This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
Allen, J.F. 1983. “Recognizing Intentions from Natural Language Utterances”. In M. Bradie and R.C. Berwick (ed), Computational Models of Discourse. MIT Press.
Allen, R.J. 1997. “Rationality, algorithms and juridical proof: a preliminary inquiry”. Lead article, special issue, Int. J. of Evidence and Proof.
Asher, N. and Sablayrolles, P. 1995. “A typology and discourse semantics for motion verbs and spatial PPs in French”. Journal of Semantics 12(2): 163–209.
Barrett, K.C., Zahn-Waxler, C. and Cole, P.M. 1993. “Avoiders vs. amenders: implications for the investigation of guilt and shame during toddlerhood?”. Cognition & Emotion 7(6): 481–506.
Bennun, M.E. 1996. “Computerizing criminal law: problems of evidence, liability and mens rea”. Information & Communications Technology Law 5(1): 29–44.
Brown, M.A. and Carmo, J. (eds) 1996. Deontic Logic, Agency and Normative Systems. Berlin: Springer-Verlag.
Berman, D.H., Hafner, C.D. and Sartor, G. (eds) 1992-Artificial Intelligence and Law (journal). Dordrecht: Kluwer.
Bohan, T.L. 1991. “Computer-aided accident reconstruction: its role in court”. SAE Technical Paper Series (12 p.).
Caldwell, C., V.S. Johnston 1989. “Tracking a criminal suspect through ‘face-space’ with a genetic algorithm”. Proc. 3rd Int. Conf. Genetic Algorithms, 416–421.
Cohn, A.G., Gooday, J.M. and Bennett, B. 1994. “A comparison of structures in spatial and temporal logics”. In R. Casati and G. White (eds), Philosophy in the Cognitive Sciences. Vienna: Hö1der-Pichler-Tempsky.
Dyer, M.G. 1983. In-Depth Understanding: A Computer Model of Integrated Processing of Narrative Comprehension. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
Edwards, D. and Potter, J. 1995. “Attribution”. Ch. 4 in R. Harré and P. Stearns (eds), Discursive Psychology in Practice. London: SAGE, 87–119.
Fakher-Eldeen, F., Kuflik, Ts., Nissan, E., Puni, G., Salfati, R., Shaul, Y. and Spanioli, A. 1993. “Interpretation of imputed behavior in ALIBI (1 to 3) and SKILL”. Informatica e Diritto, Year XIX, 2nd Series, Vol. II, No. 1/2: 213–242.
Fikes, R.E. and Nilsson, N.J. 1971. “STRIPS: A new approach to the application of theorem proving to problem solving”. Artificial Intelligence 2: 89–205.
Freeman, K. and Farley, A.M. 1996. “A model of argumentation and its application to legal reasoning”. Artificial Intelligence and Law 4(34): 157–161.
Fricker, E. 1987. “The epistemology of testimony”. Aristotelian Society Supplementary Volume 61: 57–83.
Gaines, D.M., Brown, D.C. and Doyle, J.K. 1996. “A computer simulation model of juror decision making”. Expert Systems With Applications 11(1): 13–28.
Gardner, A. v.d.L. 1987. An Artificial Intelligence Approach to Legal Reasoning. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
Grosz, B., Kraus, S. 1996. “Collaborative plans for complex group action”. AIJ 86.
Hastie, R. (ed) 1993. Inside the Juror: The Psychology of Juror Decision Making. Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge University Press.
Hastie, R., Penrod, S.D. and Pennington,N. 1993. Inside the Jury. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Hayes-Roth B. and van Gent, R. 1996. “Story-making with improvisational puppets and actors”. Tech. Rep. KSL-96-05, Knowl. Sys. Lab., Stanford.
Holmström-Hintikka, G. 1995. “Expert witnesses in legal argumentation”. Argumentation 9(3): 489–502.
Holt, A.W., Meldman, J.A. 1971. “Petri nets and legal systems”. Jurimetrics 12(2).
Holyoak, K.J. and Cheng, P.W. 1995. “Pragmatic reasoning from multiple points of view: a response”. Thinking & Reasoning 1(4): 373–389.
Jackson, B.S. 1996. “'Anchored narratives’ and the interface of law, psychology and semiotics”. Legal and Criminological Psychology 1(1): 17–45.
Jameson, A. 1983. “Impression monitoring in evaluation-oriented dialog: the role of the listener's assumed expectations and values in the generation o informative statements”. Proc. 8th IJCAI, Karlsruhe, Vol. 2, pp. 616–620.
Jones, A.J.I. and Sergot, M. 1992. “Deontic logic in the representation of law: towards a methodology”. Artificial Intelligence and Law 1(1): 45–64.
Keane, A. 1994. The Modern Law of Evidence, 3rd edn. London: Butterworth.
Kowalski, R.A., Toni, F. 1996 “Abstract argumentation” AI&Law 4(34):275–296.
Kraus, S. 1996. “An overview of incentive contracting”. AIJ 83(2): 297–346.
Kuflik, Ts., Nissan, E. and Puni, G. 1991. “Finding excuses with ALIBI: alternative plans that are deontically more defensible”. Computers and Artificial Intelligence 10(4): 297–325 (1991). Also in J. Lopes Alves (ed), Information Technology & Society: Theory, Uses, Impacts. Lisbon: Associação Portuguesa para o Desenvolvimento das Comunicações, & Sociedade Portuguesa de Filosofia: 484–510 (1992).
Linde, C. 1993. Life Stories: The Creation of Coherence. New York: Oxford UP.
Loui, R.P. and Norman, J. 1995. “Rationales and Argument Moves” Artificial Intelligence and Law 3(3): 159–190.
MacCrimmon, M.T. 1989. “Facts, stories and the hearsay rule”. In A.A. Martino (ed), Logica, Informatica, Diritto: Legal Expert Systems (Pre-proceedings of the Third International Conference,. 2 vols. + Appendix). Florence: Istituto per la Documentazione Giuridica, Vol. 1, pp. 461–475.
Martino, A.A. 1994. “Artificial intelligence and law”. International Journal of Law and Information Technology 2(2): 154–193.
Martino, A.A. and Nissan, E. (eds) 1997. Models of Time, Action, and Situations. Special issue in preparation for Artificial Intelligence and Law.
Martino, A.A. and Nissan, E. (eds) 1997. Formal Approaches to Legal Evidence. Part 1: Probabilistic Models. Part 2: Belief & Agency, Relevancy, and Argumentation. Special issue in preparation for Artificial Intelligence and Law.
May, R. 1995. “Criminal practice”. In Criminal Evidence, 3rd edn. London: Sweet & Maxwell.
McDowell, J. 1994. “Knowledge by hearsay”. In B.K. Matilal and A. Chakrabarti (eds), Knowing from Words. Dordrecht: Kluwer.
Meldman, J.A. 1975. “A preliminary study in computer-aided legal analysis”. Dissertation. Technical Report MAC-TR-157. Cambridge, MA: MIT.
Moulin, B. and Rousseau, D. 1994. “A multi-agent approach for modelling conversations”. In Proceedings of the International Avignon Conference AI 94, Natural Language Processing Sub-Conference, Paris, France, June 1994, pp. 35–50.
Nicoloff, F. 1989. “Threats and illocutions”. Journal of Pragmatics 13(4): 501–522.
Nissan, E. 1995. “SEPPHORIS: an augmented hypergraph-grammar representation for events, stipulations, and legal prescriptions”. Law, Computers, and Artificial Intelligence 4(1): 33–77.
Nissan, E. 1995. “Meanings, expression, and prototypes”. Pragmatics and Cognition 3(2): 317–364.
Nissan, E. 1996. “From ALIBI to COLUMBUS: the long march to self-aware computational models of humor”. In J. Hulstijn and A. Nijholt (eds), Automatic Interpretation and Generation of Verbal Humor. Univ. Twente, pp. 69–85.
Nissan, E. (in press). “Notions of place” (2 parts, 104 p.). In A.A. Martino (ed), Norms: Logic & Computation. In Memoriam Carlos E. Alchourrón. Pisa: SEU.
Nissan, E. and Shimony, S.E. 1997. “VEGEDOG: formalism, vegetarian dogs, and partonomies in transition”. Computers and Artificial Intelligence 16(1): 79–104.
Parry, A. 1991. “A universe of stories”. Family Process 30(1): 37–54.
Poulin, D., Mackaay, E., Bratley, P., Frémont, J. 1992. “Time Server: a legal time specialist”. In A. Martino (ed), Expert Systems in Law. North-Holland, 295–312.
Prakken, H. and Sartor, G. 1996. “A dialectical model of assessing conflicting arguments in legal reasoning”. Artificial Intelligence and Law 4(3/4): 331–368.
Prakken, H. and Sergot, M.J. 1996.“Contrary-to-duty obligations”. Studia Logica 57: 91–115.
Prakken, H. and Sergot, M.J. 1996. “Dyadic deontic logic and contrary-to-duty obligations”. In D.N. Nute (ed), Defeasible Deontic Logic: Essays in Nonmonotonic Normative Reasoning. (Synthese Library.) Dordrecht: Kluwer.
Rissland, E.L., Skalak, D.B. and Friedman, M.T. 1996. “BankXX: supporting legal arguments through heuristic retrieval”. Artificial Intelligence and Law 4(1): 1–71.
Robertson, B. and Vignaux, G.A. 1995. Interpreting Evidence: Evaluating Forensic Science in the Courtroom. Chichester, West Sussex: Wiley.
Rousseau, D. 1995. “Modelisation et simulation de conversations dans un univers multi-agent”. Ph.D. Dissertation. Technical Report 993, Department of Computer Science and Operational Research, University of Montreal.
Rousseau, D. 1996. “Personality in synthetic agents”. Technical Report KSL-96-21, Knowledge Systems Laboratory, Stanford University.
Rousseau, D., Moulin, B. and Lapalme, G. 1997. “Interpreting communicative acts and building a conversational model”. Journal of Natural Language Engineering.
Sappington, D. 1984. “Incentive contracting with asymmetric and imperfect precontractual knowledge”. Journal of Economic Theory 34: 52–70.
Schum, D. 1993. “Argument structuring and evidence evaluation”. [20]: 175–191.
Schum, D. and Tillers, P. 1991. “Marshalling evidence for adversary litigation”. Cardozo Law Review 13(2/3): 657–704.
Skalak, D.B. and Rissland, E.L. 1992. “Arguments and cases: an inevitable intertwining”. Artificial Intelligence and Law 1(1): 3–44.
Tillers, P. 1983. “Modern theories of relevancy”. Section 37 in Wigmore on Evidence (i.e., 'Evidence in Trials at Common Law’ by John Henry Wigmore), in Ten Volumes; Volume IA, Tillers Revision P. Tillers (revision). Boston: Little, Brown & Co., pp. 1004–1095.
Tillers, P. 1989. “Webs of things in the mind: a new science of evidence”. Review of D. Schum, Evidence and Inference for the Intelligence Analyst (2 vols). Lanham, MD: Univ. Press of America, 1987. Michigan Law Review 87(6): 1225–1258.
Tillers, P. and Green, E.D. (eds) 1988. Probability and Inference in the Law of Evidence. Dordrecht: Kluwer.
Tillers, P. and Schum, D. 1991. “A theory of preliminary fact investigation”. U.C. Davis Law Review 24(4): 931–1012.
Tomberlin, J. 1981. “Contrary-to-duty imperatives and conditional obligation”. Nous 16.
Vila, L. and Yoshino, H. 1995. “Temporal representation for legal reasoning”. Proceedings of the Third International Workshop on Legal Expert Systems for the CISG.
Williams, B. 1981. “Moral luck”. In his Moral Luck. Cambridge UP, pp. 20–39.
Wright, von, G.H. 1951. “Deontic logic”. In his Logical Studies. London: Routledge.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 1997 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg
About this paper
Cite this paper
Nissan, E., Rousseau, D. (1997). Towards AI formalisms for legal evidence. In: Raś, Z.W., Skowron, A. (eds) Foundations of Intelligent Systems. ISMIS 1997. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 1325. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-63614-5_32
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-63614-5_32
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg
Print ISBN: 978-3-540-63614-4
Online ISBN: 978-3-540-69612-4
eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive