A tool in modelling disagreement in law

Subscribe (Full Service)


	Search: The ACM Digital Library The Guide

	Feedback

A tool in modelling disagreement in law: preferring the most specific argument

Full text

Pdf (845 KB)

Source

International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Law archive
Proceedings of the 3rd international conference on Artificial intelligence and law table of contents

Oxford, England

Pages: 165 - 174

Year of Publication: 1991

ISBN:0-89791-399-X

Author

Henry Prakken

Computer/Law Institute, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam

Sponsor

SIGART: ACM Special Interest Group on Artificial Intelligence

Publisher

ACM New York, NY, USA

Bibliometrics

Downloads (6 Weeks): 2, Downloads (12 Months): 7, Citation Count: 8

Additional Information:

references cited by index terms collaborative colleagues

Tools and Actions:	Request Permissions Review this Article Save this Article to a Binder Display Formats: BibTeX EndNote ACM Ref

DOI Bookmark:	Use this link to bookmark this Article: http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/112646.112666 What is a DOI?

REFERENCES

Note: OCR errors may be found in this Reference List extracted from the full text article. ACM has opted to expose the complete List rather than only correct and linked references.

	Ashley and Rissland 1987	E. L. Rissland , K. D. Ashley, A case-based system for trade secrets law, Proceedings of the 1st international conference on Artificial intelligence and law, p.60-66, May 27-29, 1997, Boston, Massachusetts, United States [doi>10.1145/41735.41743]
	Brewka 1989	G. Brewka, Preferred subtheories: an extended logical framework for default reasoning. Proc. IJCAI 1989, 1043-8.
	Delgrande 1987	James R. Delgrande, An approach to default reasoning based on a first-order conditional logic: revised report, Artificial Intelligence, v.36 n.1, p.63-90, August 1988 [doi>10.1016/0004-3702(88)90079-3]
	Etherington and Reiter 1983	D.W. Etherington and R. Reiter, On inheritance hierarchies with exceptions. Proc. AAAI 1983, 104-108.
	Gardner 1987	Anne von der Lieth Gardner, An artificial intelligence approach to legal reasoning, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, 1987
	Gordon 1989	T. F. Gordon, Issue spotting in a system for searching interpretation spaces, Proceedings of the 2nd international conference on Artificial intelligence and law, p.157-164, May 1989, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada [doi>10.1145/74014.74035]
	Loui 1987	R.P. Loui, Defeat among arguments: a system of defeasible inference. Computational Intelligence, Vol 3, no 2 (1987), 100-106.
	McCarty 1988	L.T. McCarty, Programming directly in a nonmonotonic logic. Technical Report LRP-TR- 21, Computer Science Department, Rutgers University, September 1988.
	Nute 1989	D. Nute, Defeasible reasoning: a philosophical analysis in Prolog. In J.H. Fetzer (ed)' Aspects of Artificial Intelligence. Kluwer Ac. Publ., 1988, 251-288.
	Oskamp et. al. 1989	A. Oskamp , R. F. Walker , J. A. Schrickx , P. H. van den Berg, PROLEXS divide and rule: a legal application, Proceedings of the 2nd international conference on Artificial intelligence and law, p.54-62, May 1989, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada [doi>10.1145/74014.74022]
	Poole 1985	D.L. Poole, On the comparison of theories: Preferring the most specific explanation. Proc. IJCAI 1985, 144-147.
	Poole 1988	David Poole, A logical framework for default reasoning, Artificial Intelligence, v.36 n.1, p.27-47, August 1988 [doi>10.1016/0004-3702(88)90077-X]
	Prakken 1991	H. Prakkon, A formal theory about preferring the most specific argument. Research report Dept. of mathematics and computer science, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam: to appear 1991.
	Reiter 1980	R. Reiter, A logic for default reasoning. Artificial Intelligence 13 (1980), 81-132.
	Routen 1989	T. Routen, Hierarchically organised formalisations, Proceedings of the 2nd international conference on Artificial intelligence and law, p.242-250, May 1989, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada [doi>10.1145/74014.74045]
	Touretzky 1986	David S. Touretzky, The mathematics of inheritance systems, Morgan Kaufmann Publishers Inc., San Francisco, CA, 1986

CITED BY 8

	Henry Prakken, A logical framework for modelling legal argument, Proceedings of the 4th international conference on Artificial intelligence and law, p.1-9, June 15-18, 1993, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
	Arthur M. Farley , Kathleen Freeman, Burden of proof in legal argumentation, Proceedings of the 5th international conference on Artificial intelligence and law, p.156-164, May 21-24, 1995, College Park, Maryland, United States
	Carlos Iván Chesñevar , Ana Gabriela Maguitman , Ronald Prescott Loui, Logical models of argument, ACM Computing Surveys (CSUR), v.32 n.4, p.337-383, Dec. 2000
	Ronald P. Loui , Jeff Norman , Jon Olson , Andrew Merrill, A design for reasoning with policies, precedents, and rationales, Proceedings of the 4th international conference on Artificial intelligence and law, p.202-211, June 15-18, 1993, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
	Jaap Hage, Monological reason-based logic: a low level integration of rule-based reasoning and case-based reasoning, Proceedings of the 4th international conference on Artificial intelligence and law, p.30-39, June 15-18, 1993, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
	Daniel Poulin , Paul Bratley , Jacques Frémont , Ejan Mackaay, Legal interpretation in expert systems, Proceedings of the 4th international conference on Artificial intelligence and law, p.90-99, June 15-18, 1993, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
	L. Thorne McCarty, Some arguments about legal arguments, Proceedings of the 6th international conference on Artificial intelligence and law, p.215-224, June 30-July 03, 1997, Melbourne, Australia
	Giovanni Sartor, A simple computational model for nonmonotonic and adversarial legal reasoning, Proceedings of the 4th international conference on Artificial intelligence and law, p.192-201, June 15-18, 1993, Amsterdam, The Netherlands