Burden of proof in deliberation dialogs

Lecture Notes in Computer Science (including subseries Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence and Lecture Notes in Bioinformatics)

Volumn 6057 LNAI, Issue , 2010, Pages 1-22

  Walton, Douglas ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF WINDSOR   (Canada)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

BURDEN OF PROOF; FORMAL MODEL;

MULTI AGENT SYSTEMS;

EID: 78650479454     PISSN: 03029743     EISSN: 16113349     Source Type: Book Series    
DOI: 10.1007/978-3-642-12805-9_1     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (28)

1. Atkinson, K., Bench-Capon, T.J.M., McBurney, P.: A Dialogue Game Protocol for Multi-Agent Argument over Proposals for Action. Autonomous Agents and Multi-Agent Systems 11(2), 153-171 (2005). (Pubitemid 41240135)
2. Atkinson, K., Bench-Capon, T.J.M., McBurney, P.: Computational Representation of Practical Argument. Synthese 152, 157-206 (2006).
3. Atkinson, K., Bench-Capon, T.: Argumentation and Standards of Proof. In: Winkels, R. (ed.) Proceedings of the Eleventh International Conference on AI and Law (ICAIL 2007), pp. 107-116. ACM Press, New York (2007).
4. Bailey, R.: Precautionary Tale (April 1999), http://www.reason.com/news/ show/30977.html.
5. Bench-Capon, T.J.M.: Persuasion in Practical Argument Using Value-based Argumentation Frameworks. Journal of Logic and Computation 13, 429-448 (2003).
6. Freestone, D., Hey, E.: Origins and Developments of the Precautionary Principle. In: Freestone, D., Hey, E. (eds.) The Precautionary Principle and International Law, pp. 3-15. Kluwer Law International, The Hague (1996).
7. Gordon, T.F., Karacapilidis, N.: The Zero Argumentation Framework. In: Branting, L.K. (ed.) Proceedings of the Sixth International Conference on AI and Law, pp. 10-18. ACM Press, New York (1997).
8. Gordon, T.F., Prakken, H., Walton, D.: The Carneades Model of Argument and Burden of Proof. Artificial Intelligence 171, 875-896 (2007).
9. Gordon, T.F., Walton, D.: Proof Burdens and Standards. In: Rahwan, I., Simari, G. (eds.) Argumentation in Artificial Intelligence. Springer, Heidelberg (2009).
10. Hathcock, J.N.: The Precautionary Principle - an Impossible Burden of Proof for New Products. Ag. Bio. Forum. 3, 255-258 (2000).
11. Kauffeld, F.: The Ordinary Practice of Presuming and Presumption with Special Attention to Veracity and Burden of Proof. In: van Eemeren, F.H., Blair, J.A., Willard, C.A., Snoek Henkemans, A.F. (eds.) Anyone Who Has a View: Theoretical Contributions to the Study of Argumentation, pp. 136-146. Kluwer, Dordrecht (2003).
12. Lascher, E.L.: The Politics of Automobile Insurance Reform: Ideas, Institutions, and Public Policy in North America. Georgetown University Press, Washington (1999).
13. McBurney, P., Parsons, S.: Chance Discovery Using Dialectical Argumentation. In: Terano, T., Nishida, T., Namatame, A., Tsumoto, S., Ohsawa, Y., Washio, T. (eds.) JSAI-WS 2001. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 2253, pp. 414-424. Springer, Heidelberg (2001).
14. McBurney, P., Hitchcock, D., Parsons, S.: The Eightfold Way of Deliberation Dialogue. International Journal of Intelligent Systems 22, 95-132 (2007).
15. Girela, M.A.R.: Dangerous Interpretations of the Precautionary Principle and the Foundational Values of the European Food Law: Risk versus Risk. Journal of Food Law and Policy 4 (2008).
16. Prakken, H.: Formal Systems for Persuasion Dialogue. The Knowledge Engineering Review 21, 163-188 (2006).
17. Prakken, H., Reed, C., Walton, D.: Dialogues about the Burden of Proof. In: Proceedings of the Tenth International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Law, pp. 115-124. ACM, New York (2005).
18. Prakken, H., Sartor, G.: Presumptions and Burdens of Proof. Legal Knowledge and Information Systems: JURIX 2006. In: van Engers, T.M. (ed.) The Nineteenth Annual Conference, pp. 21-30. IOS Press, Amsterdam (2006).
19. Prakken, H., Sartor, G.: Formalising Arguments about the Burden of Persuasion. In: Proceedings of the Eleventh International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Law, pp. 97-106. ACM Press, New York (2007).
20. Prakken, H., Sartor, G.: A Logical Analysis of Burdens of Proof. In: Kapitein, H., Prakken, H., Verheij, B. (eds.) Legal Evidence and Proof: Statistics, Stories, Logic, Applied Legal Philosophy Series. Ashgate Publishing, Aldershot, pp. 223- 253 (2009).
21. Reed, C., Rowe, G.: Araucaria: Software for Argument Analysis, Diagramming and Representation. International Journal on Artificial Intelligence Tools 14, 961-980 (2004).
22. Tang, Y., Parsons, S.: Argumentation-Based Multi-agent Dialogues for Deliberation. In: Parsons, S., Maudet, N., Moraitis, P., Rahwan, I. (eds.) ArgMAS 2005. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 4049, pp. 229-244. Springer, Heidelberg (2006).
23. Walton, D.: Dialog Theory for Critical Argumentation. John Benjamins, Amsterdam (2007).
24. Walton, D.: How to Make and Defend a Proposal in Deliberation Dialogue. Artificial Intelligence and Law 14, 177-239 (2006).
25. Walton, D., Krabbe, E.C.W.: Commitment in Dialogue. State University of New York Press, Albany (1995).
26. Walton, D., Atkinson, K., Bench-Capon, T.J.M., Wyner, A., Cartwright, D.: Argumentation in the Framework of Deliberation Dialogue. In: Bjola, C., Kornprobst, M. (eds.) Argumentation and Global Governance (2009).
27. Walton, D., Reed, C., Macagno, F.: Argumentation Schemes. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (2008).
28. Wigmore, J.H.: A Student's Textbook of the Law of Evidence. The Foundation Press, Chicago (1935).