research-article

Norms and Extended Argumentation Frameworks

Authors:

Trevor Bench-Capon,

Sanjay ModgilAuthors Info & Claims

ICAIL '19: Proceedings of the Seventeenth International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Law

Pages 174 - 178

https://doi.org/10.1145/3322640.3326696

Published: 17 June 2019 Publication History

Abstract

This paper discusses reasoning about norms using Extended Argumentation Frameworks. We argue that norms emerge from a process of value based practical reasoning. We model practical reasoning using Action Based Alternating Transition Systems with Values, with the resulting arguments evaluated in an Extended Argumentation Framework, which permits arguments to attack attacks as well as arguments, and so provides a natural way of representing exceptions. Following our consideration of how norms are justified, we consider their application. Our representation of norms in EAFs enables us to offer an accessible account of permissions and exceptions. We illustrate our approach with an example relating to some US Supreme Court Fourth Amendment cases.

References

[1]

T. Ågotnes, W. van der Hoek, M. Tennenholtz, and M. Wooldridge. Power in normative systems. In Proceedings of The 8th AAMAS conference, pages 145--152. IFAAMS, 2009.

Digital Library

[2]

K. Atkinson and T. Bench-Capon. Practical reasoning as presumptive argumentation using action based alternating transition systems. Artificial Intelligence, 171(10-15):855--874, 2007.

Digital Library

[3]

T. Bench-Capon. Relating values in a series of Supreme Court decisions. In Proceedings of JURIX 2011, pages 13--22. Citeseer, 2011.

[4]

T. Bench-Capon. Transition systems for designing and reasoning about norms. Artificial Intelligence and Law, 23(4):345--366, 2015.

Digital Library

[5]

T. Bench-Capon and S. Modgil. Case law in extended argumentation frameworks. In Proceedings of the 12th International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Law, pages 118--127. ACM, 2009.

Digital Library

[6]

T. Bench-Capon and S. Modgil. Rules are made to be broken. AI4J--Artificial Intelligence for Justice, pages 9--17, 2016.

[7]

T. Bench-Capon and S. Modgil. When and how to violate norms. In Proceedings of JURIX 2016, pages 43--52, 2016.

[8]

T. Bench-Capon and S. Modgil. Norms and value based reasoning: justifying compliance and violation. Artificial Intelligence and Law, 25(1):29--64, 2017.

Digital Library

[9]

T. Bench-Capon and S. Modgil. Representing Norms with Extended Argumentation Frameworks. Technical Report ULCS-19-001, University of Liverpool, 2019.

[10]

D. Berman and C. Hafner. Representing teleological structure in case-based legal reasoning: The missing link. In Proceedings of the Fourth International Conference on Artificial intelligence and Law, pages 50--59, 1993.

Digital Library

[11]

F. Bex, K. Atkinson, and T. Bench-Capon. Arguments as a new perspective on character motive in stories. Literary and Linguistic Computing, 29(4):467--487, 2014.

[12]

G. Governatori, F. Olivieri, A. Rotolo, and S. Scannapieco. Computing strong and weak permissions in defeasible logic. Journal of Philosophical Logic, 42(6):799--829, 2013.

[13]

R. Hare. Freedom and reason, volume 92. Oxford Paperbacks, 1963.

[14]

A. Jones and M. Sergot. Deontic logic in the representation of law: Towards a methodology. Artificial Intelligence and Law, 1(1):45--64, 1992.

Digital Library

[15]

S. Mahmoud, N. Griffiths, J. Keppens, A. Taweel, T. Bench-Capon, and M. Luck. Establishing norms with metanorms in distributed computational systems. Artificial Intelligence and Law, 23(4):367--407, 2015.

Digital Library

[16]

A. H. Maslow. A theory of human motivation. Psychological review, 50(4):370, 1943.

[17]

S. Modgil. Reasoning about preferences in argumentation frameworks. Artificial Intelligence, 173(9):901--934, 2009.

Digital Library

[18]

J. Rawls. A Theory of Justice. Harvard University Press, 1971.

[19]

E. L. Rissland. Dimension-based analysis of hypotheticals from supreme court oral argument. In Proceedings of the Second ICAIL, pages 111--120, 1989.

Digital Library

[20]

M. Wooldridge and W. van der Hoek. On obligations and normative ability: Towards a logical analysis of the social contract. Journal of Applied Logic, 3:396--420, 2005.

Cited By

Zurek TKwik Jvan Engers T(2023)Model of a military autonomous device following International Humanitarian LawEthics and Information Technology10.1007/s10676-023-09682-125:1Online publication date: 15-Feb-2023
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10676-023-09682-1
Raymond AGunes HProrok AEl Fallah Seghrouchni ASukthankar GAn BYorke-Smith N(2020)Culture-Based Explainable Human-Agent DeconflictionProceedings of the 19th International Conference on Autonomous Agents and MultiAgent Systems10.5555/3398761.3398890(1107-1115)Online publication date: 5-May-2020
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.5555/3398761.3398890
Liao BAnderson MAnderson S(2020)Representation, justification, and explanation in a value-driven agent: an argumentation-based approachAI and Ethics10.1007/s43681-020-00001-8Online publication date: 14-Sep-2020
https://doi.org/10.1007/s43681-020-00001-8

Index Terms

Norms and Extended Argumentation Frameworks
1. Applied computing
  1. Law, social and behavioral sciences
    1. Law

Recommendations

Labellings and games for extended argumentation frameworks
IJCAI'09: Proceedings of the 21st International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence

Dung's abstract theory of argumentation has become established as a general framework for various species of non-monotonic reasoning, and reasoning in the presence of conflict. A Dung framework consists of arguments related by attacks, and the ...
Case law in extended argumentation frameworks
ICAIL '09: Proceedings of the 12th International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Law

In this paper we discuss how recent developments in argumentation frameworks, most notably Extended Argumentation Frameworks, can inform the representation of a body of case law using abstract argumentation techniques. This builds on previous work which ...
Reasoning about Preferences in Structured Extended Argumentation Frameworks
Proceedings of the 2010 conference on Computational Models of Argument: Proceedings of COMMA 2010

This paper combines two recent extensions of Dung's abstract argumentation frameworks in order to define an abstract formalism for reasoning about preferences in structured argumentation frameworks. First, extended argumentation frameworks extend Dung ...

Comments

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

cover image ACM Conferences

ICAIL '19: Proceedings of the Seventeenth International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Law

June 2019

312 pages

ISBN:9781450367547

DOI:10.1145/3322640

Copyright © 2019 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

In-Cooperation

Univ. of Montreal: University of Montreal
AAAI
IAAIL: Intl Asso for Artifical Intel & Law

Publisher

Association for Computing Machinery

New York, NY, United States

Publication History

Published: 17 June 2019

Permissions

Request permissions for this article.

Request Permissions

Check for updates

Author Tags

Qualifiers

Research-article
Research
Refereed limited

Conference

ICAIL '19

Sponsor:

SIGAI

ICAIL '19: Seventeenth International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Law

June 17 - 21, 2019

QC, Montreal, Canada

Acceptance Rates

Overall Acceptance Rate 69 of 169 submissions, 41%

Contributors

Other Metrics

View Article Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

3
Total Citations
View Citations
142
Total Downloads

Downloads (Last 12 months)7
Downloads (Last 6 weeks)0

Reflects downloads up to 08 Mar 2025

Other Metrics

View Author Metrics

Citations

Cited By

Zurek TKwik Jvan Engers T(2023)Model of a military autonomous device following International Humanitarian LawEthics and Information Technology10.1007/s10676-023-09682-125:1Online publication date: 15-Feb-2023
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10676-023-09682-1
Raymond AGunes HProrok AEl Fallah Seghrouchni ASukthankar GAn BYorke-Smith N(2020)Culture-Based Explainable Human-Agent DeconflictionProceedings of the 19th International Conference on Autonomous Agents and MultiAgent Systems10.5555/3398761.3398890(1107-1115)Online publication date: 5-May-2020
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.5555/3398761.3398890
Liao BAnderson MAnderson S(2020)Representation, justification, and explanation in a value-driven agent: an argumentation-based approachAI and Ethics10.1007/s43681-020-00001-8Online publication date: 14-Sep-2020
https://doi.org/10.1007/s43681-020-00001-8

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