微信内可能无法直接打开本站。请点右上角 ··· → 在浏览器打开,或复制链接。
When Can a Machine Trust a Statute? A Survival Certificate for Machine-Extracted Legal Logic
RSS 官方收录 · 可信分层展示
关键摘要
arXiv:2609.…
- 01741v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Statutes are increasingly parsed …
- We ask what formal logic survives such noise.
- We build a passive survival certificate for the Duquenne-Guigues impli…
摘要引擎:抽取
正文提要
arXiv:2609.01741v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Statutes are increasingly parsed by machines before people read them, and the parsers disagree: on Missouri's statutes, two independently written extractors diverge on numeric-threshold presence at a false-negative rate of 0.43. We ask what formal logic survives such noise. We build a passive survival certificate for the Duquenne-Guigues implication basis of machine-extracted statutory contexts: per-attribute inter-extractor disagreement is measured, replayed against the basis in 1,000 Monte Carlo trials, and an implication is certified only when a one-sided Wilson 95% lower bound on survival reaches 0.95; every certified implication carries premise spans and a minimal counterexample. On 29,365 Missouri sections and 502 Indian central-Act sections, the preregistered held-out gate passes (10 statute families across 7 Titles exact; 16 across 11 with 5% tolerance), yet under one globally deployed error model 93.2% of held-out chapters fall below the informativeness floor, and a 2x2 factorial assigns that to calibration-rate transfer, not selection. The certificate is usable but fragile: deploy it per-chapter-calibrated or error-tolerant. Code, data products, and the audit trail, including one retracted claim, are released.