Story schemes for argumentation about the facts of a crime

AAAI Fall Symposium - Technical Report

Volumn FS-10-04, Issue , 2010, Pages 6-13

  Bex, Floris J ^a   Verheij, Bart ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF DUNDEE   (United Kingdom)

^b UNIVERSITY OF GRONINGEN   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

COMPUTATION THEORY; DECISION MAKING; DECISION THEORY; SOFTWARE TESTING;

ARGUMENTATION SCHEMES; COMMONSENSE KNOWLEDGE; DECISION MAKERS; RESEARCH ISSUES; SENSE MAKING;

SOFTWARE PROTOTYPING;

EID: 79960122347     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Conference Proceeding    
DOI: None     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (28)

1. nd edition, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
2. Atkinson, K., Bench-Capon, T., and McBurney, P. (2006) computational representation of practical argument. Synthese 152:2, 157-206. (Pubitemid 44510926)
3. Bex, F.J. 2009a. Analysing stories using schemes. In Kaptein, H., Prakken, H. and Verheij B. (eds.), Legal Evidence and Proof: Statistics, Stories, Logic, 93-116, Ashgate Publishing, Aldershot.
4. Bex, F.J. 2011. Arguments, Stories and Criminal Evidence. A Formal Hybrid Theory. Law and Philosophy Series vol. 92, Springer, Dordrecht.
5. Bex, F.J., Bench-Capon, T., and Atkinson, K. 2009b. Did he jump or was he pushed? Abductive practical reasoning. Artificial Intelligence and Law. 17 (2), 79-99.
6. Bex, F.J., Braak, S.W. van den, Oostendorp, H. van, Prakken, H., Verheij, B., and Vreeswijk, G. 2007. Sense-making software for crime investigation: how to combine stories and arguments? Law, Probability and Risk 6: 145-168.
7. Bex, F.J., Prakken, H., Reed, C. and Walton D. 2003. Towards a formal account of reasoning about evidence: argumentation schemes and generalisations. Artificial Intelligence and Law 11:125-165. (Pubitemid 40672192)
8. Braak, S.W. van den. 2010. Sensemaking Software for Crime Analysis. Doctoral dissertation, Department of Information and Computing Sciences, Utrecht University.
9. Cohen, L.J. 1977. The Probable and The Provable, Oxford University Press, Oxford.
10. Heuer, R. J. 1999. Psychology of Intelligence Analysis. Center for the Study of Intelligence, Central Intelligence Agency.
11. Moens, M.-F., Boiy, E., Palau, R.M., and Reed, C. 2007. Automatic Detection of Arguments in Legal Texts. Proceedings of the International Conference on AI & Law (ICAIL-2007), Stanford, CA, pp 225-230.
12. Pennington, N., and Hastie, R. 1993. Reasoning in explanation-based decision making. Cognition 49:1-2, 123-163.
13. Prakken, H. 2010. On the nature of argument schemes. Festschrift for Douglas Walton.
14. Prakken, H., and Vreeswijk, G. 2002. Logics for defeasible argumentation. In Goebel, R. and Guenthner, F. (eds.), Handbook of Philosophical Logic, 219-318, Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht.
15. Reed, C., and Rowe, G. 2004. Araucaria: Software for Argument Analysis, Diagramming and Representation. International Journal of AI Tools 13 (4), pp. 961-980.
16. Reed, C., Walton, D. and Macagno, F. 2007. Argument diagramming in logic, law and artificial intelligence. Knowledge Engineering Review, 22:1, pp 87-109.
17. Rumelhart, D.E. 1975. Notes on a schema for stories. In Bobrow, D. G. and Collins, A. (eds.), Representation and Understanding: Studies in Cognitive Science, Academic Press, New York (New York).
18. Schank, R.C. 1986. Explanations Patterns: Understanding Mechanically and Creatively, Lawrence Erlbaum, Hillsdale (New Jersey).
19. Schank, R.C. and Abelson, R.P. 1977. Scripts, Plans, Goals and Understanding: an Inquiry into Human Knowledge Structures, Lawrence Erlbaum, Hillsdale (New Jersey).
20. Toulmin, S.E. 1958. The Uses of Argument, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
21. Verheij, B. 2003. Dialectical Argumentation with Argumentation Schemes: An Approach to Legal Logic. Artificial Intelligence and Law 11 (1-2), pp. 167-195.
22. Verheij, B. 2009. The Toulmin Argument Model in Artificial Intelligence. Or: how semi-formal, defeasible argumentation schemes creep into logic. Argumentation in Artificial Intelligence (eds. Rahwan, L, & Simari, G.), 219-238. Dordrecht: Springer.
23. Verheij, B., and Bex, F.J. 2009. Accepting the truth of a story about the facts of a criminal case. In Kaptein, H., Prakken, H., and Verheij, B. (eds.), 161-193, Legal Evidence and Proof: Statistics, Stories, Logic, Ashgate, Aldershot.
24. Wagenaar, W.A., Koppen, P.J. van, and Crombag, H.F.M. (1993) Anchored Narratives: The Psychology of Criminal Evidence, St. Martin's Press, New York (New York).
25. Walton, D. 1996. Argumentation Schemes for Presumptive Reasoning, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah (New Jersey).
26. Walton, D. 2002. Legal Argumentation and Evidence, Penn. State University Press, University Park (Pennsylvania).
27. Walton, D. Reed C. and Macagno F. 2008. Argumentation schemes. Cambridge University Press.
28. nd edition, Little, Brown and Company, Boston, MA