Graduate studies at Western
Artificial Intelligence and Law 2 (4):239-292 (1993)
|Abstract||The Pleadings Game is a normative formalization and computational model of civil pleading, founded in Roberty Alexy''s discourse theory of legal argumentation. The consequences of arguments and counterarguments are modelled using Geffner and Pearl''s nonmonotonic logic,conditional entailment. Discourse in focussed using the concepts of issue and relevance. Conflicts between arguments can be resolved by arguing about the validity and priority of rules, at any level. The computational model is fully implemented and has been tested using examples from Article Nine of the Uniform Commercial Code.|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Daniel M. Hausman (2005). 'Testing' Game Theory. Journal of Economic Methodology 12 (2):211-223.
Arno R. Lodder (2000). Thomas F. Gordon, the Pleadings Game – an Artificial Intelligence Model of Procedural Justice. Artificial Intelligence and Law 8 (2-3):255-264.
Till Grüne‐Yanoff & Paul Schweinzer (2008). The Roles of Stories in Applying Game Theory. Journal of Economic Methodology 15 (2):131-146.
Lauri Carlson (1994). Logic for Dialogue Games. Synthese 99 (3):377 - 415.
Giacomo Bonanno (2002). Modal Logic and Game Theory: Two Alternative Approaches. Risk Decision and Policy 7:309-324.
Lisa J. Carlson & Raymond Dacey (2010). Social Norms and the Traditional Deterrence Game. Synthese 176 (1):105 - 123.
Dietmar Berwanger (2003). Game Logic is Strong Enough for Parity Games. Studia Logica 75 (2):205 - 219.
Henry Prakken (2008). A Formal Model of Adjudication Dialogues. Artificial Intelligence and Law 16 (3):305-328.
Sorry, there are not enough data points to plot this chart.
Added to index2009-01-28
Recent downloads (6 months)0
How can I increase my downloads?