A formalisation of argumentation schemes for legal case-based reasoning in ASPIC+

Henry Prakken, Adam Wyner, Trevor Bench-Capon, Katie Atkinson

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

23 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

In this article we offer a formal account of reasoning with legal cases in terms of argumentation schemes. These schemes, and undercutting attacks associated with them, are formalized as defeasible rules of inference within the ASPIC+ framework. We begin by modelling the style of reasoning with cases developed by Aleven and Ashley in the CATO project, which describes cases using factors, and then extend the account to accommodate the dimensions used in Rissland and Ashley's earlier HYPO project. Some additional scope for argumentation is then identified and formalized.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)1141-1166
Number of pages26
JournalJournal of Logic and Computation
Volume25
Issue number5
Early online date9 May 2013
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Oct 2015

    Fingerprint

Keywords

  • argumentation
  • legal case-based reasoning

Cite this