Reasoning With Legal Cases as Theory Construction: Some Experimental Results
نویسندگان
چکیده
In this paper we report some experiments designed to clarify some issues and to test some of the assumptions in the model of reasoning with legal cases advanced by Bench-Capon and Sartor. We identify the questions to be explored, briefly describe a tool developed to support these experiments and report the results of a series of experiments based on Aleven’s analysis of US Trade Secrets cases. We then consider what light the experiments have thrown on our questions, and propose some directions for future work.
منابع مشابه
AGATHA: Automation of the Construction of Theories in Case Law Domains
Some recent accounts of reasoning with legal cases view reasoning with cases as theory construction. In this paper we describe AGATHA (ArGument Agent for THeory Automation) which will automatically generate theories intended to explain a body of case law by following a process inspired by the style of argumentation found in case based reasoning systems. Thus AGATHA behaves like a case based rea...
متن کاملGoal-based theory evaluation
In his paper ‘Some arguments about legal arguments’, Thorne McCarty [1] pleads for a theory construction approach in AI and Law research. Legal materials should not be taken at face value, but are amenable to reconstruction. This line of argument is well in line with a teleological tradition in legal theory that has historical roots in the * > around 1900 [2, 3] and which is more recently exemp...
متن کاملLegal knowledge based systems JURIX 94 The Relation with Legal Theory
Arti cial intelligence has contributed fundamentally to our understanding of reasoning and communication processes, and especially their limits. These insights have deep implications for issues in jurisprudence which depend on a model of `correct' reasoning and argumentation, such as theories of the separation of powers and judicial discretion. Some of these implications are explored in this pa...
متن کاملConstructing a Legal Knowledge-base with Partial Information
In legal reasoning systems, a typical application of normative reasoning, partial information plays an important role in the representation and reasoning of legal knowledge. To construct a legal knowledge-base with partial information, many features are required of knowledge representation languages. In this paper, we discuss the representation of knowledge-bases and their re nement through our...
متن کاملArgumentation Schemes for Reasoning about Factors with Dimensions
In previous work we presented argumentation schemes to capture the CATO and value based theory construction approaches to reasoning with legal cases with factors. We formalised the schemes with ASPIC+, a formal representation of instantiated argumentation. In ASPIC+ the premises of a scheme may either be a factor provided in a knowledge base or established using a further argumentation scheme. ...
متن کامل