An Argumentation Interface for Expert Opinion Evidence
نویسندگان
چکیده
منابع مشابه
Visualization tools, argumentation schemes and expert opinion evidence in law
New models of evidential reasoning have been closely tied in with the development of visualization tools in artificial intelligence, especially automated systems for argument diagramming. Surveying several models and visualization tools recently developed in artificial intelligence, this paper argues that any discussion of visualization methods or tools of this sort should focus on their suitab...
متن کاملAn Approach to Argumentation Schemes that Appeal to Expert Opinion
Argumentation is a form of reasoning that deeply resembles the human mechanism for commonsense reasoning. An argumentation scheme is a representational tool for modeling common patterns of reasoning; in particular, it displays the form of an argument by showing how the argument is built using the inferential structures commonly used in everyday discourse. Argument schemes are very useful in con...
متن کاملRamadan fasting: Evidence or expert opinion? Results of preliminary studies
Each year, over a billion Muslims fast worldwide during the month of Ramadan. Through this religious practice, not only will one have spiritual growth, but can improve his/her diet, which is of pivotal importance in this month. Conversely, the available evidence regarding the health benefits of Ramadan fasting is scarce and highly contentious. Although Islam exempts patients from fasting, many...
متن کاملExamination dialogue: An argumentation framework for critically questioning an expert opinion
Recent work in argumentation theory (Walton and Krabbe, 1995; Walton, 2005) and artificial intelligence (Bench-Capon, 1992, 2003; Cawsey, 1992; McBurney and Parsons, 2002; Bench-Capon and Prakken, 2005) uses types of dialogue as contexts of argument use. This paper provides an analysis of a special type called examination dialogue, in which one party questions another party, sometimes criticall...
متن کاملExpert opinion vs. empirical evidence
Expert opinion is often sought by government regulatory agencies when there is insufficient empirical evidence to judge the safety implications of a course of action. However, it can be reckless to continue following expert opinion when a preponderance of evidence is amassed that conflicts with this opinion. Factual evidence should always trump opinion in prioritizing the information that is us...
متن کاملذخیره در منابع من
با ذخیره ی این منبع در منابع من، دسترسی به آن را برای استفاده های بعدی آسان تر کنید
ژورنال
عنوان ژورنال: Ratio Juris
سال: 2016
ISSN: 0952-1917
DOI: 10.1111/raju.12115