Towards a formal account of reasoning about evidence: argumentation schemes and generalisations

TY - JOUR

T1 - Towards a formal account of reasoning about evidence

T2 - argumentation schemes and generalisations

AU - Bex, Floris

AU - Prakken, Henry

AU - Reed, Chris

AU - Walton, Douglas

N1 - Copyright 2008 Elsevier B.V., All rights reserved.

PY - 2003/1/1

Y1 - 2003/1/1

N2 - This paper studies the modelling of legal reasoning about evidence within general theories of defeasible reasoning and argumentation. In particular, Wigmore's method for charting evidence and its use by modern legal evidence scholars is studied in order to give a formal underpinning in terms of logics for defeasible argumentation. Two notions turn out to be crucial, viz. argumentation schemes and empirical generalisations.

AB - This paper studies the modelling of legal reasoning about evidence within general theories of defeasible reasoning and argumentation. In particular, Wigmore's method for charting evidence and its use by modern legal evidence scholars is studied in order to give a formal underpinning in terms of logics for defeasible argumentation. Two notions turn out to be crucial, viz. argumentation schemes and empirical generalisations.

UR - https://www.scopus.com/pages/publications/18744367295

U2 - 10.1023/B:ARTI.0000046007.11806.9a

DO - 10.1023/B:ARTI.0000046007.11806.9a

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:18744367295

SN - 0924-8463

VL - 11

SP - 125

EP - 165

JO - Artificial Intelligence and Law

JF - Artificial Intelligence and Law

IS - 2-3

ER -