Automated argument assistance for lawyers

  • Authors:

  • Bart Verheij

  • Affiliations:

  • Department of Metajuridica, Universiteit Maastricht, P.O. Box 616, 6200 MD Maastricht, The Netherlands

  • Venue:
  • ICAIL '99 Proceedings of the 7th international conference on Artificial intelligence and law
  • Year:
  • 1999

Quantified Score

Hi-index 0.00

Visualization

Abstract

Solving the first of these two drawbacks has led to a new graphical representation of the arguments, in which argument attacks are shown, and to a change in the argumentation theory, viz. the introduction of a novel notion of an argument, viz. that of a dialectical argument. Briefly, a dialectical argument is an argument in which attacks (and counterattacks) are incorporated. Solving the second drawback has led to the introduction of step warrants and undercutter warrants into the argumentation theory. The resulting notion of a warranted dialectical argument is the analog for defeasible argumentation of the notion of a (Hilbert-style) proof of classical logic.The present version of the ArguMed-system is put in context by a brief comparison with selected other systems, viz. Loui's Room 5, Gordon and Karacapilidis' Zeno, ArguMed's precursor Argue! and the previous version of ArguMed.