact, he falsified his part of the decision process because he felt that the situation was too complex to follow normal procedures. John Henderson, Multivac's Chief Programmer, admits that he altered the data being fed to Multivac, since the populace could not be trusted to report accurate information in the current situation. Max Jablonski then admits that he altered the data that Multivac produced, since he knew that Multivac was not in good working order due to manpower and spare parts shortage. Finally, Lamar Swift, executive director of the Solar Federation, reveals that he had not trusted the reports produced by Multivac, and had made the final decisions purely on the toss of a coin.
A.I.s
A.I.s is a themed anthology of science fiction short works edited by American writers Jack Dann and Gardner Dozois. It was first published in paperback by Ace Books in December 2004. It was reissued as an ebook by Baen Books in June 2013. The book collects ten novelettes and short stories by various science fiction authors, together with a preface by the editors. == Contents == "Preface" (Jack Dann and Gardner Dozois) "Antibodies" (Charles Stross) "Trojan Horse" (Michael Swanwick) "Birth Day" (Robert Reed) "The Hydrogen Wall" (Gregory Benford) "The Turing Test" (Chris Beckett) "Dante Dreams" (Stephen Baxter) "The Names of All the Spirits" (J. R. Dunn) "From the Corner of My Eye" (Alexander Glass) "Halfjack" (Roger Zelazny) "Computer Virus" (Nancy Kress)
Apache Pig
Apache Pig is a high-level platform for creating programs that run on Apache Hadoop. The language for this platform is called Pig Latin. Pig can execute its Hadoop jobs in MapReduce, Apache Tez, or Apache Spark. Pig Latin abstracts the programming from the Java MapReduce idiom into a notation which makes MapReduce programming high level, similar to that of SQL for relational database management systems. Pig Latin can be extended using user-defined functions (UDFs) which the user can write in Java, Python, JavaScript, Ruby or Groovy and then call directly from the language. == History == Apache Pig was originally developed at Yahoo Research around 2006 for researchers to have an ad hoc way of creating and executing MapReduce jobs on very large data sets. In 2007, it was moved into the Apache Software Foundation. === Naming === Regarding the naming of the Pig programming language, the name was chosen arbitrarily and stuck because it was memorable, easy to spell, and for novelty. The story goes that the researchers working on the project initially referred to it simply as 'the language'. Eventually they needed to call it something. Off the top of his head, one researcher suggested Pig, and the name stuck. It is quirky yet memorable and easy to spell. While some have hinted that the name sounds coy or silly, it has provided us with an entertaining nomenclature, such as Pig Latin for the language, Grunt for the shell, and PiggyBank for the CPAN-like shared repository. == Example == Below is an example of a "Word Count" program in Pig Latin: The above program will generate parallel executable tasks which can be distributed across multiple machines in a Hadoop cluster to count the number of words in a dataset such as all the webpages on the internet. == Pig vs SQL == In comparison to SQL, Pig has a nested relational model, uses lazy evaluation, uses extract, transform, load (ETL), is able to store data at any point during a pipeline, declares execution plans, supports pipeline splits, thus allowing workflows to proceed along DAGs instead of strictly sequential pipelines. On the other hand, it has been argued DBMSs are substantially faster than the MapReduce system once the data is loaded, but that loading the data takes considerably longer in the database systems. It has also been argued RDBMSs offer out of the box support for column-storage, working with compressed data, indexes for efficient random data access, and transaction-level fault tolerance. Pig Latin is procedural and fits very naturally in the pipeline paradigm while SQL is instead declarative. In SQL users can specify that data from two tables must be joined, but not what join implementation to use (You can specify the implementation of JOIN in SQL, thus "... for many SQL applications the query writer may not have enough knowledge of the data or enough expertise to specify an appropriate join algorithm."). Pig Latin allows users to specify an implementation or aspects of an implementation to be used in executing a script in several ways. In effect, Pig Latin programming is similar to specifying a query execution plan, making it easier for programmers to explicitly control the flow of their data processing task. SQL is oriented around queries that produce a single result. SQL handles trees naturally, but has no built in mechanism for splitting a data processing stream and applying different operators to each sub-stream. Pig Latin script describes a directed acyclic graph (DAG) rather than a pipeline. Pig Latin's ability to include user code at any point in the pipeline is useful for pipeline development. If SQL is used, data must first be imported into the database, and then the cleansing and transformation process can begin.
Legal expert system
A legal expert system is a domain-specific expert system that uses artificial intelligence to emulate the decision-making abilities of a human expert in the field of law. Legal expert systems employ a rule base or knowledge base and an inference engine to accumulate, reference and produce expert knowledge on specific subjects within the legal domain. == Purpose == It has been suggested that legal expert systems could help to manage the rapid expansion of legal information and decisions that began to intensify in the late 1960s. Many of the first legal expert systems were created in the 1970s and 1980s. Lawyers were originally identified as primary target users of legal expert systems. Potential motivations for this work included: quicker delivery of legal advice; reduced time spent in repetitive, labour-intensive legal tasks; development of knowledge management techniques that were not dependent on staff; reduced overhead and labour costs and higher profitability for law firms; and reduced fees for clients. Some early development work was oriented toward the creation of automated judges. One of the first use cases was the encoding of the British Nationality Act at Imperial College carried out under the supervision of Marek Sergot and Robert Kowalski. Lance Elliot wrote: "The British Nationality Act was passed in 1981 and shortly thereafter was used as a means of showcasing the efficacy of using Artificial Intelligence (AI) techniques and technologies, doing so to explore how the at-the-time newly enacted statutory law might be encoded into a computerized logic-based formalization." The authors’ seminal article, "The British Nationality Act as a Logic Program," published in 1986 in the Communications of the ACM journal, is one of the first and best-known works in computational law, and one of the most widely cited papers in the field. In 2021, the Inaugural CodeX Prize was awarded to Robert Kowalski, Fariba Sadri, and Marek Sergot in acknowledgment of their groundbreaking work on the application of logic programming to the formalization and analysis of the British Nationality Act. Later work on legal expert systems has identified potential benefits to non-lawyers as a means to increase access to legal knowledge. Legal expert systems can also support administrative processes, facilitate decision-making processes, automate rule-based analyses, and exchange information directly with citizen-users. == Types == === Architectural variations === Rule-based expert systems rely on a model of deductive reasoning that utilizes "If A, then B" rules. In a rule-based legal expert system, information is represented in the form of deductive rules within the knowledge base. In rule-based legal expert systems, logic programming has historically been applied to automate complex compliance paperwork. A notable early example designed for high-volume regulatory filings was the 1999 Intelligent Filing Manager (INTELLIFM), which utilized Prolog rules as its core inference engine to automate the generation, publishing, and population of structured forms via distributed COM interfaces. Case-based reasoning models, which store and manipulate examples or cases, hold the potential to emulate an analogical reasoning process thought to be well-suited for the legal domain. This model effectively draws on known experiences our outcomes for similar problems. A neural net relies on a computer model that mimics that structure of a human brain, and operates in a very similar way to the case-based reasoning model. This expert system model is capable of recognizing and classifying patterns within the realm of legal knowledge and dealing with imprecise inputs. Fuzzy logic models attempt to create 'fuzzy' concepts or objects that can then be converted into quantitative terms or rules that are indexed and retrieved by the system. In the legal domain, fuzzy logic can be used for rule-based and case-based reasoning models. === Theoretical variations === Some legal expert system architects have adopted a very practical approach, employing scientific modes of reasoning within a given set of rules or cases. Others have opted for a broader philosophical approach inspired by jurisprudential reasoning modes emanating from established legal theoreticians. === Functional variations === Some legal expert systems aim to arrive at a particular conclusion in law, while others are designed to predict a particular outcome. An example of a predictive system is one that predicts the outcome of judicial decisions, the value of a case, or the outcome of litigation. == Reception == Many forms of legal expert systems have become widely used and accepted by both the legal community and the users of legal services. == Challenges == === Domain-related problems === The inherent complexity of law as a discipline raises immediate challenges for legal expert system knowledge engineers. Legal matters often involve interrelated facts and issues, which further compound the complexity. Factual uncertainty may also arise when there are disputed versions of factual representations that must be input into an expert system to begin the reasoning process. === Computerized problem solving === The limitations of most computerized problem solving techniques inhibit the success of many expert systems in the legal domain. Expert systems typically rely on deductive reasoning models that have difficulty according degrees of weight to certain principles of law or importance to previously decided cases that may or may not influence a decision in an immediate case or context. === Representation of legal knowledge === Expert legal knowledge can be difficult to represent or formalize within the structure of an expert system. For knowledge engineers, challenges include: Open texture: Law is rarely applied in an exact way to specific facts, and exact outcomes are rarely a certainty. Statutes may be interpreted according to different linguistic interpretations, reliance on precedent cases or other contextual factors including a particular judge's conception of fairness. The balancing of reasons: Many arguments involve considerations or reasons that are not easily represented in a logical way. For instance, many constitutional legal issues are said to balance independently well-established considerations for state interests against individual rights. Such balancing may draw on extra-legal considerations that would be difficult to represent logically in an expert system. Indeterminacy of legal reasoning: In the adversarial arena of law, it is common to have two strong arguments on a single point. Determining the 'right' answer may depend on a majority vote among expert judges, as in the case of an appeal. === Time and cost effectiveness === Creating a functioning expert system requires significant investments in software architecture, subject matter expertise and knowledge engineering. Faced with these challenges, many system architects restrict the domain in terms of subject matter and jurisdiction. The consequence of this approach is the creation of narrowly focused and geographically restricted legal expert systems that are difficult to justify on a cost-benefit basis. Current applications of AI in the legal field utilize machines to review documents, particularly when a high level of completeness and confidence in the quality of document analysis is depended upon, such as in instances of litigation and where due diligence play a role. Among the numerically most quantifiable advantages of AI in the legal field are the time and money saving impact by freeing lawyers from having to spend inordinate amounts of their valuable time on routine tasks, aiding in setting free lawyers’ creative energy by reducing stress. This in turn increases the rate of case load reduction by accomplishing better results in less time, which unlocks potential additional revenue per unit of time spend on a case. The cost of setting up and maintaining AI systems in law is more than offset by the attained savings through increased efficacy; unbalanced cost can be assigned to clients. === Lack of correctness in results or decisions === Legal expert systems may lead non-expert users to incorrect or inaccurate results and decisions. This problem could be compounded by the fact that users may rely heavily on the correctness or trustworthiness of results or decisions generated by these systems. == Examples == ASHSD-II is a hybrid legal expert system that blends rule-based and case-based reasoning models in the area of matrimonial property disputes under English law. CHIRON is a hybrid legal expert system that blends rule-based and case-based reasoning models to support tax planning activities under United States tax law and codes. JUDGE is a rule-based legal expert system that deals with sentencing in the criminal legal domain for offences relating to murder, assault and manslaughter. Legislate is a knowledge graph powered contract management platform whi