Article PDF
Explore related subjects
Discover the latest articles, news and stories from top researchers in related subjects.Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
References
Aleven, V. (1997). Teaching Case Based Argumentation Through an Example and Models. Ph.D. thesis, The University of Pittsburgh.
Ashley, K. (1990). Modelling Legal Argument. Bradford Books, MIT Press.
Bench-Capon T., Coenen F., Orton P. (1993) Argument Based Explanation of the British Nationality Act as a Logic Program. Computers, Law and AI 2(1):53–66
Bench-Capon T., Sartor G. (2003) A Model of Legal Reasoning with Cases Incorporating Theories and Values. Artificial Intelligence 150: 97–143
Bench-Capon T., Sergot M. (1989). Towards a Rule Based Representation of Open Texture in Law. In C. Walter (ed.), Computing Power and Legal Reasoning, 39–60. Greenwood Press
Bench-Capon, T. J. M. (1984). Specification and Implementation of Toulmin Dialogue Game. In Proceedings JURIX 98. Nijmegen, 5–20, GNI
Bench-Capon T. J. M. (2002) The Missing Link Revisited: The Role of Teleology in Representing Legal Argument. Artificial Intelligence and Law 10(2–3): 79–94
Bench-Capon T. J. M. (2003) Persuasion in Practical Argument Using Value-based Argumentation Frameworks. Journal of Logic and Computation 13(3):429-448
Berman, D. and Hafner, C. (1993). Representing Teleological Structure in Case-based Legal Reasoning: The Missing Link. In Proceedings of the Fourth International Conference on AI and Law. New York, 50–59, ACM Press.
Dung P. M. (1995) On the Acceptability of Arguments and Its Fundamental Role in Nonmonotonic Reason, Logic Programming, and N-Person Games. Artificial Intelligence 77: 321–357
Farley, A. and Freeman, K. (1995) Burden of Proof in Legal Argumentation. In Proceedings of the Fifth International Conference on AI and Law. New York, 156–164, ACM Press
Gordon T. (1995) The Pleadings Game. An Artificial Intelligence Model of Procedural Justice. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht/Boston/London
Greenwood, K., Bench-Capon, T. and McBurney, P. (2003). Towards a Computational Account of Persuasion in Law. In Proceedings of the Ninth International Conference of AI and Law. New York, 22–31, ACM Press.
Hage J. (1996). A theory of legal reasoning and a logic to match. Artificial Intelligence and Law 4: 199–273
Lodder, A. R. (1998). Dialaw: On legal Justification and Dialogue Games. Ph.D. Thesis, University of Maastricht.
Lutomski, L. (1989). The Design of an Attorney's Statistical Consultant. In Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on AI and Law. New York, 224–233, ACM Press.
Marshall C. (1989) Representing the Structure of A Legal Argument. ACM Press, New York, pp. 121–127
Prakken, H. (1993). A Logical Framework for Modelling Legal Argument. In Proceedings of the Fourth International Conference of AI and Law. New York, 1–10, ACM Press.
Prakken H. (2002a) An exercise in formalising teleological case-based reasoning. Artificial Intelligence and Law 10: 113–133
Prakken, H. (2002b). Incomplete Arguments in Legal Discourse: A Case Study. In Bench-Capon, T., Daskalopulu, A. and Winkels, R. (eds.), Legal Knowledge and Information Systems. JURIX 2002: The Fifteenth Annual Conference. 93–102, IOS Press.
Prakken, H., Reed, C. and Walton, D. (2003). Argumentation Schemes and Generalisations in Reasoning about Evidence. In Proceedings of the Ninth International Conference on AI and Law. New York, 32–41, ACM Press.
Prakken, H., C. Reed, and D. Walton: 2005, Dialogues about the burden of proof. In: Proceedings of the Tenth International Conference on AI and Law. New York, pp. 115–124, ACM Press
Prakken, H. and Sartor, G. (1996). A Dialectical Model of Assessing Conflicting Arguments in Legal Reasoning. Artificial Intelligence and Law 4.
Sartor G. (2002) Teleological Arguments and Theory-based Dialectics. Artificial Intelligence and Law 10: 95–112
Sergot M., Sadri F., Kowalski R., Kriwaczek F., Hammond P., Cory H. (1986) The British Nationality Act as a logic program. Comm. of the ACM 29(5): 370–386
Skalak, D. and Rissland. E. (1992). Arguments and Cases: An Inevitable Intertwining. Artificial Intelligence and Law 1.
Toulmin, S. (1959). The Uses of Argument. Cambridge University Press.
Walton, D. (1996). Argumentation Schemes for Presumptive Reasoning.
Zeleznikow, J. and Stranieri, A. (1995). The Split-Up system. In Proceedings of the Fifth International Conference on AI and Law. New York, 185–195, ACM Press.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Bench-Capon, T.J., Dunne, P.E. Argumentation in AI and Law: Editors' Introduction. Artif Intell Law 13, 1–8 (2005). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10506-006-9007-z
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10506-006-9007-z