Dr. Lucien Mehl, born 1919 in Paris, studied at the University, Paris where he obtained his degrees in Philosophy and Law, and a Diploma of Advanced Studies in Political Economy and at the National School of Administration. He is now'Maitre des Requetesi to the Council of State and Director of external training at the National School of Administration. He is a member of the International Fiscal Association, the International Cybernetics Association and the French Operational Research Society. He has published a number of articles on administrative science, law, cybernetics and operational research. INTRODUCTION I. It may seem an ambitious step to try to apply mechanization or automation to the legal sciences. However, a machine for processing information can be an effective aid in searching for sources of legal information, in developing legal argument, in preparing the decision of the administrator or judge, and finally in checking the coherence of solutions arrived at.

Dr. Francois Paycha, born at Narbonne, studied medicine at the University of Montpellier. His first researches were concerned with the embryology of the eye, later using the distribution of radioactive phosphorus P32 to study the structure of the tissues and for the detection of tumours. He was then appointed to the National Centre of Scientific Research. While in charge of a hospital clinic, he noted the considerable differences in the diagnoses of conscientious and knowledgeable practitioners and those advanced by the hospital. In view of the special need for exact diagnosis in medicine he made a study of the causes of these differences. After theoretical research, he made the first "Medical Memory' in 1953 with the help of Bull and later of I.B.M. He studied the structure of a three-symbol logic which is applicable to medical' problems and in general. After a year in the service of Prof. G. E. Jayle, he abandoned pure research and entered industry. SUMMARY I am going to analyse ...

An unsophisticated translation of such a sentence will therefore not be a good translation. Again, contrary to Mr. Richensi opinion, I believe that the problem involved is serious. There is no simple procedure to find out which, and in what way, the words of the English language are context-dependent. And I don't think that the issue can be belittled for tae reason that contextdependent words do not occur in scientific discussions and writings. They might not be too abundant in ordinary scientific papers on matters physical or chemical, but there would surely be plenty of them in discussions of matters linguistic, for instance. This might be one reason why so far hardly anybody has tried to machine translate papers in linguistics. As soon as this is attempted, the seriousness of the problem will become immediately evident.

Known in behaviour as "habituation" and in perception as "adaptation", it has been recognised from time immemorial yet still lacks explanation. Only recently Sharpless and Jasper (1956, ref. 10) could say "Habituaticn... has yet to be explained by any known neurophysiological principles". A review of the subject need not be given here as it has been well reviewed by Humphrey (1933, ref.6), Harris (1943, ref. 5), and Thorpe (1956, ref. 11). On one important matter they are agreed: habituation of typical form occurs in almost every form of life; in particular it appears as readily in forms having no neural apparatus as in the forms having a well developed brain. Amoeba shows it as freely as does the cat. The phenomenon evidently does not depend on specifically neurophysiological details. Its origin must lie in some property of much wider occurrence. The possibility of "fatigue" as an explanation must be rejected.

Biology seems to be a science in its own right, or set of sciences having common aims, and so it should have its own language and explanatory concepts; yet when any specifically biological concept is suggested and used as an explanatory concept it seems to be unsatisfactory and even mystical. There are many biological concepts of this kind: Purpose, Drive, elan vital, Entelechy, Gestalten.* Physicists and engineers seem, on the other hand, to have clearly defined concepts having great power within biology.

If ability to perform complex calculations were a sufficient criterion, then even a conventional digital computor could lay claim to more intelligence than any of usand perhaps we had better let it make away with the word and be done with it.

In this paper we discuss a hybrid approach combining Case-Based Reasoning (CBR) .

We discuss several aspects of legal arguments, primarily arguments about the meaning of statutes. First, we discuss how the requirements of argument guide the specification and selection of supporting cases and how an existing case base influences argument formation.

We focus on realistic, complex domains where the concepts, terms and predicates used by domain rules or by rule-based models are not well-defined. Often, in such inherently ill-defined domains the rules do not encompass all the situations they are asked or assumed to cover, admit tacit exceptions, or can be contradicted and annulled by other rules. Interpretation is therefore required of the terms and predicates used. The law is a prototypical example of such an area, where terms used in legal statutes are not completely defined by legal regulations. The use of case-based reasoning (CBR) to complement and supplement other types of reasoning involves many computational questions of system architecture and control. The key focus of this work is how and when to interleave CBR with other modes of reasoning in the context of applying a rule or model to a new set of facts in light of a corpus of cases of past application. The goal is to generate an explanation or argument as to how the new fact situation might be interpreted. In particular, we report on a system called CABARET (CAse-BAsed REasoning Tool), a hybrid architecture we have built to study and experiment with these issues.

This paper presents a hybrid case-based reasoning (CBR) and information retrieval (IR) system, called SPIRE, that both retrieves documents from a full-text document corpus and from within individual documents, and locates passages likely to contain information about important problem-solving features of cases. SPIRE uses two case-bases, one containing past precedents, and one containing excerpts from past case texts. Both are used by SPIRE to automatically generate queries, which are then run by the INQUERY full-text retrieval engine on a large text collection in the case of document retrieval and on individual text documents for passage retrieval.