Using case-based reasoning to predict the outcome of construction litigation

Computer-Aided Civil and Infrastructure Engineering

Volumn 14, Issue 6, 1999, Pages 385-393

  Arditi, David ^a   Tokdemir, Onur Behzat ^a  

^a Illinois Institute of Technology   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

CONSTRUCTION INDUSTRY; DECISION MAKING; LAWS AND LEGISLATION;

CASE BASED REASONING; CONSTRUCTION LITIGATION;

COMPUTER AIDED ENGINEERING;

EID: 0032638318     PISSN: 10939687     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/0885-9507.00157     Document Type: Article

References (21)

1. Aamodt, A. & Plaza, E., Case-based reasoning: Foundational issues, methodological variations, and system approaches, AICOM, 7(1) (1994), 39-59.
2. Arditi, D., Oksay, F. E. & Tokdemir, O. B., Predicting the outcome of construction litigation using neural networks, Computer-Aided Civil and Infrastructure Engineering, 13(2) (1998), 75-81.
3. Ashley, K. D. & Rissland, E. L., A case-based approach to modeling legal expertise, IEEE Expert, 3(3) (1988), 70-7.
4. Ashley, K. D., Case-based reasoning and its implications for legal expert systems, Artificial Intelligence and Law, 1(2) (1992), 113-208.
5. Barletta, R., An introduction to case based reasoning, AI Expert, 6(8) (1991), 42-9.
6. ESTEEM, Version 1.4. Esteem Software, Inc., Cambridge City, IN, 1997.
7. Gupta, U. G., How case-based reasoning solves new problems, Interfaces, 24(6) (1994), 110-19.
8. Jukes, E., Case-based reasoning in legal case-retrieval, IEE Computing and Control Division Colloquium on Case Based Reasoning: Prospects for Applications, 10/1-10/4, 1995.
9. Loui, R. P. & Norman, J., Rationales and argument moves, Artificial Intelligence and Law, 3(3) (1995), 159-89.
10. Oksay, F. E., Predicting the Outcome of Construction Claims Using Neural Networks, thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements of the degree of Master of Science, Illinois Institute of Technology, Department of Civil Engineering, Chicago, 1995.
11. Nitta, K. & Shibasaki, M., Defeasible reasoning in Japanese criminal jurisprudence, Artificial Intelligence and Law, 5(1/2) (1997), 139-59.
12. Quinlan, J. R., Induction of decision trees, Machine Learning, 1(1) (1986), 81-106.
13. Riesbeck, C. K. & Schank, R. C., Inside Case-Based Reasoning, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Hillsdale, NJ, 1989.
14. Rissland, E. L., Skalak, D. B. & Friedman, M. T., Evaluating a legal argument program: The BankXX experiments, Artificial Intelligence and Law, 5(1/2) (1997), 1-74.
15. Skalak, D. B. & Rissland, E. L., Arguments and cases: An inevitable intertwining, Artificial Intelligence and Law, 1(1) (1992), 3-44.
16. Stottler, R. H., CBR for cost and sales prediction, AI Expert, 9(4) (1994), 25-33.
17. Tojo, S. & Nitta, K., Similarity of legal cases: From temporal relations of affairs, Artificial Intelligence and Law, 5(1/2) (1997), 161-76.
18. Tunca, A. A., Analysis of State of Illinois Appellate Court Cases Filed for the Resolution of Construction Disputes, thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements of the degree of Master of Science, Illinois Institute of Technology, Department of Civil Engineering, Chicago, 1992.
19. Watson, I. & Marir, F., Case-based reasoning: A review, The Knowledge Engineering Review, 9(4) (1994), 327-54.
20. Wolf, W. T., Bramble, B. B. & Phillips, A. E. (eds.), Construction Litigation: Strategies and Techniques, Wiley Law Publications, New York, 1989.
21. Zeleznikow, J., Stranieri, A. & Gawler, M., Project report: Split up a legal expert system which determines property division upon divorce, Artificial Intelligence and Law, 3(4) (1995), 267-75.