A design for reasoning with policies, precedents, and rationales

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.

	1	Ashley, K. "Defining salience in case--b~ed arguments," Proc. IJCAI 1989a.
	2	K. D. Ashley, Toward a computational theory of arguing with precedents, Proceedings of the 2nd international conference on Artificial intelligence and law, p.93-102, May 1989, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada [doi>10.1145/74014.74028]
	3	Kevin D. Ashley , Vincent Aleven, Toward an intelligent tutoring system for teaching law students to argue with cases, Proceedings of the 3rd international conference on Artificial intelligence and law, p.42-52, May 1991, Oxford, England [doi>10.1145/112646.112651]
	4	Ashley, K. and V. Aleven. "Generating dialectical examples automatically," Proc. AAAI 1992.
	5	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]
	6	Kevin D. Ashley , Edwina L. Rissland, A Case-Based Approach to Modeling Legal Expertise, IEEE Expert: Intelligent Systems and Their Applications, v.3 n.3, p.70-77, September 1988 [doi>10.1109/64.21892]
	7	Baader, F. and B. HoUunder. "How to prefer more specific defaults in terminological default logic," DFKI (Saarbriicken) RR-92-58 (to appear in Proc. IJCAI 1993).
	8	Baker, A. and M. Ginsberg. "A theorem prover for prioritized circumscription," Proc. IJCAI, 1989.
	9	Cavalli-Sforza, V. and Moore, J. "Collaborating on arguments and explanations," Proc. AAAI Spring Symposium on Producing Cooperative Explanations, 1992.
	10	Clark, P. "Representing arguments as background knowledge for the jusdfcation of case-base~ inferences," AAAI Workshop on Case-Based Reasoning, 1988.
	11	Hector Geffner , Judea Pearl, Conditional entailment: bridging two approaches to default reasoning, Artificial Intelligence, v.53 n.2-3, p.209-244, Feb. 1992 [doi>10.1016/0004-3702(92)90071-5]
	12	T. F. Gordon, Oblog-2: A hybrid knowledge representation system for defeasible reasoning, Proceedings of the 1st international conference on Artificial intelligence and law, p.231-239, May 27-29, 1997, Boston, Massachusetts, United States [doi>10.1145/41735.41761]
	13	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]
	14	Gordon, T. Doctoral dissertation, forthcoming, 1993a.
	15	Gordon, T. "The pleadings game," this volume, 1993b.
	16	Benjamin Nathan Grosof, Updating and structure in non-monotonic theories, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, 1993
	17	Grosof, B. Personal communication, 1993.
	18	Loui, R. "Defeat among arguments: a system of defeasible inference," Computational Intelligence 3, 1987.
	19	R. P. Loui, Analogical reasoning, defeasible reasoning, and the reference class, Proceedings of the first international conference on Principles of knowledge representation and reasoning, p.256-265, December 1989
	20	Loui, R. "Dialectic, computation, and ampliative inference," in Philosophy and AI, R. Cummins and J. Pollock, eds., MIT Press, 1991a.
	21	Loui, R. "Argument and belief: where we stand in the Keynesian tradition," Minds and Machines 1, 1991b.
	22	Loui, R. "Process and policy: resource-bounded non-demonstrative argument," Wash. U. Comp. Sci. CS- TR-92-43, 1992.
	23	Loui, R. "How a formal theory can be normative: implementation versus interpretation," Journal of Philosophy 90, 1993.
	24	Loui, R. and W. Chen. "An Argument Game," Technical Report, Wash. U. Comp. Sci. TR-92-47, 1992.
	25	Loui, R., Norman, J., Merrill, A., Olson, J., Costello, A., and K. Stiefvater. "Computing specificity," Wash. U. Comp. Sci. TR-93-03, 1993.
	26	Pollock, J. "Defeasible reasoning," Cognitive Science H, 1987.
	27	Poole, D. "On the comparison of theories: preferring t~he most specific explanation," l:'roc. IJCAI, 1985.
	28	Henry Prakken, A tool in modelling disagreement in law: preferring the most specific argument, Proceedings of the 3rd international conference on Artificial intelligence and law, p.165-174, May 1991, Oxford, England [doi>10.1145/112646.112666]
	29	l:'rakken, H. "An argumentation framework in default logic," to appear in Annals of Mathematics and AI, 1993a.
	30	Prakken, H. Logical Tools for Modelling Legal Argument, doctoral dissertation, Free University Amsterdam, 1993b.
	31	Rescher, Nicholas. Dialectics, SUNY Albany, 1977.
	32	Edwina Rissland, AI and legal reasoning, AI Magazine, v.9 n.3, p.45-55, September 1988
	33	Rissland, E. "Artificial intelligence and law," Yale Law Journal 99, pp. 1957-1981, 1990.
	34	E. L. Rissland , D. B. Skalak, Interpreting statutory predicates, Proceedings of the 2nd international conference on Artificial intelligence and law, p.46-53, May 1989, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada [doi>10.1145/74014.74021]
	35	Simari, G. "Plausible reasoning," draft, 1992.
	36	Guillermo R. Simari , Ronald P. Loui, A mathematical treatment of defeasible reasoning and its implementation, Artificial Intelligence, v.53 n.2-3, p.125-157, Feb. 1992 [doi>10.1016/0004-3702(92)90069-A]
	37	Vreeswijk, G. Stuch'es in Defeasible Argumentation, doctoral dissertation, Free University Amsterdam, 1993.