Artificial argument assistants for defeasible argumentation

Artificial Intelligence

Volumn 150, Issue 1-2, 2003, Pages 291-324

  Verheij, Bart ^a  

^a MAASTRICHT UNIVERSITY   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

Argumentation software; Artificial intelligence and law; Defeasible argumentation; Legal reasoning

Indexed keywords

COMPUTER SOFTWARE; KNOWLEDGE BASED SYSTEMS; LAWS AND LEGISLATION;

LEGAL REASONING;

ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE;

EID: 0142166342     PISSN: 00043702     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/S0004-3702(03)00107-3     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (55)

1. V. Aleven, Teaching case-based argumentation through a model and examples, Dissertation, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA, 1997.
2. Ashley K. Modeling Legal Argument. Reasoning with Cases and Hypotheticals. 1990;MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.
3. Barwise J., Etchemendy J. Language, Proof, and Logic. 2000;Seven Bridges Press, New York.
4. Bench-Capon T.J.M. Argument in artificial intelligence and law. Artif. Intell. Law. 5:1997;249-261.
5. Bench-Capon T.J.M., Leng P.H., Staniford G. A computer supported environment for the teaching of legal argument. J. Inform. Law Technol. (JILT). 3:1998; http://elj.warwick.ac.uk/jilt/98-3/capon.html.
6. Bench-Capon T., Sartor G. Theory based explanation of case law domains. Proc. of the 8th International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Law (ICAIL-2001), St. Louis, MO. 2001;12-21 ACM, New York.
7. Bondarenko A., Dung P.M., Kowalski R.A., Toni F. An abstract, argumentation-theoretic approach to default reasoning. Artificial Intelligence. 93:1997;63-101.
8. Chesñevar C.I., Maguitman A.G., Loui R.P. Logical models of argument. ACM Comput. Surv. 32:(4):2000;337-383.
9. Dung P.M. On the acceptability of arguments and its fundamental role in nonmonotonic reasoning, logic programming and n -person games. Artificial Intelligence. 77:1995;321-357.
10. Eemeren F.H., van Grootendorst R., Kruiger T. Argumentatietheorie. 1981;Uitgeverij Het Spectrum, Utrecht.
11. Eemeren F.H., van Grootendorst R., Kruiger T. Handbook of Argumentation Theory. A Critical Survey of Classical Backgrounds and Modern Studies. 1987;Foris Publications, Dordrecht. Translation of [10].
12. Gabbay D.M., Hogger C.J., Robinson J.A. Handbook of Logic in Artificial Intelligence and Logic Programming, Vol. 3, Nonmonotonic Reasoning and Uncertain Reasoning. 1994;Clarendon Press, Oxford.
13. van Gelder T.J. The Reason! project. The Skeptic. 21:(2):2001;9-12.
14. Gelfond M., Lifschitz V. The stable model semantics for logic programming. Kowalski R.A., Bowen K.A. Logic Programming, Proceedings of the Fifth International Conference and Symposium. 1988;1070-1080 MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.
15. Gordon T.F. The pleadings game. An Artificial Intelligence Model of Procedural Justice. 1995;Kluwer Academic, Dordrecht.
16. Gordon T.F., Karacapilidis N. The zeno argumentation framework. Proc. of the Sixth International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Law (ICAIL-97), Melbourne, Australia. 1997;10-18 ACM, New York.
17. Hage J.C. Reasoning with Rules. An Essay on Legal Reasoning and its Underlying Logic. 1997;Kluwer Academic, Dordrecht.
18. Hage J.C. Dialectical models in artificial intelligence and law. Artif. Intell. Law. 8:2000;137-172.
19. Kowalski R.A., Toni F. Abstract argumentation. Artif. Intell. Law. 4:1996;275-296.
20. Leenes R.E. Hercules of Karneades. Hard cases in recht en rechtsinformatica. 1998;Twente University Press, Enschede.
21. A.R. Lodder, DiaLaw - On legal justification and dialog games, Dissertation, Universiteit Maastricht, Maastricht, 1998.
22. Lodder A.R., Verheij B. Opportunities of computer-mediated legal argument in education. Proceedings of the BILETA Conference, Dublin. 1998.
23. Lodder A.R. A simple model to structure the information of parties in online ADR. Proc. of the 8th International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Law (ICAIL-2001), St. Louis, MO. 2001;233-234 ACM, New York.
24. Loui R.P. Process and policy: Resource-bounded non-demonstrative reasoning. Comput. Intell. 14:(1):1998;1-38.
25. Loui R.P., Norman J., Altepeter J., Pinkard D., Craven D., Linsday J., Foltz M. Progress on Room 5. A testbed for public interactive semi-formal legal argumentation. Proc. of the Sixth International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Law (ICAIL-97), Melbourne, Australia. 1997;207-214 ACM, New York.
26. Marshall C.C. Representing the structure of a legal argument. Proc. of the Second International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Law (ICAIL-89), Vancouver, BC. 1989;121-127 ACM, New York.
27. Nute D. Defeasible reasoning: A philosophical analysis in Prolog. Fetzer J.H. Aspects of Artificial Intelligence. 1988;251-288 Kluwer Academic, Dordrecht.
28. Pollock J.L. Defeasible reasoning. Cognitive Sci. 11:1987;481-518.
29. Pollock J.L. Cognitive Carpentry: A Blueprint for How to Build a Person. 1995;MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.
30. Prakken H. Logical Tools for Modelling Legal Argument. A Study of Defeasible Reasoning in Law. 1997;Kluwer Academic, Dordrecht.
31. Prakken H., Sartor G. A dialectical model of assessing conflicting arguments in legal reasoning. Artif. Intell. Law. 4:1996;331-368.
32. Prakken H., Sartor G. Modelling reasoning with precedents in a formal dialogue game. Artif. Intell. Law. 6:1998;231-287.
33. Prakken H., Vreeswijk G.A.W. Logics for defeasible argumentation. Gabbay D.M., Guenthner F. Handbook of Philosophical Logic, Vol. 4. 2nd Edition: 2002;218-319 Kluwer Academic, Dordrecht.
34. Read S. Thinking about Logic. An Introduction to the Philosophy of Logic. 1995;Oxford University Press, Oxford.
35. Reed C., Walton D. Applications of argumentation schemes. OSSA 2001: Argumentation and its Applications. 2001;The Ontario Society for the Study of Argumentation.
36. Reiter R. A logic for default reasoning. Artificial Intelligence. 13:1980;81-132.
37. Rissland E.L., Skalak D.B. CABARET: Rule interpretation in a hybrid architecture. Internat. J. Man-Machine Stud. 34:(6):1991;839-887.
38. Rittel H.W.J., Webber M.M. Dilemmas in a general theory of planning. Policy Sci. 4:1973.
39. Simari G.R., Loui R.P. A mathematical treatment of defeasible reasoning and its applications. Artificial Intelligence. 53:1992;125-157.
40. Stranieri A., Zeleznikow J. Argumentation structures for knowledge management. Proceedings of the Third International Conference on the Practical Applications of Knowledge Management (PAKeM-2000), Manchester. 2000;51-69 The Practical Application Company Ltd, Blackpool, UK.
41. Suthers D., Weiner A., Connelly J., Paolucci M. Belvedere: Engaging students in critical discussion of science and public policy issues. Proceedings of the 7th World Conference on Artificial Intelligence in Education (AI-Ed 95), Charlottesville, VA. 1995;266-273.
42. Toulmin S.E. The Uses of Argument. 1958;Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
43. A. Veerman, Computer-supported collabrative argumentation through argumentation, Dissertation, Universiteit Utrecht, Utrecht, 2000.
44. B. Verheij, Rules, reasons, arguments. Formal studies of argumentation and defeat, Dissertation, Universiteit Maastricht, 1996.
45. Verheij B. ARGUE! - An implemented system for computer-mediated defeasible argumentation. La Poutré H., van den Herik J. NAIC'98. Proceedings of the Tenth Netherlands/Belgium Conference on Artificial Intelligence. 1998;57-66 CWI, Amsterdam.
46. Verheij B. ARGUMED - A template-based argument mediation system for lawyers. Hage J.C., Bench-Capon T.J.M., Koers A.W., de Vey Mestdagh C.N.J., Grütters C.A.F.M. Legal Knowledge Based Systems. JURIX: The Eleventh Conference. 1998;113-130 Gerard Noodt Instituut, Nijmegen.
47. Verheij B. Automated argument assistance for lawyers. Proc. of the Seventh International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Law (ICAIL-99), Oslo, Norway. 1999;43-52 ACM, New York.
48. Verheij B. DEFLOG - A logic of dialectical justification and defeat, Manuscript. See. http://www.rechten.unimaas.nl/metajuridica/verheij/publications.htm:2000;
49. Verheij B. Dialectical argumentation as a heuristic for courtroom decision-making. van Koppen P.J., Roos N.H.M. Rationality, Information and Progress in Law and Psychology. Liber Amicorum Hans F. Crombag. 2000;203-226 Metajuridica Publications, Maastricht.
50. Verheij B. Evaluating arguments based on Toulmin's scheme. Proc. OSSA 2001: Argumentation and its Applications. 2001;The Ontario Society for the Study of Argumentation.
51. Verheij B. Legal decision making as dialectical theory construction with argumentation schemes. Proc. of the 8th International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Law (ICAIL-2001), St. Louis, MO. 2001;225-226 ACM, New York.
52. Verheij B. DEFLOG: On the logical interpretation of prima facie justified assumptions. J. Logic Comput. 13:(3):2003;319-346.
53. B. Verheij, Virtual Arguments. On the Design of Argument Assistants for Lawyers and other Arguers, TMC Asser Press, Hague, submitted for publication.
54. Vreeswijk G. IACAS: An implementation of Chisholm's principles of knowledge. Dutch/German Workshop on Nonmonotonic Reasoning. Proceedings of the Second Workshop. 1995;225-234 Universiteit Utrecht, Utrecht.
55. Vreeswijk G. Abstract argumentation systems. Artificial Intelligence. 90:1997;225-279.