Burdens and standards of proof for inference to the best explanation: Three case studies

TY - JOUR

T1 - Burdens and standards of proof for inference to the best explanation

T2 - Three case studies

AU - Bex, F.

AU - Walton, D.

N1 - Copyright 2012 Elsevier B.V., All rights reserved.

PY - 2012

Y1 - 2012

N2 - In this article, we provide a formal logical model of evidential reasoning with proof standards and burdens of proof, which enables us to evaluate evidential reasoning by comparing stories on either side of a case. It is based on a hybrid inference model that combines argumentation and explanation, using inference to the best explanation as the central form of argument. The model is applied to one civil case and two criminal cases. It is shown to have some striking implications for modelling and using traditional proof standards like preponderance of the evidence and beyond reasonable doubt.

AB - In this article, we provide a formal logical model of evidential reasoning with proof standards and burdens of proof, which enables us to evaluate evidential reasoning by comparing stories on either side of a case. It is based on a hybrid inference model that combines argumentation and explanation, using inference to the best explanation as the central form of argument. The model is applied to one civil case and two criminal cases. It is shown to have some striking implications for modelling and using traditional proof standards like preponderance of the evidence and beyond reasonable doubt.

UR - https://www.scopus.com/pages/publications/84866392001

U2 - 10.1093/lpr/mgs003

DO - 10.1093/lpr/mgs003

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:84866392001

SN - 1470-8396

VL - 11

SP - 113

EP - 133

JO - Law, Probability and Risk

JF - Law, Probability and Risk

IS - 2-3

ER -