FUNDAMENTAL ERRORS IN LEGAL LOGIC PROGRAMMING
FUNDAMENTAL ERRORS IN LEGAL LOGIC PROGRAMMING
复制标题
DOI：
10.1093/comjnl/29.6.545
复制
发表时间：
1986-12-01
期刊：
影响因子：
1.4
通讯作者：
LEITH, P
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
LEITH, P
逻辑编程--尤其是基于PROLOG编程语言的编程--既是一种有效的编程语言，也是一种提供了将计算机科学应用于新领域的新机会的语言，人们对逻辑编程的效用的大量主张正变得司空见惯。后者的一个例子是伦敦帝国理工学院的一个团队声称已经正式制定了(部分)英国国籍法(1981)。我分析了这一说法，并建议该团队对法律程序和该领域的逻辑编程的有用性有一个混乱的看法，并建议这种不正确的观点很可能渗透到该团队声称成功的其他领域。实际上，我想对逻辑编程的力量提出异议。
It is becoming a commonplace to see substantial claims made for the utility of logic programming – especially that based on the PROLOG programming language – as both an effective programming language and a language which offers new opportunities to apply computer science to novel areas. An example of the latter is the claim made by a team at Imperial College, London to have formalised – in part – the British Nationality Act (1981). I analyse this claim and suggest that the team have a muddled view of the legal process and of the usefulness of logic programming in that field, and suggest that this incorrect perspective might well pervade other areas in which the team claim success. In effect, I wish to dispute the power of logical programming.