Using argument schemes for hypothetical reasoning in law

&
Artificial Intelligence and Law 18 (2):153-174 (2010)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

This paper studies the use of hypothetical and value-based reasoning in US Supreme-Court cases concerning the United States Fourth Amendment. Drawing upon formal AI & Law models of legal argument a semi-formal reconstruction is given of parts of the Carney case, which has been studied previously in AI & law research on case-based reasoning. As part of the reconstruction, a semi-formal proposal is made for extending the formal AI & Law models with forms of metalevel reasoning in several argument schemes. The result is compared with Rissland’s (1989) analysis in terms of dimensions and Ashley’s (2008) analysis in terms of his process model of legal argument with hypotheticals

Categories

Keywords

Reprint years

DOI

10.1007/s10506-010-9094-8

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 93,990

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

My notes

Similar books and articles

Teaching a process model of legal argument with hypotheticals.Kevin D. Ashley - 2009 - Artificial Intelligence and Law 17 (4):321-370.
Precedent and Legal Analogy.Kevin D. Ashley - 2011 - In Colin Aitken, Amalia Amaya, Kevin D. Ashley, Carla Bagnoli, Giorgio Bongiovanni, Bartosz Brożek, Cristiano Castelfranchi, Samuele Chilovi, Marcello Di Bello, Jaap Hage, Kenneth Einar Himma, Lewis A. Kornhauser, Emiliano Lorini, Fabrizio Macagno, Andrei Marmor, J. J. Moreso, Veronica Rodriguez-Blanco, Antonino Rotolo, Giovanni Sartor, Burkhard Schafer, Chiara Valentini, Bart Verheij, Douglas Walton & Wojciech Załuski (eds.), Handbook of Legal Reasoning and Argumentation. Dordrecht, Netherland: Springer Verlag. pp. 673-710.
Defeasible reasoning in japanese criminal jurisprudence.Katsumi Nitta & Masato Shibasaki - 1997 - Artificial Intelligence and Law 5 (1-2):139-159.
Representing Popov v Hayashi with dimensions and factors.T. J. M. Bench-Capon - 2012 - Artificial Intelligence and Law 20 (1):15-35.
AI & Law, Logic and Argument Schemes.Henry Prakken - 2005 - Argumentation 19 (3):303-320.
Argument in artificial intelligence and law.Trevor Bench-Capon - 1997 - Artificial Intelligence and Law 5 (4):249-261.
Formalising ordinary legal disputes: A case study. [REVIEW]Henry Prakken - 2008 - Artificial Intelligence and Law 16 (4):333-359.
Towards a formal account of reasoning about evidence: Argumentation schemes and generalisations. [REVIEW]Floris Bex, Henry Prakken, Chris Reed & Douglas Walton - 2003 - Artificial Intelligence and Law 11 (2-3):125-165.
Towards a Formal Account of Reasoning about Evidence: Argumentation Schemes and Generalisations.Bex Floris, Prakken Henry, Reed Chris & Walton Douglas - 2003 - Artificial Intelligence and Law 11 (2-3):125-165.
Formalizing value-guided argumentation for ethical systems design.Bart Verheij - 2016 - Artificial Intelligence and Law 24 (4):387-407.

Analytics

Added to PP
2010-11-17

Downloads
134 (#137,014)

6 months
17 (#203,103)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Citations of this work

Argumentation schemes in AI and Law.Katie Atkinson & Trevor Bench-Capon - 2021 - Argument and Computation 12 (3):417-434.
HYPO's legacy: introduction to the virtual special issue.T. J. M. Bench-Capon - 2017 - Artificial Intelligence and Law 25 (2):205-250.

View all 23 citations / Add more citations

References found in this work

Counterfactuals.David K. Lewis - 1973 - Malden, Mass.: Blackwell.
Counterfactuals.David Lewis - 1973 - Foundations of Language 13 (1):145-151.
Counterfactuals.David Lewis - 1973 - Tijdschrift Voor Filosofie 36 (3):602-605.
Counterfactuals.David Lewis - 1973 - Philosophy of Science 42 (3):341-344.

View all 16 references / Add more references