Skip to content

Computational Legal Studies

Tag: US Code

-

Final Data on the Physics of Law ONLINE Conference !

November 19, 2020November 23, 2020 Daniel Katz

Thanks to everyone who attended The Physics of Law Virtual Conference earlier this month. Overall, we had 292+ Attendees from 48 Countries watch the presentation of 20 Academic Papers by 62 Authors. We saw a wide range of methods from Physics, Computer Science and Applied Mathematics devoted to the exploration of legal systems and their outputs. 

Methodological approaches included Agent Based Modeling, Game Theory and other Formal Modeling, Dynamics of Acyclic Digraphs, Knowledge Graphs, Entropy of Legal Systems, Temporal Modeling of MultiGraphs, Information Diffusion, etc.

NLP Methods on display included traditional approaches such as TF-IDF, n-grams, entity identification and other metadata extraction as well as more advanced methods such as Bert, Word2Vec, GloVe, etc.

Methods were then applied to topics including Attorney Advocacy Networks, Statutory Outputs from Legislatures, various bodies of Regulations, Contracts, Patents, Shell Corporations, Common Law Systems, Legal Scholarship and Legal Rules ∩ Financial Systems.

If you have an eligible paper – it is not too late to submit – papers are due in January. After undergoing the Peer Review process — Look for the Final Papers to be published in Frontiers in Physics in 2021.

-

Day One of The Physics of Law ONLINE Conference

November 12, 2020November 13, 2020 Daniel Katz

We are live at the Physics of Law Online Conference!

Over the next two days, we will have 20 Papers Presented from Scholars from Around the World …Click here to access the site so you can Sign Up for Day 2. If you would like to access the full agenda click here.

-

Draft AGENDA – ‘Physics of Law’ – ONLINE Conference – November 12-13, 2020

October 21, 2020October 21, 2020 Daniel Katz

Here is the PDF of DRAFT Agenda for our Online Academic Conference entitled “The Physics of Law” which will take place on November 12-13. We have 20 Accepted Paper Abstracts from Research Teams from Around the World. Access to the Conference is FREE – but Registration is Required. Sign Up Today at PhysicsOfLaw.com !

Papers presented at this Conference are part of a Special Track for Frontiers in Physics and will appear in 2021 (after undergoing the Peer Review Process). Note although this is a technical conference — papers will reflect a range of methodological approaches (i.e. may be either Theoretical or Empirical).

-

The Physics of the Law – Legal Systems Through the Prism of Complexity Science [Online Conference – November 12 – 13, 2020]

October 7, 2020October 6, 2020 Daniel Katz

On November 12-13, 2020 – we will be hosting an Online Conference entitled “The Physics of Law – Legal Systems Through the Prism of Complexity Science.”

Papers presented at this Conference are part of a Special Track for Frontiers in Physics and will appear in 2021 (after undergoing the Peer Review Process).

After our Call for Papers — we have 20 Accepted Paper Abstracts for Papers which will presented at the Online Conference on November 12-13, 2020.

Note although this is a technical conference — papers will reflect a range of methodological approaches (i.e. may be either Theoretical or Empirical).

Access to the Conference is FREE – but Registration is Required. Sign Up Today at PhysicsOfLaw.com

-

Frontiers in Physics – Special Collection “The Physics of the Law: Legal Systems Through the Prism of Complexity Science”

August 21, 2020September 9, 2020 Daniel Katz

Open Call for Papers for a Special Collection in FRONTIERS in PHYSICS — “The Physics of the Law: Legal Systems Through the Prism of Complexity Science.” So far we have more than 30+ Scholars who have accepted our call for papers but we welcome others who would like to participate. Abstracts are due September 14th.

We welcome Original Research and Reviews where complexity science and quantitative approaches are deployed to evaluate the law / legal systems. Papers will be Peer Reviewed under the standards of Frontiers in Physics (or allied Frontiers Journals).

Papers can be empirical or theoretical but should be technical. If you have any questions feel free to message me.

An Online Virtual Conference will be held in early November.

Full Submission are due in January 2021.

More to come … please share!

-

Complex Societies and the Growth of the Law — v1.02

August 11, 2020September 9, 2020 Daniel Katz

Updated Version of our Paper — ’Complex Societies and the Growth of the Law’ is now on SSRN / arXiv. It is primarily a methods and measurement paper combining Network Science, Natural Language Processing, etc. to evaluate the growth of the law as a function of time. #LegalComplexity #LegalScience #NLP #NetworkScience #ComplexSystems #DataScience

SSRN LINK: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3602098
arXiv LINK: https://arxiv.org/abs/2005.07646

ABSTRACT – While a large number of informal factors influence how people interact, modern societies rely upon law as a primary mechanism to formally control human behaviour. How legal rules impact societal development depends on the interplay between two types of actors: the people who create the rules and the people to which the rules potentially apply. We hypothesise that an increasingly diverse and interconnected society might create increasingly diverse and interconnected rules, and assert that legal networks provide a useful lens through which to observe the interaction between law and society. To evaluate these propositions, we present a novel and generalizable model of statutory materials as multidimensional, time-evolving document networks. Applying this model to the federal legislation of the United States and Germany, we find impressive expansion in the size and complexity of laws over the past two and a half decades. We investigate the sources of this development using methods from network science and natural language processing. To allow for cross-country comparisons over time, we algorithmically reorganise the legislative materials of the United States and Germany into cluster families that reflect legal topics. This reorganisation reveals that the main driver behind the growth of the law in both jurisdictions is the expansion of the welfare state, backed by an expansion of the tax state.

Authors

Daniel Martin Katz
< CV > < SSRN > < arXiv >

Michael J Bommarito II
< CV > < SSRN > < arXiv >

Twitter

Selected Publications

Daniel Martin Katz, Ron Dolin & Michael Bommarito, Legal Informatics, Cambridge University Press (2021) (Edited Volume) < Cambridge >

Corinna Coupette, Janis Beckedorf, Dirk Hartung, Michael Bommarito, & Daniel Martin Katz, Measuring Law Over Time: A Network Analytical Framework with an Application to Statutes and Regulations in the United States and Germany, 9 Front. Phys. 658463 (2021) < Frontiers in Physics > < Supplemental Material >

Daniel Martin Katz, Legal Innovation (Book Forward) in Mapping Legal Innovation: Trends and Perspectives (Springer) (Antoine Masson & Gavin Robinson, eds.) (2021) < Springer >

Michael Bommarito, Daniel Martin Katz & Eric Detterman,  LexNLP: Natural Language Processing and Information Extraction For Legal and Regulatory Texts in Research Handbook on Big Data Law (Edward Elgar Press) (Roland Vogl, ed.) (2021) < Edward Elgar > < Github > < SSRN > < arXiv >

Daniel Martin Katz, Corinna Coupette, Janis Beckedorf & Dirk Hartung, Complex Societies and the Growth of the Law, 10 Scientific Reports 18737 (2020) < Nature Research >  < Supplemental Material >

Edward D. Lee, Daniel Martin Katz, Michael J. Bommarito II, Paul Ginsparg, Sensitivity of Collective Outcomes Identifies Pivotal Components, 17 Journal of the Royal Society Interface 167 (2020) < Journal of the Royal Society Interface > < Supplemental Material >

Michael Bommarito, Daniel Martin Katz & Eric Detterman,  OpenEDGAR: Open Source Software for SEC EDGAR Analysis,  MIT Computational Law Report  (2020) < MIT Law > < Github >

J.B. Ruhl & Daniel Martin Katz, Mapping the Law with Artificial Intelligence in Law of Artificial Intelligence and Smart Machines (ABA Press) (2019) < ABA Press >

J.B. Ruhl & Daniel Martin Katz, Harnessing the Complexity of Legal Systems for Governing Global Challenges in Global Challenges, Governance, and Complexity (Edward Elgar) (2019) < Edward Elgar >

J.B. Ruhl & Daniel Martin Katz, Mapping Law’s Complexity with ‘Legal Maps’ in Complexity Theory and Law: Mapping an Emergent Jurisprudence (Taylor & Francis) (2018) < Taylor & Francis >

Michael Bommarito & Daniel Martin Katz, Measuring and Modeling the U.S. Regulatory Ecosystem, 168 Journal of Statistical Physics 1125 (2017)  < J Stat Phys >

Daniel Martin Katz, Michael Bommarito & Josh Blackman, A General Approach for Predicting the Behavior of the Supreme Court of the United States, PLoS ONE 12(4): e0174698 (2017) < PLoS One >

J.B. Ruhl, Daniel Martin Katz & Michael Bommarito, Harnessing Legal Complexity, 355 Science 1377 (2017) < Science >

J.B. Ruhl & Daniel Martin Katz, Measuring, Monitoring, and Managing Legal Complexity, 101 Iowa Law Review 191 (2015) < SSRN >

Paul Lippe, Daniel Martin Katz & Dan Jackson, Legal by Design: A New Paradigm for Handling Complexity in Banking Regulation and Elsewhere in Law, 93 Oregon Law Review 831 (2015) < SSRN >

Paul Lippe, Jan Putnis, Daniel Martin Katz & Ian Hurst, How Smart Resolution Planning Can Help Banks Improve Profitability And Reduce Risk, Banking Perspective Quarterly (2015)  < SSRN >

Daniel Martin Katz, The MIT School of Law? A Perspective on Legal Education in the 21st Century, Illinois Law Review 1431 (2014) < SSRN > < Slides >

Daniel Martin Katz & Michael Bommarito, Measuring the Complexity of the Law: The United States Code, 22 Journal of Artificial Intelligence & Law 1 (2014)  < Springer > < SSRN >

Daniel Martin Katz, Quantitative Legal Prediction – or – How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Start Preparing for the Data Driven Future of the Legal Services Industry,  62 Emory Law Journal 909 (2013)  < SSRN >

Daniel Martin Katz, Joshua Gubler, Jon Zelner, Michael Bommarito, Eric Provins & Eitan Ingall, Reproduction of Hierarchy? A Social Network Analysis of the American Law Professoriate, 61 Journal of Legal Education 76 (2011) < SSRN >

Michael Bommarito, Daniel Martin Katz & Jillian Isaacs-See, An Empirical Survey of the Written Decisions of the United States Tax Court (1990-2008), 30 Virginia Tax Review 523 (2011)  < SSRN >

Daniel Martin Katz, Michael Bommarito, Juile Seaman, Adam Candeub, Eugene Agichtein, Legal N-Grams? A Simple Approach to Track the Evolution of Legal Language  in Proceedings of JURIX: The 24th International Conference on Legal Knowledge and Information Systems (2011)   < SSRN >

Daniel Martin Katz & Derek Stafford, Hustle and Flow: A Social Network Analysis of the American Federal Judiciary, 71 Ohio State Law Journal 457 (2010)  < SSRN >

Michael Bommarito & Daniel Martin Katz, A Mathematical Approach to the Study of the United States Code, 389 Physica A 4195 (2010)  < SSRN > < arXiv >

Michael Bommarito, Daniel Martin Katz & Jonathan Zelner, On the Stability of Community Detection Algorithms on Longitudinal Citation Data in Proceedings of the 6th Conference on Applications of Social Network Analysis (2010) < SSRN > < arXiv >

Michael Bommarito, Daniel Martin Katz, Jonathan Zelner & James Fowler, Distance Measures for Dynamic Citation Networks 389 Physica A 4201 (2010)  < SSRN > < arXiv >

Michael Bommarito, Daniel Martin Katz & Jonathan Zelner, Law as a Seamless Web? Comparing Various Network Representations of the United States Supreme Court Corpus (1791-2005)  in Proceedings of the 12th International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Law (2009) < SSRN >

Marvin Krislov & Daniel Martin Katz, Taking State Constitutions Seriously, 17 Cornell Journal of Law & Public Policy 295 (2008)  < SSRN >

Daniel Martin Katz, Derek Stafford & Eric Provins, Social Architecture, Judicial Peer Effects and the ‘Evolution’ of the Law: Toward a Positive Theory of Judicial Social Structure, 23 Georgia State Law Review 975 (2008)  < SSRN >

Daniel Martin Katz, Institutional Rules, Strategic Behavior and the Legacy of Chief Justice William Rehnquist: Setting the Record Straight on Dickerson v. United States, 22 Journal of Law & Politics 303 (2006)  < SSRN >

Publications in Progress

Daniel Martin Katz, Michael Bommarito, Tyler Sollinger & James Ming Chen, Law on the Market? Abnormal Stock Returns and Supreme Court Decision-Making < SSRN > < arXiv > < Slides >

Daniel Martin Katz, Michael Bommarito & Josh Blackman, Crowdsourcing Accurately and Robustly Predicts Supreme Court Decisions  < SSRN > < arXiv > < Slides >

Daniel Martin Katz & Michael Bommarito, Regulatory Dynamics Revealed by the Securities Filings of Registered Companies  < Slides >

Pierpaolo Vivo, Daniel Martin Katz & J.B. Ruhl (Editors), The Physics of the Law: Legal Systems Through the Prism of Complexity Science, Special Collection for Frontiers in Physics (2021 Forthcoming)  < Frontiers in Physics >

Corinna Coupette, Dirk Hartung, Janis Beckedorf, Maximilian Bother & Daniel Martin Katz, Law Smells – Defining and Detecting Problematic Patterns in Legal Drafting  < SSRN >

Ilias Chalkidis, Abhik Jana, Dirk Hartung, Michael Bommarito, Ion Androutsopoulos, Daniel Martin Katz & Nikolaos Aletras, LexGLUE: A Benchmark Dataset for Legal Language Understanding in English  < arXiv >  < SSRN >

Recent Posts

  • Daniel Katz — Jones Day Visiting Professor of Law at Singapore Management University
  • Bucerius Law School Summer Program Legal Technology and Operations 2022
  • Legal NLP — Breaking the Legal Language Barrier ? Short Lex Talk at Future Law – Stanford CodeX Center for Legal Informatics
  • Scenes from Yesterday’s FutureLaw Conference 2022 at Stanford CodeX
  • Session on Computable Contracts in the Insurance Sector (PreMeeting for tomorrow’s FutureLaw Conference)

Tags

access to justice algorithms artificial intelligence artificial intelligence and law big data blockchain business of law complex systems computational legal studies computational linguistics computational social science computer science data mining data science financial crisis fin legal tech Google for Government industries innovation Judicial Decision Making Law as a Complex System law schools legal analytics legal data legal education legal entrepreneurship legal informatics legal innovation legal operations legal services legal tech legal technology machine learning machine learning and law natural language processing network analysis physics political science quantitative legal prediction social epidemiology supreme court the future Uncategorized visualization Web 2.0

Archives

  • May 2022
  • April 2022
  • March 2022
  • February 2022
  • January 2022
  • December 2021
  • November 2021
  • October 2021
  • September 2021
  • August 2021
  • July 2021
  • June 2021
  • May 2021
  • April 2021
  • March 2021
  • February 2021
  • January 2021
  • December 2020
  • November 2020
  • October 2020
  • September 2020
  • August 2020
  • July 2020
  • June 2020
  • May 2020
  • April 2020
  • March 2020
  • February 2020
  • January 2020
  • December 2019
  • November 2019
  • October 2019
  • September 2019
  • August 2019
  • July 2019
  • June 2019
  • May 2019
  • April 2019
  • March 2019
  • February 2019
  • January 2019
  • December 2018
  • November 2018
  • October 2018
  • September 2018
  • August 2018
  • July 2018
  • June 2018
  • May 2018
  • April 2018
  • March 2018
  • February 2018
  • January 2018
  • December 2017
  • November 2017
  • October 2017
  • September 2017
  • August 2017
  • July 2017
  • June 2017
  • May 2017
  • April 2017
  • March 2017
  • February 2017
  • January 2017
  • December 2016
  • November 2016
  • October 2016
  • September 2016
  • August 2016
  • July 2016
  • June 2016
  • May 2016
  • April 2016
  • March 2016
  • February 2016
  • January 2016
  • December 2015
  • November 2015
  • October 2015
  • September 2015
  • August 2015
  • July 2015
  • June 2015
  • May 2015
  • April 2015
  • March 2015
  • February 2015
  • January 2015
  • December 2014
  • November 2014
  • October 2014
  • September 2014
  • August 2014
  • July 2014
  • June 2014
  • May 2014
  • April 2014
  • March 2014
  • February 2014
  • January 2014
  • December 2013
  • November 2013
  • October 2013
  • September 2013
  • August 2013
  • July 2013
  • June 2013
  • May 2013
  • April 2013
  • March 2013
  • February 2013
  • January 2013
  • December 2012
  • November 2012
  • October 2012
  • September 2012
  • August 2012
  • July 2012
  • June 2012
  • May 2012
  • April 2012
  • March 2012
  • February 2012
  • January 2012
  • December 2011
  • November 2011
  • October 2011
  • September 2011
  • August 2011
  • July 2011
  • June 2011
  • May 2011
  • April 2011
  • March 2011
  • February 2011
  • January 2011
  • December 2010
  • November 2010
  • October 2010
  • September 2010
  • August 2010
  • July 2010
  • June 2010
  • May 2010
  • April 2010
  • March 2010
  • February 2010
  • January 2010
  • December 2009
  • November 2009
  • October 2009
  • September 2009
  • August 2009
  • July 2009
  • June 2009
  • May 2009
  • April 2009
  • March 2009

Meta

  • Log in
  • Entries feed
  • Comments feed
  • WordPress.org
Copyright © 2025 Computational Legal Studies.