Reasoning with textual cases

Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence (Subseries of Lecture Notes in Computer Science)

Volumn 3620, Issue , 2005, Pages 137-151

  Brüninghaus, Stefanie ^a   Ashley, Kevin D ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

KNOWLEDGE BASED SYSTEMS; LEARNING ALGORITHMS; PERFORMANCE;

CLASSIFICATION BASED METHODS; MULTIPLE LEARNING ALGORITHMS;

INDEXING (OF INFORMATION);

EID: 26944478571     PISSN: 03029743     EISSN: None     Source Type: Conference Proceeding    
DOI: 10.1007/11536406_13     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (20)

1. Aleven, V. 2003. Using Background Knowledge in Case-Based Legal Reasoning: A Computational Model and an Intelligent Learning Environment. Artificial Intelligence 150(1-2):183-237.
2. Ashley, K., and Brüninghaus, S. 2003. A Predictive Role for Intermediate Legal Concepts. In Proc. 16th Annual Conference on Legal Knowledge and Information Systems.
3. Ashley, K. 1990. Modeling Legal Argument, Reasoning with Cases and Hypotheticals. MIT-Press.
4. Brüninghaus, S., and Ashley, K. 1999. Bootstrapping Case Base Development with Annotated Case Summmaries. In Proc. 3rd International Conference on Case-Based Reasoning.
5. Brüninghaus, S., and Ashley, K. D. 2001. The Role of Information Extraction for Textual CBR. In Proc. 4th International Conference on Case-Based Reasoning.
6. Brüninghaus, S., and Ashley, K. D. 2003. Combining Case-Based and Model-Based Reasoning for Predicting the Outcome of Legal Cases. In Proc. 5th International Conference on Case-Based Reasoning.
7. Burke, R.; Hammond, K.; Kulyukin, V.; Lytinen, S.; Tomuro, N.; and Schonberg, S. 1997. Question-Answering from Frequently-Asked Question Files: Experiences with the FAQ-Finder System. AI Magazine 18(1):57-66.
8. Burke, R. 1998. Defining the Opportunities for Textual CBR. In Proc. AAAI-98 Workshop on Textual Case-Based Reasoning.
9. Cardie, C., and Howe, N. 1997. Improving Minority Class Prediction Using Case-Specific Feature Weights. In Proc. 14th International Conference on Machine Learning.
10. Cohen, P. 1995. Empirical Methods for Artificial Intelligence. MIT-Press.
11. Cunningham, C.; Weber, R.; Proctor, J. M.; Fowler, C.; and Murphy, M. 2004. Investigating Graphs in Textual Case-Based Reasoning. In Proc. 7th European Conference on Case-Based Reasoning.
12. Daelemans, W.; Zavrel, J.; van der Sloot, K.; and van den Bosch, A. 2004. TiMBL: Tilburg Memory Based Learner, version 5.02. http://ilk.kub.nl/software. html.
13. Daniels, J., and Rissland, E. 1997. Finding Legally Relevant Passages in Case Opinions. In Proc. 6th International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Law.
14. Dietterich, T. 1996. Statistical Tests for Comparing Supervised Classification Learning Algorithms. Oregon State University Technical Report.
15. Gupta, K., and Aha, D. W. 2004. Towards Acquiring Case Indexing Taxonomies from Text. In Proc. 6th International Florida Artificial Intelligence Research Society Conference.
16. Lenz, M. 1999. Case Retreival Nets as a Model for Building Flexible Information Systems. Ph.D. Dissertation, Humboldt University, Berlin, Germany.
17. McCallum, A. K. 2004. Bow. A toolkit for statistical language modeling, text retrieval, classification and clustering, http://www.cs.cmu.edu/~mccallum/ bow.
18. Riloff, E. 2003. From Manual Knowledge Engineering to Bootstrapping: Progress in Information Extraction and NLP. Invited Talk at the Fifth International Conference on Case-Based Reasoning (ICCBR-03), http://www.iccbr.org/iccbr03/invited.html.
19. Rose, D. 1994. A Symbolic and Connectionist Approach to Legal Information Retrieval. Hills-dale, NJ: Lawrence Earlbaum Publishers.
20. Salzberg, S. 1997. On Comparing Classifiers: Pitfalls to Avoid and a Recommended Approach. Data Mining and Knowledge Discovery 1(3):317-328.