Artificial Intelligence and Law 5 (1-2):1-74 (1997)
|Abstract||In this article we evaluate the BankXX program from several perspectives. BankXX is a case-based legal argument program that retrieves cases and other legal knowledge pertinent to a legal argument through a combination of heuristic search and knowledge-based indexing. The program is described in detail in a companion article in Artificial Intelligence and Law 4: 1--71, 1996. Three perspectives are used to evaluate BankXX:(1) classical information retrieval measures of precision and recall applied against a hand-coded baseline; (2) knowledge-representation and case-based reasoning, where the baseline is provided by the functionality of a well-known case-based argument program, HYPO (Ashley, 1990); and (3) search, in which the performance of BankXX run with various parameter settings, for instance, resource limits, is compared. In this article we report on an extensive series of experiments performed to evaluate the program. We also describe two additional experiments concerning(1) the program's search behavior; and (2) the use of a modified form of precision and recall based on case similarity. Finally we offer some general conclusions that might be drawn from these particular experiments.|
|Keywords||case-based reasoning legal argument information retrieval search evaluation bankruptcy|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Martin Možina, Jure Žabkar, Trevor Bench-Capon & Ivan Bratko (2005). Argument Based Machine Learning Applied to Law. Artificial Intelligence and Law 13 (1):53-73.
Henry Prakken (2010). Using Argument Schemes for Hypothetical Reasoning in Law. Artificial Intelligence and Law 18 (2):153-174.
João P. Martins & Maria R. Cravo (1991). How to Change Your Mind. Noûs 25 (4):537-551.
Kathleen Freeman & Arthur M. Farley (1996). A Model of Argumentation and its Application to Legal Reasoning. Artificial Intelligence and Law 4 (3-4):163-197.
David B. Skalak & Edwina L. Rissland (1992). Arguments and Cases: An Inevitable Intertwining. [REVIEW] Artificial Intelligence and Law 1 (1):3-44.
Kevin D. Ashley (2009). Teaching a Process Model of Legal Argument with Hypotheticals. Artificial Intelligence and Law 17 (4):321-370.
Kevin D. Ashley & Stefanie Brüninghaus (2009). Automatically Classifying Case Texts and Predicting Outcomes. Artificial Intelligence and Law 17 (2):125-165.
Edwina L. Rissland, David B. Skalak & M. Timur Friedman (1996). BankXX: Supporting Legal Arguments Through Heuristic Retrieval. [REVIEW] Artificial Intelligence and Law 4 (1):1-71.
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?