Svoboda | Graniru | BBC Russia | Golosameriki | Facebook

research-article

Factors, issues and values: revisiting reasoning with cases

Authors:

Latifa Al-Abdulkarim,

Katie Atkinson,

Trevor Bench-CaponAuthors Info & Claims

ICAIL '15: Proceedings of the 15th International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Law

Pages 3 - 12

https://doi.org/10.1145/2746090.2746103

Published: 08 June 2015 Publication History

Abstract

In this paper we revisit reasoning with legal cases, with a view to articulating the relationships between issues, factors, facts and values, and to identifying areas for future work on these topics. We start from the different ways in which attempts have been made to go beyond a fortori reasoning from the precedent base, so that conclusions not fully justified by the precedents can be drawn. We then use a particular example domain taken from the literature to illustrate our preferred approach and to relate factors and values. From this we observe that much current work depends critically on the ascription of factors to cases in a Boolean manner, while in practice there are compelling reasons to see the presence of factors as a matter of degree. On the basis of our observations we make suggestions for the directions of future work on this topic.

References

[1]

L. Al-Abdulkarim, K. Atkinson, and T. Bench-Capon. A strategy for deliberation exploiting accrual of values. In Proceedings of the Ninth International Workshop on Argumentation in Multi-Agent Systems (ARGMAS 2012), pages 1--19, 2012.

[2]

L. Al-Abdulkarim, K. Atkinson, and T. Bench-Capon. Abstract dialectical frameworks for legal reasoning. In Proceedings of JURIX 2014, pages 61--70. IOS Press, 2014.

[3]

L. Al-Abdulkarim, K. Atkinson, and T. Bench-Capon. Evaluating the use of abstract dialectical frameworks to represent case law. In Proceedings of the 15th ICAIL. This volume, 2015.

Digital Library

[4]

V. Aleven. Teaching case-based argumentation through a model and examples. PhD thesis, Univ. of Pittsburgh, 1997.

Digital Library

[5]

M. Araszkiewicz, A. Lopatkiewicz, and A. Zienkiewicz. Factor-based parent plan support system. In Proceedings of the Fourteenth International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Law, pages 171--175, 2013.

Digital Library

[6]

K. Ashley. Modelling Legal Argument: Reasoning with Cases and Hypotheticals. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, 1990.

Digital Library

[7]

K. Ashley. Teaching a process model of legal argument with hypotheticals. Artif. Intell. Law, 17(4): 321--370, 2009.

Digital Library

[8]

K. D. Ashley and S. Brüninghaus. A predictive role for intermediate legal concepts. In Proceedings of JURIX 2003, pages 153--162. IOS Press, 2003.

[9]

T. Bench-Capon and H. Prakken. Using argument schemes for hypothetical reasoning in law. Artif. Intell. Law, 18(2): 153--174, 2010.

Digital Library

[10]

T. Bench-Capon, H. Prakken, A. Wyner, and K. Atkinson. Argument schemes for reasoning with legal cases using values. In Proceedings of the Fourteenth International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Law, pages 13--22. ACM, 2013.

Digital Library

[11]

T. Bench-Capon and E. Rissland. Back to the future: dimensions revisited. In Proceedings of JURIX 2001, pages 41--52. IOS Press, 2001.

[12]

T. J. M. Bench-Capon. Relating values in a series of supreme court decisions. In Legal Knowledge and Information Systems - JURIX 2011: The Twenty-Fourth Annual Conference, University of Vienna, Austria, 14th-16th December 2011, pages 13--22, 2011.

[13]

T. J. M. Bench-Capon, K. Atkinson, and A. Chorley. Persuasion and value in legal argument. J. Log. Comput., 15(6): 1075--1097, 2005.

Digital Library

[14]

T. J. M. Bench-Capon and S. Modgil. Case law in extended argumentation frameworks. In The 12th International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Law, Proceedings of the Conference, June 8-12, 2009, Barcelona, Spain, pages 118--127. ACM Press, 2009.

Digital Library

[15]

T. J. M. Bench-Capon and G. Sartor. A model of legal reasoning with cases incorporating theories and values. Artif. Intell., 150(1-2): 97--143, 2003.

Digital Library

[16]

D. Berman and C. Hafner. Representing teleological structure in case-based legal reasoning: The missing link. In Proceedings of the Fourth International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Law, pages 50--59. ACM Press, 1993.

Digital Library

[17]

D. H. Berman and C. D. Hafner. Understanding precedents in a temporal context of evolving legal doctrine. In Proceedings of the Fifth International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Law, pages 42--51. ACM Press, 1995.

Digital Library

[18]

F. J. Bex. Arguments, stories and criminal evidence: A formal hybrid theory, volume 92. Springer, 2011.

[19]

L. K. Branting. Reasoning with portions of precedents. In Proceedings of the 3rd ICAIL, pages 145--154. ACM, 1991.

Digital Library

[20]

L. K. Branting. A reduction-graph model of ratio decidendi. In Proceedings of the Fourth International Conference on Artificial intelligence and Law, pages 40--49, 1993.

Digital Library

[21]

J. Breuker and N. den Haan. Separating world and regulation knowledge: Where is the logic. In Proceedings of the Third International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Law, pages 92--97. ACM Press, 1991.

Digital Library

[22]

G. Brewka, H. Strass, S. Ellmauthaler, J. Wallner, and S. Woltran. Abstract dialectical frameworks revisited. In Proceedings of IJCAI 2013, 2013. Issued on CD.

Digital Library

[23]

S. Brüninghaus and K. Ashley. Predicting outcomes of case-based legal arguments. In Proceedings of the Ninth International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Law, pages 233--242. ACM Press, 2003.

Digital Library

[24]

A. Chorley and T. Bench-Capon. Agatha: Using heuristic search to automate the construction of case law theories. Artif. Intell. Law, 13(1): 9--51, 2005.

Digital Library

[25]

A. Chorley and T. Bench-Capon. An empirical investigation of reasoning with legal cases through theory construction and application. Artif. Intell. Law, 13(3-4): 323--371, 2005.

Digital Library

[26]

M. Davis and H. Putnam. A computing procedure for quantification theory. J. ACM, 7(3): 201--215, July 1960.

Digital Library

[27]

A. v. d. L. Gardner. Artificial intelligence approach to legal reasoning. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, 1984.

Digital Library

[28]

M. R. Garey and D. S. Johnson. Computers and intractability. W. H. Freeman, 1979.

Digital Library

[29]

M. Grabmair and K. D. Ashley. Facilitating case comparison using value judgments and intermediate legal concepts. In Proceedings of the 13th International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Law, pages 161--170. ACM Press, 2011.

Digital Library

[30]

J. Horty and T. Bench-Capon. A factor-based definition of precedential constraint. Artif. Intell. Law, 20(2): 181--214, 2012.

Digital Library

[31]

M. Lauritsen. On balance. Artif. Intell. Law, 23(1), 2015.

Digital Library

[32]

E. H. Levi. An introduction to legal reasoning. University of Chicago Press, 1949.

[33]

L. Lindahl and J. Odelstad. Intermediaries and intervenients in normative systems. J. Applied Logic, 6(2): 229--250, 2008.

[34]

L. T. McCarty. Reflections on taxman: An experiment in artificial intelligence and legal reasoning. Harvard Law Review, pages 837--893, 1977.

[35]

L. T. McCarty. An implementation of Eisner v. Macomber. In Proceedings of the Fifth International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Law, pages 276--286. ACM Press, 1995.

Digital Library

[36]

H. Prakken. A study of accrual of arguments, with applications to evidential reasoning. In Proceedings of the 10th ICAIL, pages 85--94. ACM Press, 2005.

Digital Library

[37]

H. Prakken and G. Sartor. Modelling reasoning with precedents in a formal dialogue game. Artif. Intell. Law, 6(2-4): 231--287, 1998.

Digital Library

[38]

H. Prakken, A. Wyner, T. Bench-Capon, and K. Atkinson. A formalization of argumentation schemes for legal case-based reasoning in ASPIC+. Journal of Logic and Computation, 2013, Available online.

[39]

E. L. Rissland and K. D. Ashley. A note on dimensions and factors. Artif. Intell. Law, 10(1-3): 65--77, 2002.

Digital Library

[40]

G. Sartor. Doing justice to rights and values: teleological reasoning and proportionality. Artif. Intell. Law, 18(2): 175--215, 2010.

Digital Library

[41]

D. B. Skalak and E. L. Rissland. Arguments and cases: An inevitable intertwining. Artif. Intell. Law, 1(1): 3--44, 1992.

Digital Library

Cited By

Rigoni A(2024)Toward representing interpretation in factor-based models of precedentArtificial Intelligence and Law10.1007/s10506-023-09384-5Online publication date: 12-Jan-2024
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10506-023-09384-5
Richmond KMuddamsetty SGammeltoft-Hansen TOlsen HMoeslund T(2023)Explainable AI and Law: An Evidential SurveyDigital Society10.1007/s44206-023-00081-z3:1Online publication date: 19-Dec-2023
https://doi.org/10.1007/s44206-023-00081-z
Sartor GAraszkiewicz MAtkinson KBex Fvan Engers TFrancesconi EPrakken HSileno GSchilder FWyner ABench-Capon T(2022)Thirty years of Artificial Intelligence and Law: the second decadeArtificial Intelligence and Law10.1007/s10506-022-09326-730:4(521-557)Online publication date: 8-Aug-2022
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10506-022-09326-7
Show More Cited By

Index Terms

Factors, issues and values: revisiting reasoning with cases
1. Applied computing
  1. Law, social and behavioral sciences
    1. Law
2. Social and professional topics
  1. Computing / technology policy

Recommendations

Factors to actors: implications of posthumanism for social justice work
SIGDOC '15: Proceedings of the 33rd Annual International Conference on the Design of Communication

Contexts, tools, and other nonhuman factors are central to the practice and scholarship of technical communication, particularly communication design. But viewed through the lens of posthumanism, these considerations shift from factors to actors: the ...
The Internet, ethical values, and conceptual frameworks: an introduction to Cyberethics

What exactly is Cyberethics? How did the field develop? What are some of the central issues and themes in this field, and what methodologies are used by those working in this area of applied ethics? These and related questions are considered in the ...
Cyborg morals, cyborg values, cyborg ethics

The era of the Cyborg is now upon us. This has enormous implications on ethical values for both humans and cyborgs. In this paper the state of play is discussed. Routes to cyborgisation are introduced and different types of Cyborg are considered. The author'...

Comments

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

ICAIL '15: Proceedings of the 15th International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Law

June 2015

246 pages

ISBN:9781450335225

DOI:10.1145/2746090

Conference Chair:
Ted Sichelman
University of San Diego School of Law, San Diego, CA
,
Program Chair:
Katie Atkinson
University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK

Copyright © 2015 ACM.

Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

Sponsors

Center for IP Law & Markets: Center for Intellectual Property Law & Markets, University of San Diego School of Law
TrademarkNow: TrademarkNow
The International Association for Artificial Intelligence and Law
Davis Polk: Davis Polk & Wardwell LLP
Legal Robot: Legal Robot
Thomson Reuters: Thomson Reuters Corporation

In-Cooperation

SIGAI: ACM Special Interest Group on Artificial Intelligence

Publisher

Association for Computing Machinery

New York, NY, United States

Publication History

Published: 08 June 2015

Permissions

Request permissions for this article.

Request Permissions

Check for updates

Qualifiers

Research-article

Conference

ICAIL '15

Sponsor:

Center for IP Law & Markets
TrademarkNow
Davis Polk
Legal Robot
Thomson Reuters

ICAIL '15: 15th International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Law

June 8 - 12, 2015

California, San Diego

Acceptance Rates

ICAIL '15 Paper Acceptance Rate 30 of 58 submissions, 52%;

Overall Acceptance Rate 69 of 169 submissions, 41%

Contributors

Other Metrics

View Article Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

16
Total Citations
View Citations
189
Total Downloads

Downloads (Last 12 months)9
Downloads (Last 6 weeks)0

Reflects downloads up to 31 Jul 2024

Other Metrics

View Author Metrics

Citations

Cited By

Rigoni A(2024)Toward representing interpretation in factor-based models of precedentArtificial Intelligence and Law10.1007/s10506-023-09384-5Online publication date: 12-Jan-2024
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10506-023-09384-5
Richmond KMuddamsetty SGammeltoft-Hansen TOlsen HMoeslund T(2023)Explainable AI and Law: An Evidential SurveyDigital Society10.1007/s44206-023-00081-z3:1Online publication date: 19-Dec-2023
https://doi.org/10.1007/s44206-023-00081-z
Sartor GAraszkiewicz MAtkinson KBex Fvan Engers TFrancesconi EPrakken HSileno GSchilder FWyner ABench-Capon T(2022)Thirty years of Artificial Intelligence and Law: the second decadeArtificial Intelligence and Law10.1007/s10506-022-09326-730:4(521-557)Online publication date: 8-Aug-2022
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10506-022-09326-7
Bench-Capon TAtkinson KMaranhão JWyner A(2021)Precedential constraintProceedings of the Eighteenth International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Law10.1145/3462757.3466062(12-21)Online publication date: 21-Jun-2021
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3462757.3466062
Akula RGaribay I(2021)Ethical AI for Social GoodHCI International 2021 - Late Breaking Papers: Multimodality, eXtended Reality, and Artificial Intelligence10.1007/978-3-030-90963-5_28(369-380)Online publication date: 11-Nov-2021
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-90963-5_28
Floridi LCowls JKing TTaddeo M(2021)How to Design AI for Social Good: Seven Essential FactorsEthics, Governance, and Policies in Artificial Intelligence10.1007/978-3-030-81907-1_9(125-151)Online publication date: 3-Nov-2021
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-81907-1_9
Floridi LCowls JKing TTaddeo M(2020)How to Design AI for Social Good: Seven Essential FactorsScience and Engineering Ethics10.1007/s11948-020-00213-5Online publication date: 3-Apr-2020
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11948-020-00213-5
Broughton G(2019)Vertical precedents in formal models of precedential constraintArtificial Intelligence and Law10.1007/s10506-019-09244-1Online publication date: 8-Feb-2019
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10506-019-09244-1
Raghupathi VZhou YRaghupathi W(2018)Legal Decision Support: Exploring Big Data Analytics Approach to Modeling Pharma Patent Validity CasesIEEE Access10.1109/ACCESS.2018.28590526(41518-41528)Online publication date: 2018
https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2018.2859052
Rigoni A(2018)Representing dimensions within the reason model of precedentArtificial Intelligence and Law10.1007/s10506-017-9216-726:1(1-22)Online publication date: 26-Dec-2018
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1007/s10506-017-9216-7
Show More Cited By

View Options

Get Access

Login options

Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

Full Access

Get this Publication

View options

PDF

View or Download as a PDF file.

eReader

View online with eReader.

Media

Figures

Other

Tables

View Table of Contents