Graduate studies at Western
Artificial Intelligence and Law 1 (2-3):113-208 (1992)
|Abstract||Reasoners compare problems to prior cases to draw conclusions about a problem and guide decision making. All Case-Based Reasoning (CBR) employs some methods for generalizing from cases to support indexing and relevance assessment and evidences two basic inference methods: constraining search by tracing a solution from a past case or evaluating a case by comparing it to past cases. Across domains and tasks, however, humans reason with cases in subtly different ways evidencing different mixes of and mechanisms for these components.In recent CBR research in Artificial Intelligence (AI), five paradigmatic approaches have emerged: statistically-oriented, model-based, planning/design-oriented, exemplar-based, and adversarial or precedent-based. The paradigms differ in the assumptions they make about domain models, the extent to which they support symbolic case comparison, and the kinds of inferences for which they employ cases.|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
John Zeleznikow (2002). An Australian Perspective on Research and Development Required for the Construction of Applied Legal Decision Support Systems. Artificial Intelligence and Law 10 (4):237-260.
Henry Prakken (2010). Using Argument Schemes for Hypothetical Reasoning in Law. Artificial Intelligence and Law 18 (2):153-174.
Chase E. Thiel, Shane Connelly, Lauren Harkrider, Lynn D. Devenport, Zhanna Bagdasarov, James F. Johnson & Michael D. Mumford (2013). Case-Based Knowledge and Ethics Education: Improving Learning and Transfer Through Emotionally Rich Cases. Science and Engineering Ethics 19 (1):265-286.
Jaap Hage (2004). Comparing Alternatives in the Law. Artificial Intelligence and Law 12 (3):181-225.
Kevin D. Ashley (2002). An AI Model of Case-Based Legal Argument From a Jurisprudential Viewpoint. Artificial Intelligence and Law 10 (1-3):163-218.
Edwina L. Rissland, David B. Skalak & M. Timur Friedman (1997). Evaluating a Legal Argument Program: The BankXX Experiments. [REVIEW] Artificial Intelligence and Law 5 (1-2):1-74.
István Borgulya (1999). Two Examples of Decision Support in the Law. Artificial Intelligence and Law 7 (2-3):303-321.
Carole D. Hafner & Donald H. Berman (2002). The Role of Context in Case-Based Legal Reasoning: Teleological, Temporal, and Procedural. [REVIEW] Artificial Intelligence and Law 10 (1-3):19-64.
Mingqiang Xu, Kaoru Hirota & Hajime Yoshino (1999). A Fuzzy Theoretical Approach to Case-Based Representation and Inference in CISG. Artificial Intelligence and Law 7 (2-3):259-272.
John Zeleznikow, George Vossos & Daniel Hunter (1993). The IKBALS Project: Multi-Modal Reasoning in Legal Knowledge Based Systems. [REVIEW] Artificial Intelligence and Law 2 (3):169-203.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads15 ( #86,080 of 738,566 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #61,778 of 738,566 )
How can I increase my downloads?