# Code-Driven Law NO, Normware SI!

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2410.17257 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2410.17257/

## Key facts

- No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Builds on 5 of its 67 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 5 Oct 2024.

## Builds on (most cited first, 5 of 5)

- [Catala: A Programming Language for the Law](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2103.03198/) (2021)
- [Enabling Reasoning with LegalRuleML](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1711.06128/) (2017)
- [To Trust or Not to Trust a Regressor: Estimating and Explaining Trustworthiness of Regression Predictions](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2104.06982/) (2021)
- [The Role of Normware in Trustworthy and Explainable AI](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1812.02471/) (2018)
- [DPCL: a Language Template for Normative Specifications](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2201.04477/) (2022)

## Abstract (arXiv)

With the digitalization of society, the interest, the debates and the research efforts concerning "code", "law", "artificial intelligence", and their various relationships, have been widely increasing. Yet, most arguments primarily focus on contemporary computational methods and artifacts (inferential models constructed via machine-learning methods, rule-based systems, smart contracts), rather than attempting to identify more fundamental mechanisms. Aiming to go beyond this conceptual limitation, this paper introduces and elaborates on "normware" as an explicit additional stance -- complementary to software and hardware -- for the interpretation and the design of artificial devices. By means of a few examples, I will argue that a normware-centred perspective provides a more adequate abstraction to study and design interactions between computational systems and human institutions, and may help with the design and development of technical interventions within wider socio-technical views.