Hart's critics on defeasible concepts and ascriptivism
ICAIL '95 Proceedings of the 5th international conference on Artificial intelligence and law
Evaluating Explanations: A Content Theory
Evaluating Explanations: A Content Theory
Explanation Patterns: Understanding Mechanical and Creatively
Explanation Patterns: Understanding Mechanical and Creatively
Teaching case-based argumentation through a model and examples
Teaching case-based argumentation through a model and examples
Extensionally defining principles and cases in ethics: an AI model
Artificial Intelligence - Special issue on AI and law
Towards a formal account of reasoning about evidence: argumentation schemes and generalisations
Artificial Intelligence and Law - Law, logic and defeasibility
Computational Models of Ethical Reasoning: Challenges, Initial Steps, and Future Directions
IEEE Intelligent Systems
Arguing about cases as practical reasoning
ICAIL '05 Proceedings of the 10th international conference on Artificial intelligence and law
Coherence and Flexibility in Dialogue Games for Argumentation
Journal of Logic and Computation
The Carneades model of argument and burden of proof
Artificial Intelligence
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
Pierson vs. Post RevisitedA Reconstruction using the Carneades Argumentation Framework
Proceedings of the 2006 conference on Computational Models of Argument: Proceedings of COMMA 2006
Argument Schemes for Legal Case-based Reasoning
Proceedings of the 2007 conference on Legal Knowledge and Information Systems: JURIX 2007: The Twentieth Annual Conference
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
Investigating Stories in a Formal Dialogue Game
Proceedings of the 2008 conference on Computational Models of Argument: Proceedings of COMMA 2008
Ontological requirements for analogical, teleological, and hypothetical legal reasoning
Proceedings of the 12th International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Law
Proceedings of the 13th International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Law
Using Argumentation Schemes for Argument Extraction: A Bottom-Up Method
International Journal of Cognitive Informatics and Natural Intelligence
Using Argumentation Schemes for Argument Extraction: A Bottom-Up Method
International Journal of Cognitive Informatics and Natural Intelligence
Using event progression to enhance purposive argumentation in the value judgment formalism
Proceedings of the Fourteenth International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Law
| Hi-index | 0.00 |
In this paper, it is shown (1) that there are two schemes for argument from analogy that seem to be competitors but are not, (2) how one of them is based on a distinctive type of similarity premise, (3) how to analyze the notion of similarity using story schemes illustrated by some cases, (4) how arguments from precedent are based on arguments from analogy, and in many instances arguments from classification, and (5) that when similarity is defined by means of episode schemes, we can get a clearer idea of how it integrates with the use of argument from classification and argument from precedent in case-based reasoning by using a dialogue structure.