research-article

Reasoning with dimensions and magnitudes

Author:

John HortyAuthors Info & Claims

ICAIL '17: Proceedings of the 16th edition of the International Conference on Articial Intelligence and Law

Pages 109 - 118

https://doi.org/10.1145/3086512.3086523

Published: 12 June 2017 Publication History

Abstract

In response to problems raised by Bench-Capon [4], this paper shows how two models of precedential constraint can be broadened to include legal information represented through dimensions, as well as standard factors.

References

[1]

Vincent Aleven and Kevin Ashley. 1997. Evaluating a learning environment for case-based argumentation skills. In Proceedings of the Sixth International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Law (ICAIL-97). The Association for Computing Machinery Press, 170--179.

Digital Library

[2]

Larry Alexander. 1989. Constrained by precedent. Southern California Law Review 63 (1989), 1--64.

[3]

Kevin Ashley. 1990. Modeling Legal Argument: Reasoning with Cases and Hypotheticals. The MIT Press.

Digital Library

[4]

Trevor Bench-Capon. 1999. Some observations on modelling case based reasoning with formal argument models. In Proceedings of the Sixth International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Law (ICAIL-99). The Association for Computing Machinery Press, 36--42.

Digital Library

[5]

Trevor Bench-Capon. 2002. The missing link revisited: the role of teleology in representing legal argument. Artificial Intelligence and Law 10 (2002), 79--94.

Digital Library

[6]

Trevor Bench-Capon. 2012. Representing Popov v. Hayashi with dimensions and factors. Artificial Intelligence and Law 20 (2012), 15--35.

Digital Library

[7]

Trevor Bench-Capon and Edwina Rissland. 2001. Back to the future: dimensions revisited. In The Fourteenth Annual Conference on Legal Knowledge and Information Systems (JURIX-2001). IOS Press, 41--52.

[8]

Trevor Bench-Capon and Giovanni Sartor. 2003. A model of legal reasoning with cases incorporating theories and values. Artificial Intelligence 150 (2003), 97--143.

Digital Library

[9]

Neil Duxbury. 2005. The Nature and Authority of Precedent. Cambridge University Press.

[10]

Melvin Eisenberg. 1988. The Nature of the Common Law. Harvard University Press.

[11]

Arthur Goodhart. 1930. Determining the ratio decidendi of a case. Yale Law Journal 40 (1930), 161--183.

[12]

John Horty. 2004. The result model of precedent. Legal Theory 10 (2004), 19--31.

[13]

John Horty. 2011. Rules and reasons in the theory of precedent. Legal Theory 17 (2011), 1--33.

[14]

John Horty and Trevor Bench-Capon. 2012. A factor-based definition of precedential constraint. Artificial Intelligence and Law 20 (2012), 181--214.

Digital Library

[15]

Grant Lamond. 2005. Do precedents create rules? Legal Theory 11 (2005), 1--26.

[16]

Ronald Loui, Jeff Norman, Jon Olson, and Andrew Merrill. 1993. A design for reasoning with policies, precedents, and rationales. In Proceedings of the Fourth International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Law (ICAIL-93). The Association for Computing Machinery Press, 201--211.

Digital Library

[17]

Henry Prakken. 2002. An exercise in formalising teleological case-based reasoning. Artificial Intelligence and Law 10 (2002), 113--133.

Digital Library

[18]

Henry Prakken and Giovanni Sartor. 1998. Modelling reasoning with precedents in a formal dialogue game. Artificial Intelligence and Law 6 (1998), 231--287.

Digital Library

[19]

Joseph Raz. 1979. The Authority of Law. Oxford University Press.

[20]

Edwina Rissland and Kevin Ashley. 2002. A note on dimensions and factors. Artificial Intelligence and Law 10 (2002), 65--77.

Digital Library

[21]

Edwina Rissland and David Skalak. 1989. Interpreting statutory predicates. In Proceedings of the Second International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Law (ICAIL-89). The Association for Computing Machinery Press, 46--53.

Digital Library

[22]

A. W. B. Simpson. 1961. The ratio decidendi of a case and the doctrine of binding precedent. In Oxford Essays in Jurisprudence, A. G. Guest (Ed.). Oxford University Press, 148--175.

Cited By

Rigoni A(2024)Toward representing interpretation in factor-based models of precedentArtificial Intelligence and Law10.1007/s10506-023-09384-533:1(199-226)Online publication date: 12-Jan-2024
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10506-023-09384-5
Di Florio CRotolo A(2024)Judicial ExplanationsRules and Reasoning10.1007/978-3-031-72407-7_8(91-107)Online publication date: 11-Sep-2024
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-72407-7_8
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

Reasoning with dimensions and magnitudes
1. Applied computing
  1. Law, social and behavioral sciences
    1. Law
2. Computing methodologies
  1. Artificial intelligence
    1. Knowledge representation and reasoning
    2. Natural language processing
      1. Lexical semantics

Recommendations

Precedential constraint: the role of issues
ICAIL '21: Proceedings of the Eighteenth International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Law

Horty, Rigoni and Prakken have developed formal characterisations of precedential constraint based on dimensions and factors as introduced in HYPO and CATO. We discuss the relation between dimensions and factors and also describe the current models of ...
Representing dimensions within the reason model of precedent

This paper gives an account of dimensions in the reason model found in Horty (Legal Theory 17(1): 1---33, 2011), Horty and Bench-Capon (in: Proceedings of the 15th international conference on artificial intelligence and law, pp 109---118, ACM Press, ...
Reasoning with dimensions and magnitudes
Abstract
This paper shows how two models of precedential constraint can be broadened to include legal information represented through dimensions. I begin by describing a standard representation of legal cases based on boolean factors alone, and then ...

Comments

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

cover image ACM Conferences

ICAIL '17: Proceedings of the 16th edition of the International Conference on Articial Intelligence and Law

June 2017

299 pages

ISBN:9781450348911

DOI:10.1145/3086512

Conference Chair:
Jeroen Keppens
King's College London, United Kingdom
,
Program Chair:
Guido Governatori
Data61, CSIRO, Australia

Copyright © 2017 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

SIGAI: ACM Special Interest Group on Artificial Intelligence

Publisher

Association for Computing Machinery

New York, NY, United States

Publication History

Published: 12 June 2017

Permissions

Request permissions for this article.

Request Permissions

Check for updates

Author Tags

Qualifiers

Research-article

Conference

ICAIL '17

Sponsor:

SIGAI

ICAIL '17: Sixteenth International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Law

June 12 - 16, 2017

London, United Kingdom

Acceptance Rates

Overall Acceptance Rate 69 of 169 submissions, 41%

Contributors

Other Metrics

View Article Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

11
Total Citations
View Citations
113
Total Downloads

Downloads (Last 12 months)13
Downloads (Last 6 weeks)2

Reflects downloads up to 05 Mar 2025

Other Metrics

View Author Metrics

Citations

Cited By

Rigoni A(2024)Toward representing interpretation in factor-based models of precedentArtificial Intelligence and Law10.1007/s10506-023-09384-533:1(199-226)Online publication date: 12-Jan-2024
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10506-023-09384-5
Di Florio CRotolo A(2024)Judicial ExplanationsRules and Reasoning10.1007/978-3-031-72407-7_8(91-107)Online publication date: 11-Sep-2024
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-72407-7_8
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
Prakken H(2021)A formal analysis of some factor- and precedent-based accounts of precedential constraintArtificial Intelligence and Law10.1007/s10506-021-09284-6Online publication date: 23-Feb-2021
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10506-021-09284-6
Horty J(2020)Modifying the reason modelArtificial Intelligence and Law10.1007/s10506-020-09275-z29:2(271-285)Online publication date: 18-Nov-2020
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10506-020-09275-z
Atkinson KBench-Capon T(2019)Reasoning with Legal CasesProceedings of the Seventeenth International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Law10.1145/3322640.3326695(12-21)Online publication date: 17-Jun-2019
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3322640.3326695
Horty J(2019)Reasoning with dimensions and magnitudesArtificial Intelligence and Law10.1007/s10506-019-09245-0Online publication date: 11-Mar-2019
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10506-019-09245-0
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
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: 1-Mar-2018
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1007/s10506-017-9216-7
Show More Cited By

View Options

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.

Figures

Tables

Media

View Table of Conten