Did he jump or was he pushed?: abductive practical reasoning

Authors:
Floris Bex;Trevor Bench-Capon;Katie Atkinson
Affiliations:
Faculty of Law, University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands;Department of Computer Science, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK;Department of Computer Science, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK
Venue:
Artificial Intelligence and Law
Year:
2009

Citing 8
Cited 2

On the acceptability of arguments and its fundamental role in nonmonotonic reasoning, logic programming and n-person games

Artificial Intelligence
Alternating-time temporal logic

Journal of the ACM (JACM)
Character Evidence: An Abductive Theory (Argumentation Library)

Character Evidence: An Abductive Theory (Argumentation Library)
Audiences in argumentation frameworks

Artificial Intelligence
Formalising argumentative story-based analysis of evidence

Proceedings of the 11th international conference on Artificial intelligence and law
Practical reasoning as presumptive argumentation using action based alternating transition systems

Artificial Intelligence
Anchored Narratives in Reasoning about Evidence

Proceedings of the 2006 conference on Legal Knowledge and Information Systems: JURIX 2006: The Nineteenth Annual Conference
Value Based Argumentation in Hierarchical Argumentation Frameworks

Proceedings of the 2006 conference on Computational Models of Argument: Proceedings of COMMA 2006

A proposal for evidential reasoning about motives

Proceedings of the 12th International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Law
A hybrid formal theory of arguments, stories and criminal evidence

Artificial Intelligence and Law

Quantified Score

Hi-index	0.00

Visualization

Abstract

In this paper, we present a particular role for abductive reasoning in law by applying it in the context of an argumentation scheme for practical reasoning. We present a particular scheme, based on an established scheme for practical reasoning, that can be used to reason abductively about how an agent might have acted to reach a particular scenario, and the motivations for doing so. Plausibility here depends on a satisfactory explanation of why this particular agent followed these motivations in the particular situation. The scheme is given a formal grounding in terms of action-based alternating transition systems and we illustrate the approach with a running legal example.