Formalising argumentative story-based analysis of evidence

Proceedings of the International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Law

Volumn , Issue , 2007, Pages 1-10

  Bex, F J ^a   Prakken, H ^a   Verheij, B ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF GRONINGEN   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

Abductive reasoning; Argumentation; Inference to the best explanation; Legal evidence; Stories

Indexed keywords

ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE; CASE BASED REASONING; MATHEMATICAL MODELS;

ABDUCTIVE REASONING; ARGUMENTATION; LEGAL EVIDENCE; STORIES;

INFORMATION ANALYSIS;

EID: 34548023926     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Conference Proceeding    
DOI: 10.1145/1276318.1276320     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (26)

1. nd edition, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
2. Bex, F. J., Prakken, H., Reed, C., and Walton, D. N. (2003) Towards a formal account of reasoning about evidence: argumentation schemes and generalisations. Artificial Intelligence and Law 11, pp. 125 - 165.
3. Bex, F.J., Prakken, H. and Verheij, B. (2006) Anchored Narratives in Reasoning about Evidence. In T.M. van Engers (ed.), Legal Knowledge and Information Systems. JURIX 2006: The Nineteenth Annual Conference, pp. 11-20, IOS Press, Amsterdam.
4. Van den Braak, S.W., & Vreeswijk, G.A.W. (2006), AVER,: Argument visualization for evidential reasoning. In T.M. van Engers (ed.), Legal Knowledge and Information Systems. JURIX 2006: The Nineteenth Annual Conference, pp. 151, 156, IOS Press, Amsterdam.
5. nd edition, Contact, Amsterdam. English edition: Wagenaar, W.A., Koppen, P.J. van & Crombag, H.F.M. (1993), Anchored Narratives. The Psychology of Criminal Evidence. London: Harvester Wheatsheaf.
6. Dung, P.M. (1995), On the acceptability of arguments and its fundamental role in nonmonotonic reasoning, logic programming, and n-person games. Artificial Intelligence 77, pp. 321-357.
7. Hage, J. C. (1997). Reasoning with Rules. An Essay on Legal Reasoning and Its Underlying Logic. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht.
8. Hage, J. and Verheij, B. (1999). The law as a dynamic interconnected system of states of affairs: a legal top ontology. International Journal of Human- Computer Studies 51, pp.1043 - 1077.
9. Keppens, J. and Schafer, B. (2006) Knowledge based crime scenario modelling. Expert Systems with Applications 30: pp. 203 - 222.
10. Lucas, P. (1997). Symbolic diagnosis and its formalisation. The Knowledge Engineering Review 12, pp. 109 - 146.
11. Pearl, J. (1988) Embracing Causality in Default Reasoning. Artificial Intelligence 35, pp. 259 - 271.
12. Pennington, N. and Hastie, R., (1993) The story model for juror decision making. In Hastie, R. (eds.), Inside the Juror, The Psychology of Juror Decision Making, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
13. Pollock, J. (1995) Cognitive Carpentry: A Blueprint for How to Build a Person, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.
14. Poole, D. (1998) Learning, Bayesian Probability, Graphical Models, and Abduction, In Flach, P. and Kakas, A.(eds), Abduction and Induction: essays on their relation and integration, Kluwer, 1998.
15. de Poot, C. J., Bokhorst, R. J., Van Koppen, P. J., and Muller, E. R. (2004), Rechercheportret - Over dilemma 's in de opsporing (Investigation portrait about dilemmas in investigation), Kluwer, Alphen a.d. Rijn.
16. Prakken, H. and Vreeswijk, G. (2002) Logical systems for defeasible argumentation. In D. Gabbay and F. Guenthner (eds.), Handbook of Philosophical Logic, second edition, Vol 4, pp. 219-318. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht etc.
17. Schank, R. C., and Abelson, R. P. (1977) Scripts, Plans, Goals and Understanding: an Inquiry into Human Knowledge Structures, Lawrence Erlbaum, Hillsdale, NJ.
18. Thagard, P. (2005) Testimony, Credibility and Explanatory Coherence. Erkenntnis 63, pp. 295 - 316.
19. Thagard, P. and Shelley, C. P. (1997). Abductive reasoning: Logic, visual thinking, and coherence. In M.-L. Dalla Chiara et al. (Eds.), Logic and scientific methods, pp. 413-427, Kluwer, Dordrecht.
20. Tillers, P. and Schum, D. A. (1991) A Theory of Preliminary Fact Investigation. University of California Davis Law Review 24, pp. 931 - 1012.
21. Toulmin, S. E. (2003) The Uses of Argument, Updated Edition, in 1958), Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
22. Twining, W. L. (1994) Rethinking Evidence: Exploratory Essays, Northwestern University Press, Evanston, IL
23. Verheij, B. (2003) Dialectical argumentation with argumentation schemes: An approach to legal logic. Artificial Intelligence and Law 11, pp.167 - 195.
24. Verheij, B. (2005) Virtual Arguments. On the Design of Argument Assistants for Lawyers and Other Arguers. T.M.C. Asser Press, The Hague.
25. Walton, D.N. (1996) Argumentation Schemes for Presumptive Reasoning, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah, N.J.
26. Wigmore, J. H. (1931) The Principles of Judicial Proof or the Process of Proof as Given by Logic, Psychology, and General Experience, and Illustrated in Judicial Trials, 2nd edition, Little, Brown and Company, Boston, MA