Reading ComprehensionDifficulty: Easy

PT132 S3 P4 Q25 Explanation

Computer Legal Reasoning

A free, expert breakdown of this official LSAT Reading Comprehension question.

TopicsAuthor OpinionLaw

Keep going in LSAT Lab

  • Save & drill this skill build targeted practice sets from questions like this one

  • Video walkthroughs watch every question solved step by step

  • 81 official LSATs as questions, timed sections & full-length tests

Full official LSAT questions are available through LawHub. This page provides LSAT Lab's explanation, strategy, and review tools without republishing the full official question.

Passage

Computers have long been utilized in the sphere of law in the form of word processors, spreadsheets, legal research systems, and practice management systems. Most exciting, however, has been the prospect of using artificial intelligence techniques to create so-called legal reasoning systems—computer programs that can help to resolve legal disputes by reasoning in resolving problems involving the meaning and applicability of rules set out in a legal text.

Early attempts at automated legal reasoning focused on the doctrinal nature of law. They viewed law as a set of rules, and the resulting computer systems were engineered to make legal decisions by determining the consequences that followed when its stored set of legal rules was applied to a collection of evidentiary of the world that is far beyond their capabilities at present or in the foreseeable future.

Proponents of legal reasoning systems now argue that accommodating reference to, and reasoning from, cases improves the chances of producing a successful system. By focusing on the practice of reasoning from precedents, researchers have designed systems called case-based reasoners, which store individual example cases in their knowledge bases. In contrast to a a system that can discover for itself the factors that make cases similar in relevant ways.

What this question is testing

Author Opinion

Your task

Pin down exactly what the question asks about the passage — a detail, the author's view, the structure, or the main point — before looking at the choices.

Common trap

Answers that restate a true detail from the passage but don't answer the specific question being asked.

Winning move

Anticipate the answer in your own words from the passage, then find the choice that matches that prediction.

Reading along? Open the full official question in LawHub — we show a fragment here and keep the reasoning in our own words.

The question
25.

It can be most reasonably inferred from the passage’s discussion of requirements for developing effective automated legal reasoning systems that the author would agree with which

Answer choices

  1. Too Broad / Too Strong6% picked this

    Focusing on the doctrinal nature of law is the fundamental error made by developers of

    This only applies to early attempts at automated legal reasoning. "The fundamental error" is also really strong.

  2. Too Strong4% picked this

    Contemporary computers do not have the required memory capability to store enough data to be

    Sure, legal reasoning that focuses on the doctrinal nature of law will need to be equipped with a kind of comprehensive knowledge of the world, which likely requires memory. But this doesn’t mean that memory capacity is holding back computers from having a comprehensive knowledge.

  3. Too Strong4% picked this

    Questions of interpretation in rule-based legal reasoning systems must be settled by programming more legal

    Programming more legal rules may help, but its not the only way for computers to learn how to apply rules to novel situations (second paragraph).

  4. Correct86% picked this

    Legal statutes and reasoning may involve innovative applications that cannot be modeled by a fixed set of

    Why this is right

    This is supported in the second and third paragraphs.

    Skill tested: Author Opinion · how this choice captures the passage's function is the move to repeat next time.

  5. Unsupported1% picked this

    As professionals continue to use computers in the sphere of law they will develop the competence to use

    The author does not see a lack of competence as the reason for the lackluster results (First Paragraph). The author sees the problem to be the meaning and applicability of rules (First Paragraph).

Continue the review in LSAT Lab

Save this question, watch the video walkthrough, and drill similar questions in your LSAT Lab account.

LSAT Lab

Turn this review into a targeted study plan.

Save this question, drill more like it, watch the video walkthrough, and track your progress in your LSAT Lab account.

Start practicing free