arXiv:2503.09129cs.CYcs.CL2025-03

比较自然语言与形式语言写计算法的优劣

Specification languages for computational laws versus basic legal principles

  • 用自然语言写计算法易歧义,导致执行不一
  • 形式语言虽精确但难懂且缺决策理由
  • 案例显示两种语言各有适用场景

当法律通过软件自动化执行时,称为计算法。随着数字技术发展,公共管理中计算法日益增多。传统法律用自然语言书写,但计算法若仍用自然语言,常因表述不全或模糊导致编码者产生多种解释,造成法律适用不均。因此,转向形式语言书写计算法看似合理。然而,形式语言也带来新问题:非专业人士难以理解、决策依据不明确、数据获取困难等。本文以欧盟道路运输法规为例,分析在自然语言与形式语言下,若干法律原则的表现差异,揭示两种写法间的张力与各自优势。

原文摘要 · Abstract (English)

We speak of a \textit{computational law} when that law is intended to be enforced by software through an automated decision-making process. As digital technologies evolve to offer more solutions for public administrations, we see an ever-increasing number of computational laws. Traditionally, law is written in natural language. Computational laws, however, suffer various complications when written in natural language, such as underspecification and ambiguity which lead to a diversity of possible interpretations to be made by the coder. These could potentially result into an uneven application of the law. Thus, resorting to formal languages to write computational laws is tempting. However, writing laws in a formal language leads to further complications, for example, incomprehensibility for non-experts, lack of explicit motivation of the decisions made, or difficulties in retrieving the data leading to the outcome. In this paper, we investigate how certain legal principles fare in both scenarios: computational law written in natural language or written in formal language. We use a running example from the European Union's road transport regulation to showcase the tensions arising, and the benefits from each language.

计算法法律语义形式语言

Thank you to arXiv for use of its open access interoperability. PaperDance 不是 arXiv 官方产品;中文卡片由大模型生成,请以原文为准。