2022
DOI: 10.1016/j.clsr.2022.105717
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Machines that make and keep promises - Lessons for contract automation from algorithmic trading on financial markets

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1

Citation Types

0
2
0

Year Published

2022
2022
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
6
1

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 7 publications
(3 citation statements)
references
References 30 publications
0
2
0
Order By: Relevance
“…In addition, using algorithms or other methods to help with contract interpretation can also be an option to consider [29]. Algorithms can assist in language and context analysis to clarify the meaning and intention of contracts [30].…”
Section: Validity and Interpretation Of Contracts Involving Agimentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In addition, using algorithms or other methods to help with contract interpretation can also be an option to consider [29]. Algorithms can assist in language and context analysis to clarify the meaning and intention of contracts [30].…”
Section: Validity and Interpretation Of Contracts Involving Agimentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Finally, the law-jobs include the adjustment of the trouble-casesoffences, grievances and disputeswhich could potentially threaten the existence and continuation of group life, if sufficiently multiplied and cumulative (Llewellyn and Hoebel, 1941). The need to adjudicate new forms of high-volume disputes involving algorithmssuch as in algorithmic collusion (Ezrachi, 2016), content moderation (Cavaliere and Romeo, 2022) and market abuse in algorithmic trading (Schmidt-Kessen et al, 2022) and the development of algorithm-supported dispute resolution (Lodder and Zeleznikow, 2012) illustrate the challenges of this law-job. The rise of new dispute resolution methods, such as predictive analytics, and the role of new actors in the adjudication disputes, from LegalTechs to market-places and social networks (Cavaliere and Romeo, 2022;Fortes et al, 2022), reveal a new agenda for this law-job that involves the adoption of algorithms as a new craft in law's toolbox.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Finally, the law-jobs include the adjustment of the trouble-casesoffences, grievances and disputeswhich could potentially threaten the existence and continuation of group life, if sufficiently multiplied and cumulative (Llewellyn and Hoebel, 1941). The need to adjudicate new forms of high-volume disputes involving algorithmssuch as in algorithmic collusion (Ezrachi, 2016), content moderation (Cavaliere and Romeo, 2022) and market abuse in algorithmic trading (Schmidt-Kessen et al, 2022) and the development of algorithm-supported dispute resolution (Lodder and Zeleznikow, 2012) illustrate the challenges of this law-job. The rise of new dispute resolution methods, such as predictive analytics, and the role of new actors in the adjudication disputes, from LegalTechs to market-places and social networks (Cavaliere and Romeo, 2022;Fortes et al, 2022), reveal a new agenda for this law-job that involves the adoption of algorithms as a new craft in law's toolbox.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%