27 found
Sort by:
  1. Giovanni Sartor (forthcoming). Fundamental Legal Concepts: A Teleological Characterisation. Artificial Intelligence and Law.
    No categories
    Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  2. Giovanni Sartor (forthcoming). Legal Validity: A Conceptual and Normative Analysis. Ratio Juris.
    No categories
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  3. Douglas Walton & Giovanni Sartor (2013). Teleological Justification of Argumentation Schemes. Argumentation 27 (2):111-142.
    Argumentation schemes are forms of reasoning that are fallible but correctable within a self-correcting framework. Their use provides a basis for taking rational action or for reasonably accepting a conclusion as a tentative hypothesis, but they are not deductively valid. We argue that teleological reasoning can provide the basis for justifying the use of argument schemes both in monological and dialogical reasoning. We consider how such a teleological justification, besides being inspired by the aim of directing a bounded cognizer to (...)
    Direct download (8 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  4. Giulia Andrighetto, Rosaria Conte, Eunate Mayor Villalba & Giovanni Sartor (2012). Introduction to the Special Issue: Simulation, Norms and Laws. [REVIEW] Artificial Intelligence and Law 20 (4):335-337.
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  5. Régis Riveret, Antonino Rotolo & Giovanni Sartor (2012). Probabilistic Rule-Based Argumentation for Norm-Governed Learning Agents. Artificial Intelligence and Law 20 (4):383-420.
    This paper proposes an approach to investigate norm-governed learning agents which combines a logic-based formalism with an equation-based counterpart. This dual formalism enables us to describe the reasoning of such agents and their interactions using argumentation, and, at the same time, to capture systemic features using equations. The approach is applied to norm emergence and internalisation in systems of learning agents. The logical formalism is rooted into a probabilistic defeasible logic instantiating Dung’s argumentation framework. Rules of this logic are attached (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  6. Giovanni Sartor (2012). Defeasibility in Legal Reasoning. In Jordi Ferrer Beltrán & Giovanni Battista Ratti (eds.), The Logic of Legal Requirements: Essays on Defeasibility. Oxford University Press.
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  7. Phan Minh Dung & Giovanni Sartor (2011). The Modular Logic of Private International Law. Artificial Intelligence and Law 19 (2-3):233-261.
    We provide a logical analysis of private international law, a rather esoteric, but increasingly important, domain of the law. Private international law addresses overlaps and conflicts between legal systems by distributing cases between the authorities of such systems (jurisdiction) and establishing what rules these authorities have to apply to each case (choice of law). A formal model of the resulting interactions between legal systems is proposed based on modular argumentation. It is argued that this model may also be useful for (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  8. Giovanni Sartor (2010). Doing Justice to Rights and Values: Teleological Reasoning and Proportionality. [REVIEW] Artificial Intelligence and Law 18 (2):175-215.
    This paper studies how legal choices, and in particular legislative determinations, need to consider multiple rights and values, and can be assessed accordingly. First it is argued that legal norms (and in particular constitutional right-norms) often prescribe the pursuit of goals, which may be in conflict one with another. Then a model of teleological reasoning is brought to bear on choices affecting different goals, among which those prescribed by constitutional norms. An analytical framework is provided for evaluating such choices with (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  9. Giovanni Sartor (2009). Cognitive Automata and the Law: Electronic Contracting and the Intentionality of Software Agents. [REVIEW] Artificial Intelligence and Law 17 (4):253-290.
    I shall argue that software agents can be attributed cognitive states, since their behaviour can be best understood by adopting the intentional stance. These cognitive states are legally relevant when agents are delegated by their users to engage, without users’ review, in choices based on their the agents’ own knowledge. Consequently, both with regard to torts and to contracts, legal rules designed for humans can also be applied to software agents, even though the latter do not have rights and duties (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  10. Giovanni Sartor (2009). Legal Concepts as Inferential Nodes and Ontological Categories. Artificial Intelligence and Law 17 (3):217-251.
    I shall compare two views of legal concepts: as nodes in inferential nets and as categories in an ontology (a conceptual architecture). Firstly, I shall introduce the inferential approach, consider its implications, and distinguish the mere possession of an inferentially defined concept from the belief in the concept’s applicability, which also involves the acceptance of the concept’s constitutive inferences. For making this distinction, the inferential and eliminative analysis of legal concepts proposed by Alf Ross will be connected to the views (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  11. Giovanni Sartor (2009). Legality Policies and Theories of Legality: From Bananas to Radbruch's Formula. Ratio Juris 22 (2):218-243.
    Abstract. In this paper I shall take an inferential approach to legality (legal validity), and consider how the legality of a norm can be inferred, and what can be inferred from it. In particular, I shall analyse legality policies, namely, conditionals conferring the quality of legality upon norms having certain properties, and I shall examine to what extent such conditionals need to be positivistic, so that legality is only dependant on social facts. Finally, I shall consider how legality is transmitted (...)
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  12. Henry Prakken & Giovanni Sartor (2008). A Logical Analysis of Burdens of Proof. In Hendrik Kaptein (ed.), Legal Evidence and Proof: Statistics, Stories, Logic. Ashgate.
    No categories
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  13. Rossella Rubino & Giovanni Sartor (2008). Preface. Artificial Intelligence and Law 16 (1):1-5.
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  14. Giovanni Sartor (2008). Legal Validity: An Inferential Analysis. Ratio Juris 21 (2):212-247.
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  15. Giovanni Sartor (2006). Fundamental Legal Concepts: A Formal and Teleological Characterisation. [REVIEW] Artificial Intelligence and Law 14 (1-2):101-142.
    We shall introduce a set of fundamental legal concepts, providing a definition of each of them. This set will include, besides the usual deontic modalities (obligation, prohibition and permission), the following notions: obligative rights (rights related to other’s obligations), permissive rights, erga-omnes rights, normative conditionals, liability rights, different kinds of legal powers, potestative rights (rights to produce legal results), result-declarations (acts intended to produce legal determinations), and sources of the law.
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  16. Giovanni Sartor (2005). Reasoning with Factors. Argumentation 19 (4):417-432.
    No categories
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  17. Jonathan Gelati, Antonino Rotolo, Giovanni Sartor & Guido Governatori (2004). Normative Autonomy and Normative Co-Ordination: Declarative Power, Representation, and Mandate. [REVIEW] Artificial Intelligence and Law 12 (1-2):53-81.
    In this paper we provide a formal analysis of the idea of normative co-ordination. We argue that this idea is based on the assumption that agents can achieve flexible co-ordination by conferring normative positions to other agents. These positions include duties, permissions, and powers. In particular, we explain the idea of declarative power, which consists in the capacity of the power-holder of creating normative positions, involving other agents, simply by proclaiming such positions. In addition, we account also for the concepts (...)
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  18. Henry Prakken & Giovanni Sartor (2004). The Three Faces of Defeasibility in the Law. Ratio Juris 17 (1):118-139.
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  19. Trevor J. M. Bench-Capon & Giovanni Sartor (2003). A Model of Legal Reasoning with Cases Incorporating Theories and Values. Artificial Intelligence 150 (1-2):97-143.
    Reasoning with cases has been a primary focus of those working in AI and law who have attempted to model legal reasoning. In this paper we put forward a formal model of reasoning with cases which captures many of the insights from that previous work. We begin by stating our view of reasoning with cases as a process of constructing, evaluating and applying a theory. Central to our model is a view of the relationship between cases, rules based on cases, (...)
    Translate to English
    | Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  20. Giovanni Sartor (2002). Teleological Arguments and Theory-Based Dialectics. Artificial Intelligence and Law 10 (1-3):95-112.
    This paper proposes to model legal reasoning asdialectical theory-constructiondirected by teleology. Precedents are viewed asevidence to be explained throughtheories. So, given a background of factors andvalues, the parties in a case canbuild their theories by using a set of operators,which are called theory constructors.The objective of each party is to provide theoriesthat both explain the evidence (theprecedents) and support the decision wished by thatparty. This leads to theory-basedargumentation, i.e., a dialectical exchange ofcompeting theories, which support opposedoutcomes by explaining the same (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  21. Giovanni Sartor (2000). Henning Herrestad, Formal Theories of Rights. Artificial Intelligence and Law 8 (1):93-100.
  22. Rosaria Conte, Rino Falcone & Giovanni Sartor (1999). Introduction: Agents and Norms: How to Fill the Gap? [REVIEW] Artificial Intelligence and Law 7 (1):1-15.
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  23. Lothar Philipps & Giovanni Sartor (1999). Introduction: From Legal Theories to Neural Networks and Fuzzy Reasoning. [REVIEW] Artificial Intelligence and Law 7 (2-3):115-128.
    Computational approaches to the law have frequently been characterized as being formalistic implementations of the syllogistic model of legal cognition: using insufficient or contradictory data, making analogies, learning through examples and experiences, applying vague and imprecise standards. We argue that, on the contrary, studies on neural networks and fuzzy reasoning show how AI & law research can go beyond syllogism, and, in doing that, can provide substantial contributions to the law.
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  24. Henry Prakken & Giovanni Sartor (1997). Argument-Based Extended Logic Programming with Defeasible Priorities. Journal of Applied Non-Classical Logics 7 (1-2):25-75.
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  25. Henry Prakken & Giovanni Sartor (1996). Editors' Introduction. Artificial Intelligence and Law 4 (3-4):157-161.
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  26. Giovanni Sartor (1994). A Formal Model of Legal Argumentation. Ratio Juris 7 (2):177-211.
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  27. Giovanni Sartor (1992). Normative Conflicts in Legal Reasoning. Artificial Intelligence and Law 1 (2-3):209-235.
    This article proposes a formal analysis of a fundamental aspect of legal reasoning: dealing with normative conflicts. Firstly, examples are illustrated concerning the dynamics of legal systems, the application of rules and exceptions, and the semantic indeterminacy of legal sources. Then two approaches to cope with conflicting information are presented: the preferred theories of Brewka, and the belief change functions of Alchourrón, Gärdenfors, and Makinson. The relations between those approaches are closely examined, and some aspects of a model of reasoning (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation