Artificial Intelligence
Defeasible reasoning with variable degrees of justification
Artificial Intelligence
Online Dispute Resolution: Resolving Conflicts in Cyberspace
Online Dispute Resolution: Resolving Conflicts in Cyberspace
An algorithm for the induction of defeasible logic theories from databases
ADC '03 Proceedings of the 14th Australasian database conference - Volume 17
Propositional defeasible logic has linear complexity
Theory and Practice of Logic Programming
ICTAI '04 Proceedings of the 16th IEEE International Conference on Tools with Artificial Intelligence
Artificial Intelligence and Law - Law, logic and defeasibility
A study of accrual of arguments, with applications to evidential reasoning
ICAIL '05 Proceedings of the 10th international conference on Artificial intelligence and law
The appropriate role of dispute resolution in building trust online
Artificial Intelligence and Law - Online dispute resolution
Persuasion dialogue in online dispute resolution
Artificial Intelligence and Law - Online dispute resolution
The Carneades Argumentation FrameworkUsing Presumptions and Exceptions to Model Critical Questions
Proceedings of the 2006 conference on Computational Models of Argument: Proceedings of COMMA 2006
Contract enactment in virtual organizations: a commitment-based approach
AAAI'06 Proceedings of the 21st national conference on Artificial intelligence - Volume 1
Running contracts with defeasible commitment
IEA/AIE'06 Proceedings of the 19th international conference on Advances in Applied Artificial Intelligence: industrial, Engineering and Other Applications of Applied Intelligent Systems
| Hi-index | 0.00 |
Online dispute resolution is becoming the main method when dealing with a conflict in e-commerce. A family of defeasible reasoning patterns is used to provide a useful link between dispute resolution agents and legal doctrines. The proposed argumentation framework combines defeasible logic with temporal reasoning and argumentation with level of certainty. The evaluation of arguments depends on the stage of the dispute: commencement, discovery, pre-trial, arbitration, according to current practice in law. By applying the open world assumption to the rules, the argumentative semantics of defeasible logic is enriched with three types of negated rules which offer symmetrical means of argumentation for both disputants. A corollary of this extension consists in defining a specialized type of undercutting defeater. The theory is illustrated with the help of a concrete business-to-client case in a prototype implemented system.