Reasoning with portions of precedents
ICAIL '91 Proceedings of the 3rd international conference on Artificial intelligence and law
A reduction-graph model of ratio decidendi
ICAIL '93 Proceedings of the 4th international conference on Artificial intelligence and law
Representing teleological structure in case-based legal reasoning: the missing link
ICAIL '93 Proceedings of the 4th international conference on Artificial intelligence and law
The Zeno argumentation framework
Proceedings of the 6th international conference on Artificial intelligence and law
Coherence in finite argument systems
Artificial Intelligence
Teaching case-based argumentation through a model and examples
Teaching case-based argumentation through a model and examples
Two party immediate response disputes: properties and efficiency
Artificial Intelligence
A model of legal reasoning with cases incorporating theories and values
Artificial Intelligence - Special issue on AI and law
Try to see it my way: modelling persuasion in legal discourse
Artificial Intelligence and Law
Arguing about cases as practical reasoning
ICAIL '05 Proceedings of the 10th international conference on Artificial intelligence and law
Formal systems for persuasion dialogue
The Knowledge Engineering Review
Persuasion and Value in Legal Argument
Journal of Logic and Computation
Audiences in argumentation frameworks
Artificial Intelligence
Reasoning about preferences in argumentation frameworks
Artificial Intelligence
Pierson vs. Post RevisitedA Reconstruction using the Carneades Argumentation Framework
Proceedings of the 2006 conference on Computational Models of Argument: Proceedings of COMMA 2006
Arguments, Values and Baseballs: Representation of Popov v. Hayashi
Proceedings of the 2007 conference on Legal Knowledge and Information Systems: JURIX 2007: The Twentieth Annual Conference
Integrating Object and Meta-Level Value Based Argumentation
Proceedings of the 2008 conference on Computational Models of Argument: Proceedings of COMMA 2008
Reasoning about Preferences in Structured Extended Argumentation Frameworks
Proceedings of the 2010 conference on Computational Models of Argument: Proceedings of COMMA 2010
Computation in Extended Argumentation Frameworks
Proceedings of the 2010 conference on ECAI 2010: 19th European Conference on Artificial Intelligence
Open texture and argumentation: what makes an argument persuasive?
Logic Programs, Norms and Action
Argument schemes for reasoning with legal cases using values
Proceedings of the Fourteenth International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Law
Hi-index | 0.00 |
In this paper we discuss how recent developments in argumentation frameworks, most notably Extended Argumentation Frameworks, can inform the representation of a body of case law using abstract argumentation techniques. This builds on previous work which has first used abstract Argumentation Frameworks, and then Value based Argumentation Frameworks for this purpose. Extended Argumentation Frameworks augment Argumentation Frameworks to not only allow arguments to be attacked, but also attacks to be attacked. This allows argumentation based reasoning about information normally assumed to be metalevel to the object level domain of argumentation, including argumentation over preferences, values and the audience based ranking of values promoted by arguments. The Extended Argumentation Frameworks can then be rewritten as standard Argumentation Frameworks, so that cases, and values and their rankings relevant to the cases, can be reasoned about using standard dialogue games for Argumentation Frameworks. In this way precedents can be represented as collections of arguments and dialogues using these arguments. Now, when confronted with a new case, these dialogues may be used to identify ways of deploying the arguments in the new case so as to reach a favourable position.