Dimension-based analysis of hypotheticals from supreme court oral argument
ICAIL '89 Proceedings of the 2nd international conference on Artificial intelligence and law
CABARET: rule interpretation in a hybrid architecture
International Journal of Man-Machine Studies - AI and legal reasoning. Part 1
Assessing agreement on classification tasks: the kappa statistic
Computational Linguistics
Modeling Legal Arguments: Reasoning with Cases and Hypotheticals
Modeling Legal Arguments: Reasoning with Cases and Hypotheticals
Teaching case-based argumentation through a model and examples
Teaching case-based argumentation through a model and examples
A model of legal reasoning with cases incorporating theories and values
Artificial Intelligence - Special issue on AI and law
Artificial Intelligence - Special issue on AI and law
Evaluating Legal Argument Instruction with Graphical Representations Using LARGO
Proceedings of the 2007 conference on Artificial Intelligence in Education: Building Technology Rich Learning Contexts That Work
Validating and Representing Case Based Knowledge
Proceedings of the 2009 conference on Artificial Intelligence in Education: Building Learning Systems that Care: From Knowledge Representation to Affective Modelling
| Hi-index | 0.00 |
The transcripts of oral arguments before the US Supreme Court provide interesting opportunities from the viewpoint of legal education. As the pinnacle of legal argumentation, they illustrate, often in dramatic fashion, a sophisticated process of concept formation and testing driven by skillful posing of hypotheticals. Yet it is not easy to get beginning law students to understand the arguments and the underlying processes of hypothesis formation and testing. We introduce a novel project with the dual aims of developing an AI model of concept formation and testing as well as an intelligent tutoring system for beginning law students. We describe a planned experiment in which we will evaluate to what extent law students' study of the Supreme Court oral arguments can be improved by providing detailed and specific self-explanation prompts. It is hypothesized that detailed prompts to explain connections between tests, rationales, dimensions, and hypotheticals will help students to induce adequate mental models of concept formation processes.