A tool in modelling disagreement in law: preferring the most specific argument

@inproceedings{Prakken1991ATI,
  title={A tool in modelling disagreement in law: preferring the most specific argument},
  author={H. Prakken},
  booktitle={ICAIL '91},
  year={1991}
}
  • H. Prakken
  • Published in ICAIL '91 1991
  • Computer Science
applied to legal reasoning and used to formulate requirements for legal knowledge-based systems choosing between alternative arguments. It is based on a proposal of Poole, but improves it in two respects: firstly, default Iog”c is shown to be a better underlying Io@”c for defensible reasoning than standard first-order lo~-c; and secondly, specificity is defined iteratively, in order to handle muhiple conflicts and to characterize the set of prefk?red knowledge. lle theory is an example of the… Expand
A logical framework for modelling legal argument
This paper investigates the relevance of the logical study of argumentation systems for AI-and-law research, in particular for modelling the adversarial aspect of legal reasoning. It does so inExpand
Normative conflicts in legal reasoning
  • G. Sartor
  • Sociology, Computer Science
  • Artificial Intelligence and Law
  • 2004
TLDR
A formal analysis of a fundamental aspect of legal reasoning: dealing with normative conflicts is proposed and two approaches to cope with conflicting information are presented: the preferred theories of Brewka, and the belief change functions of Alchourrón, Gärdenfors, and Makinson. Expand
An Explainable Approach to Deducing Outcomes in European Court of Human Rights Cases Using ADFs
TLDR
An argumentation-based approach to representing and reasoning about a domain of law that has previously been addressed through a machine learning approach is presented, and initial results show that the system based on the argumentation approach improves on the machine learning results in terms of accuracy. Expand
Monological reason-based logic: a low level integration of rule-based reasoning and case-based reasoning
  • J. Hage
  • Computer Science
  • ICAIL '93
  • 1993
TLDR
This paper describes how to establish the presence of a reason and how to argue whether the reasons for or the reasons against the conclusion prevail, and addresses the topic of meta-level reasoning about the use of rules in concrete cases. Expand
A model of argumentation and its application to legal reasoning
TLDR
A computational model of dialectical argumentation that could serve as a basis for legal reasoning, and includes burden of proof as a key element, indicating what level of support must be achieved by one side to win the argument. Expand
A dialectical model of assessing conflicting arguments in legal reasoning
TLDR
This approach complements two other lines of research in AI and Law, investigations of precedent-based reasoning and the development of ‘procedural’, or ‘dialectical’ models of legal argument. Expand
An argumentation framework in default logic
  • H. Prakken
  • Mathematics, Computer Science
  • Annals of Mathematics and Artificial Intelligence
  • 2005
TLDR
This article presents a formal theory about nontrivial reasoning with inconsistent information, applicable, among other things, to defeasible reasoning, and chooses a nonmonotonic logic, default logic, as the formalism underlying the argumentation framework. Expand
Burden of proof in legal argumentation
TLDR
A computational model of dialectical argumentation is presented that could serve as a basis for studying elements of legal reasoning and includes burden of proof as a key element, indicating the level of support that must be achieved by a particular side to an argument. Expand
Two approaches to the formalisation of defeasible deontic reasoning
  • H. Prakken
  • Mathematics, Computer Science
  • Stud Logica
  • 1996
This paper compares two ways of formalising defeasible deontic reasoning, both based on the view that the issues of conflicting obligations and moral dilemmas should be dealt with from theExpand
A simple computational model for nonmonotonic and adversarial legal reasoning
TLDR
A model for reasoning with ordered defaults, interpreted as unidirectional inference rules, is proposed: a language for representing (possibly) contradictory rules is introduced, a notion of argument is defined, and types of arguments are distinguished. Expand
...
1
2
3
4
...

References

SHOWING 1-10 OF 27 REFERENCES
A logical framework for modelling legal argument
This paper investigates the relevance of the logical study of argumentation systems for AI-and-law research, in particular for modelling the adversarial aspect of legal reasoning. It does so inExpand
On the Comparison of Theories: Preferring the Most Specific Explanation
  • D. Poole
  • Mathematics, Computer Science
  • IJCAI
  • 1985
TLDR
A formal, model-theoretic characterisation of default reasoning is presented, which overcomes many of the problems which motivated non-normal defaults, and provides a semantics for correct inheritance in inheritance systems, where the authors want choose the result supported by the most specific knowledge. Expand
Issue spotting in a system for searching interpretation spaces
A method for spotting issues is described which uses a system we are developing for searching interpretations spaces and constructing legal arguments. The system is compatible with the legalExpand
Preferred Subtheories: An Extended Logical Framework for Default Reasoning
We present a general framework for defining nonmonotonic systems based on the notion of preferred maximal consistent subsets of the premises. This framework subsumes David Poole's THEORIST approachExpand
Defeasible Reasoning: A Philosophical Analysis in Prolog
TLDR
This work contrasts this with both invalid deductive reasoning and inductive reasoning, which is the kind of “other things being equal” reasoning that proceeds from the assumption that the authors are dealing with the usual or normal case. Expand
A Logic for Default Reasoning
  • R. Reiter
  • Mathematics, Computer Science
  • Artif. Intell.
  • 1980
TLDR
This paper proposes a logic for default reasoning, develops a complete proof theory and shows how to interface it with a top down resolution theorem prover, and provides criteria under which the revision of derived beliefs must be effected. Expand
A Logical Framework for Default Reasoning
  • D. Poole
  • Mathematics, Computer Science
  • Artif. Intell.
  • 1988
TLDR
A simple logical framework for default reasoning by treating defaults as predefined possible hypotheses is presented, and it is shown how this idea subsumes the intuition behind Reiter's default logic. Expand
An Approach to Default Reasoning Based on a First-Order Conditional Logic: Revised Report
TLDR
This paper presents an approach to default reasoning based on an extension to classical first-order logic augmented with a "variable conditional" operator for representing default statements that is argued to be superior to the first. Expand
Defeat among arguments: a system of defeasible inference
  • R. Loui
  • Computer Science
  • Comput. Intell.
  • 1987
TLDR
A system of nonmonotonic reasoning with defeasible rules that can be solved without additional explicit knowledge; ordering competing extensions can be done in a natural and defeasibility way, via syntactic considerations. Expand
A case-based system for trade secrets law
TLDR
An overview of the case-based reasoning program, HYPO, which operates in the field of trade secret law, and an extended example of HYPO working through a hypothetical trade secrets case, patterned after an actual case. Expand
...
1
2
3
...