An Argumentation-Based Legal Reasoning Approach for DL-Ontology
Ontology is a popular method for knowledge representation in different domains, including the legal domain, and description logics (DL) is commonly used as its description language. To handle reasoning based on inconsistent DL-based legal ontologies, the current paper presents a structured argumentation framework particularly for reasoning in legal contexts on the basis of ASPIC+, and translates the legal ontology into formulas and rules of an argumentation theory. With a particular focus on the design of autonomous vehicles from the perspective of legal AI, we show that using this combined theory of formal argumentation and DL-based legal ontology, acceptable assertions can be obtained based on inconsistent ontologies, and the traditional reasoning tasks of DL ontologies can also be accomplished. In addition, a formal definition of explanations for the result of reasoning is presented.
Code (0)
등록된 구현이 없습니다.
Tasks
Autonomous VehiclesLegal ReasoningMethods 이 논문이 사용한 방법론
Similar Papers 제목 키워드 기반
AI and Legal Argumentation: Aligning the Autonomous Levels of AI Legal Reasoning
Legal argumentation is a vital cornerstone of justice, underpinning an adversarial form of law, and extensive research has attempted to augment or undertake legal argumentation via the use of computer-based automation in…
Legal ReasoningUsing Argumentation Schemes to Model Legal Reasoning
We present argumentation schemes to model reasoning with legal cases. We provide schemes for each of the three stages that take place after the facts are established: factor ascription, issue resolution and outcome deter…
Legal ReasoningmodelExplainable Automated Reasoning in Law using Probabilistic Epistemic Argumentation
Applying automated reasoning tools for decision support and analysis in law has the potential to make court decisions more transparent and objective. Since there is often uncertainty about the accuracy and relevance of e…
Guidelines for the Annotation and Visualization of Legal Argumentation Structures in Chinese Judicial Decisions
This Guideline presents a systematic and operationalizable annotation framework for representing legal argumentation structures in judicial decisions. Grounded in theories of legal reasoning and argumentation, the framew…
Legal ReasoningArgument MiningTechnical Report on the Learning of Case Relevance in Case-Based Reasoning with Abstract Argumentation
Case-based reasoning is known to play an important role in several legal settings. In this paper we focus on a recent approach to case-based reasoning, supported by an instantiation of abstract argumentation whereby argu…
Abstract ArgumentationSpecificity