A model of argumentation and its application to legal reasoning

Artificial Intelligence and Law 4 (3-4):163-197 (1996)

Abstract
We present a computational model of dialectical argumentation that could serve as a basis for legal reasoning. The legal domain is an instance of a domain in which knowledge is incomplete, uncertain, and inconsistent. Argumentation is well suited for reasoning in such weak theory domains. We model argument both as information structure, i.e., argument units connecting claims with supporting data, and as dialectical process, i.e., an alternating series of moves by opposing sides. Our model includes burden of proof as a key element, indicating what level of support must be achieved by one side to win the argument. Burden of proof acts as move filter, turntaking mechanism, and termination criterion, eventually determining the winner of an argument. Our model has been implemented in a computer program. We demonstrate the model by considering program output for two examples previously discussed in the artificial intelligence and legal reasoning literature.
Keywords argumentation  legal reasoning  burden of proof
Categories (categorize this paper)
DOI 10.1007/BF00118492
Options
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

Our Archive


Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 39,062
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

The Uses of Argument.Stephen E. Toulmin - 1958 - Cambridge University Press.
Defeasible Reasoning.John L. Pollock - 1987 - Cognitive Science 11 (4):481-518.

View all 10 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

Comparing Alternatives in the Law.Jaap Hage - 2004 - Artificial Intelligence and Law 12 (3):181-225.

View all 7 citations / Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Defeasible Reasoning in Japanese Criminal Jurisprudence.Katsumi Nitta & Masato Shibasaki - 1997 - Artificial Intelligence and Law 5 (1-2):139-159.
Legal Practices and the Reason of the Law.Kurt Nutting - 2002 - Argumentation 16 (1):111-133.
A Formal Model of Adjudication Dialogues.Henry Prakken - 2008 - Artificial Intelligence and Law 16 (3):305-328.
Law, Logic, Rhetoric: A Procedural Model of Legal Argumentation.Arno R. Lodder - 2004 - In S. Rahman (ed.), Logic, Epistemology, and the Unity of Science. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers. pp. 569--588.
Normative Conflicts in Legal Reasoning.Giovanni Sartor - 1992 - Artificial Intelligence and Law 1 (2-3):209-235.
A Theory of Legal Reasoning and a Logic to Match.Jaap Hage - 1996 - Artificial Intelligence and Law 4 (3-4):199-273.

Analytics

Added to PP index
2009-01-28

Total views
59 ( #121,918 of 2,320,272 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
4 ( #356,990 of 2,320,272 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Monthly downloads

My notes

Sign in to use this feature