Representing teleological structure in case-based legal reasoning: the missing link
ICAIL '93 Proceedings of the 4th international conference on Artificial intelligence and law
Burden of proof in legal argumentation
ICAIL '95 Proceedings of the 5th international conference on Artificial intelligence and law
The Zeno argumentation framework
Proceedings of the 6th international conference on Artificial intelligence and law
Inferring from Inconsistency in Preference-Based Argumentation Frameworks
Journal of Automated Reasoning
A model of legal reasoning with cases incorporating theories and values
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
Arguing about cases as practical reasoning
ICAIL '05 Proceedings of the 10th international conference on Artificial intelligence and law
Dialogues about the burden of proof
ICAIL '05 Proceedings of the 10th international conference on Artificial intelligence and law
Audiences in argumentation frameworks
Artificial Intelligence
Zeno Revisited: Representation of Persuasive Argument
Proceedings of the 2006 conference on Legal Knowledge and Information Systems: JURIX 2006: The Nineteenth Annual Conference
Presumptions and Burdens of Proof
Proceedings of the 2006 conference on Legal Knowledge and Information Systems: JURIX 2006: The Nineteenth Annual Conference
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
Value Based Argumentation in Hierarchical Argumentation Frameworks
Proceedings of the 2006 conference on Computational Models of Argument: Proceedings of COMMA 2006
Autonomous Agents and Multi-Agent Systems
A Process Model of Legal Argument with Hypotheticals
Proceedings of the 2008 conference on Legal Knowledge and Information Systems: JURIX 2008: The Twenty-First 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
Ontological requirements for analogical, teleological, and hypothetical legal reasoning
Proceedings of the 12th International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Law
Teaching a process model of legal argument with hypotheticals
Artificial Intelligence and Law
Carneades and Abstract Dialectical Frameworks: A Reconstruction
Proceedings of the 2010 conference on Computational Models of Argument: Proceedings of COMMA 2010
Expanding Argumentation Frameworks: Enforcing and Monotonicity Results
Proceedings of the 2010 conference on Computational Models of Argument: Proceedings of COMMA 2010
Dealing with the dynamics of proof-standard in argumentation-based decision aiding
Proceedings of the 2010 conference on STAIRS 2010: Proceedings of the Fifth Starting AI Researchers' Symposium
Facilitating case comparison using value judgments and intermediate legal concepts
Proceedings of the 13th International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Law
Burden of proof in deliberation dialogs
ArgMAS'09 Proceedings of the 6th international conference on Argumentation in Multi-Agent Systems
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 we examine some previous AI and Law attempts to characterise standards of proof, and relate these to the notions of acceptability found in argumentation frameworks, an approach which forms the basis of much recent work on argumentation. We distinguish between the justification of facts and the justication of choices relating to the law and its interpretation. Standards of proof most naturally arise in connection with facts, but points of law have analogous degrees of justification.