How clear is transparent? Reporting expert reasoning in legal cases
نویسندگان
چکیده
منابع مشابه
Levels of Reasoning With Legal Cases
In this paper we discuss how different levels of reasoning can occur in legal cases. We build upon our recent work in which we have reconstructed the reasoning of the majority and dissenting opinions for a particular case through the use of Belief-DesireIntention (BDI) agents to replicate the contrasting views involved in the actual decision. This reconstruction has shown how the reasoning invo...
متن کاملThe Role of Semantics in Legal Expert Systems and Legal Reasoning*
The consensus among legal philosophers is probably that rule-based legal expert systems leave much to be desired as aids in legal decision-making. Why? What can we do about it? A bureaucrat administering some set of complex rules will ascertain the facts and apply the rules to them in order to discover their consequences for the case in hand. This process of deductive reasoning is characteristi...
متن کاملWhy Is Legal Reasoning Defeasible ? ∗ Juan
This paper analyses the claim that legal reasoning is defeasible, which is indeed a hallmark of some major contributions to the theory of legal reasoning in recent times. Before addressing the question of what kind of logical tools are needed to formalize defeasible reasoning, it must be explained why legal reasoning is supposed to be defeasible in the first place. Some arguments to this effect...
متن کاملDimensions and Values for Reasoning with Legal Cases
In this paper we build on two recent attempts to formalise reasoning with dimensions. Both of these approaches effectively map dimensions into factors, which enables propositional reasoning, but we show that sometimes a balance between dimensions needs to be struck. To permit trade offs we need to keep the magnitudes and reason more geometrically. We also revisit the link between dimensions and...
متن کاملReasoning With Legal Cases as Theory Construction: Some Experimental Results
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. ...
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: Law, Probability and Risk
سال: 2012
ISSN: 1470-8396,1470-840X
DOI: 10.1093/lpr/mgs017