Reasoning with Cases

A Selected Bibliography

Trevor Bench-Capon

Department of Computer Science

University of Liverpool

General History of the Field

Trevor J. M. Bench-Capon, Michal Araszkiewicz, Kevin D. Ashley, Katie Atkinson, Floris Bex, Filipe Borges, Danièle Bourcier, Paul Bourgine, Jack G. Conrad, Enrico Francesconi, Thomas F. Gordon, Guido Governatori, Jochen L. Leidner, David D. Lewis, Ronald Prescott Loui, L. Thorne McCarty, Henry Prakken, Frank Schilder, Erich Schweighofer, Paul Thompson, Alex Tyrrell, Bart Verheij, Douglas N. Walton, Adam Zachary Wyner: A history of AI and Law in 50 papers: 25 years of the international conference on AI and Law. Artif. Intell. Law 20(3): 215-319 (2012)

Trevor Bench-Capon (2017). HYPOs Legacy: Introduction to the Virtual Special Issue. Artificial Intelligence and Law, Vol 25 No 2. Pages 205-250.

Thorne McCarty

L. Thorne McCarty, Reflections on TAXMAN: An Experiment in Artificial Intelligence and Legal Reasoning, Harvard Law Review, vol. 90, pages 837-893 (1977).

L. Thorne McCarty, N. S. Sridharan: The Representation of an Evolving System of Legal Concepts: II. Prototypes and Deformations. IJCAI 1981: 246-253

"A Computational Theory of Eisner v. Macomber," in C. Ciampi, ed., Artificial Intelligence and Legal Information Systems, pages 329-355 (North-Holland Publishing Co., 1982).

L. Thorne McCarty: An Implementation of Eisner v. Macomber. ICAIL 1995: 276-286

Edwina Rissland

Edwina L. Rissland: Examples in Legal Reasoning: Legal Hypotheticals. IJCAI 1983: 90-93

Edwina L. Rissland, Jody J. Daniels: A Hybrid CBR-IR Approach to Legal Information Retrieval. ICAIL 1995: 52-61

Edwina L. Rissland, M. Timur Friedman: Detecting Change in Legal Concepts. ICAIL 1995: 127-136

HYPO

Edwina L. Rissland, Kevin D. Ashley: A Case-Based System for Trade Secrets Law. ICAIL 1987: 60-66

Kevin D. Ashley, Edwina L. Rissland: A Case-Based Approach to Modeling Legal Expertise. IEEE Expert 3(3): 70-77 (1988)

Kevin D. Ashley: Reasoning with Cases and Hypotheticals in HYPO. International Journal of Man-Machine Studies 34(6): 753-796 (1991)

Ashley, K.D., (1990). Modeling Legal Argument: Reasoning with Cases and Hypotheticals. The MIT Press / Bradford Books, Cambridge, MA.

CABARET

Edwina L. Rissland, David B. Skalak: CABARET: Rule Interpretation in a Hybrid Architecture. International Journal of Man-Machine Studies 34(6): 839-887 (1991)

David B. Skalak, Edwina L. Rissland: Arguments and cases: An inevitable intertwining. Artif. Intell. Law 1(1): 3-44 (1992)

BANKXX

Edwina L. Rissland, David B. Skalak, M. Timur Friedman: BankXX: Supporting Legal Arguments through Heuristic Retrieval. Artif. Intell. Law 4(1): 1-71 (1996)

Edwina L. Rissland, David B. Skalak, M. Timur Friedman: Evaluating a Legal Argument Program: The BankXX Experiments. Artif. Intell. Law 5(1-2): 1-74 (1997)

CATO

Vincent Aleven, Kevin D. Ashley: Doing Things with Factors. ICAIL 1995: 31-41

Vincent Aleven, Kevin D. Ashley: Evaluating a Learning Environment for Case-Based Argumentation Skills. ICAIL 1997: 170-179

Aleven, V. (1997). Teaching Case-Based Argumentation Through a Model and Examples. Ph.D. Thesis, Intelligent Systems Program, University of Pittsburgh.

IBP

Stefanie Brüninghaus, Kevin D. Ashley: Predicting Outcomes of Case-Based Legal Arguments. ICAIL 2003: 233-242

A Predictive Role for Intermediate Legal Concepts, Ashley, K. and Brüninghaus, S. (2003). In the Proceedings 16th Annual Conference on Legal Knowledge and Information Systems, Jurix-03. pp. 153-162. Utrecht, The Netherlands. December. IOS Press, Amsterdam.

Stefanie Brüninghaus, Kevin D. Ashley: Generating Legal Arguments and Predictions from Case Texts. ICAIL 2005: 65-74

Reconstructing Factor Based Reasoning

T.J.M. Bench-Capon, Arguing with Cases, in Proceedings of JURIX 97, GNI Nijmegen, 1997, pp 85-100.

Henry Prakken, Giovanni Sartor: Modelling Reasoning with Precedents in a Formal Dialogue Game. Artif. Intell. Law 6(2-4): 231-287 (1998)

M. Allen, Trevor J. M. Bench-Capon, Geof Staniford: A Multi-Agent Legal Argument Generator. DEXA Workshop 2000: 1080-1086

John F. Horty, Trevor J. M. Bench-Capon: A factor-based definition of precedential constraint. Artif. Intell. Law 20(2): 181-214 (2012)

Trevor J. M. Bench-Capon: Representing Popov v Hayashi with dimensions and factors. Artif. Intell. Law 20(1): 15-35 (2012)

Adam Rigoni, 2015. An improved factor based approach to precedential constraint. Artificial Intelligence and Law, 23(2), pp.133-160.

Henry Prakken, 2019. Modelling accrual of arguments in ASPIC+. In Proceedings of the Seventeenth International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Law (pp. 103-112).

Henry Prakken 2019, December. Comparing Alternative Factor-and Precedent-Based Accounts of Precedential Constraint. In Proceedings of JURIX 2019: The Thirty-second Annual Conference p. 73-82. IOS Press.

Dimensions and Factors with Magnitude

Edwina Rissland and Kevin Ashley, 2002. A note on dimensions and factors. Artificial Intelligence and law, 10(1-3), pp.65-77.

Bench-Capon, Trevor and Rissland. Edwina, 2001. Back to the future: dimensions revisited. In Proceedings of JURIX 2001.

Trevor Bench-Capon and Katie Atkinson, 2017. Dimensions and Values for Legal CBR. In JURIX (pp. 27-32).

Adam Rigoni. Representing dimensions within the reason model of precedent. Artificial Intelligence and Law 26, no. 1 (2018): 1-22.

Trevor Bench-Capon and Katie Atkinson., 2018. Lessons from Implementing Factors with Magnitude. In JURIX (pp. 11-20).

John Horty, 2019. Reasoning with dimensions and magnitudes. Artificial Intelligence and Law, 27(3), pp.309-345.

Argumentation

T.J.M. Bench-Capon, 2002. Representation of Case Law as an Argumentation Framework. In T. Bench-Capon, Daskalopoulu, A., and Winkels, R., (eds) Legal Knowledge and Information Systems, Proceedings of Jurix 2002. IOS Press: Amsterdam. pp 103-112.

Adam Zachary Wyner, Trevor J. M. Bench-Capon: Modelling Judicial Context in Argumentation Frameworks. J. Log. Comput. 19(6): 941-968 (2009)

Colen, S., Cnossen, F., & Verheij, B. (2009). How Much Logical Structure is Helpful in Content-Based Argumentation Software for Legal Case Solving?

Henry Prakken: Reconstructing Popov v. Hayashi in a framework for argumentation with structured arguments and Dungean semantics. Artif. Intell. Law 20(1): 57-82 (2012)

Tom Gordon and Doug Walton, 2012. A Carneades reconstruction of Popov v Hayashi. Artificial Intelligence and Law, 20(1), pp.37-56

Henry Prakken and Giovanni Sartor, 2015. Law and logic: A review from an argumentation perspective. Artificial Intelligence, 227, pp.214-245.

Tom Gordon and Doug Walton, 2016, September. Formalizing Balancing Arguments. In Proceedings of COMMA 2016 (pp. 327-338).

Michal Araskiewicz and Tomasz Zurek, 2017. Balancing with Thresholds. Legal Knowledge and Information Systems, p.107-112.

Values

Trevor J. M. Bench-Capon: The missing link revisited: The role of teleology in representing legal argument. Artif. Intell. Law 10(1-3): 79-94 (2002)

Henry Prakken: An exercise in formalising teleological case-based reasoning. Artif. Intell. Law 10(1-3): 113-133 (2002)

Giovanni Sartor Teleological arguments and theory-based dialectics. . Artif. Intell. Law 10(1-3): 95-112 (2002)

Trevor J. M. Bench-Capon, Giovanni Sartor: A model of legal reasoning with cases incorporating theories and values. Artif. Intell. 150(1-2): 97-143 (2003)

Trevor J. M. Bench-Capon, Katie Atkinson, Alison Chorley: Persuasion and Value in Legal Argument. J. Log. Comput. 15(6): 1075-1097 (2005)

Adam Zachary Wyner, Trevor J. M. Bench-Capon, Katie Atkinson: Arguments, Values and Baseballs: Representation of Popov v. Hayashi. JURIX 2007: 151-160

Trevor J. M. Bench-Capon, Sanjay Modgil: Case law in extended argumentation frameworks. ICAIL 2009: 118-127

Latifa Al-Abdulkarim, Hatie Atkinson, and Trevor Bench-Capon, 2015. Factors, issues and values: Revisiting reasoning with cases. In Proceedings of the 15th international conference on artificial intelligence and law (pp. 3-12).

Argumentation Schemes

Katie Greenwood, Trevor J. M. Bench-Capon, Peter McBurney: Towards a Computational Account of Persuasion in Law. ICAIL 2003: 22-31

Katie Atkinson, Trevor J. M. Bench-Capon, Peter McBurney: Arguing about cases as practical reasoning. ICAIL 2005: 35-44

Adam Zachary Wyner, Trevor J. M. Bench-Capon: Argument Schemes for Legal Case-based Reasoning. JURIX 2007: 139-149

Trevor Bench-Capon, Henry Prakken, Adam Wyner and Katie Atkinson (2013). Argument Schemes for Reasoning with Legal Cases Using Values. Proceedings of Fourteenth International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Law. ICAIL 2013 pp13-22.

Katie Atkinson, Trevor Bench-Capon, Henry Prakken and Adam Wyner, 2013. Argumentation Schemes for Reasoning about Factors with Dimensions. In Proceedings of JURIX 2013 (pp. 39-48).

Henry Prakken, Adam Wyner, Trevor Bench-Capon and Katie Atkinson (2015), A formalisation of argumentation schemes for legal case-based reasoning in ASPIC+. Journal of Logic and Computation, 25(5) pp 1141-66.

AGATHA

Alison Chorley, Trevor J. M. Bench-Capon: AGATHA: Using heuristic search to automate the construction of case law theories. Artif. Intell. Law 13(1): 9-51 (2005)

Theory Construction

Alison Chorley, Trevor J. M. Bench-Capon: An empirical investigation of reasoning with legal cases through theory construction and application. Artif. Intell. Law 13(3-4): 323-371 (2005)

Adam Zachary Wyner, Trevor J. M. Bench-Capon, Katie Atkinson: Towards formalising argumentation about legal cases. ICAIL 2011: 1-10

Neural Networks

Trevor J. M. Bench-Capon: Neural Networks and Open Texture. ICAIL 1993: 292-297

Semantic Networks

Karl Branting: Representing and Reusing Explanations of Legal Precedents. ICAIL 1989: 103-110

Karl Branting: Building Explanations from Rules and Structured Cases. International Journal of Man-Machine Studies 34(6): 797-837 (1991)

Karl Branting: A Reduction-Graph Model of Ratio Decidendi. ICAIL 1993: 40-49

Karl Branting: A computational model of ratio decidendi. Artif. Intell. Law 2(1): 1-31 (1993)

Extending Factors

Roth, B., & Verheij, B. (2004). Dialectical Arguments and Case Comparison. Legal Knowledge and Information Systems. JURIX 2004: The Seventeenth Annual Conference (ed. Gordon, T.F.), 99-108. Amsterdam: IOS Press.

Evidence

F.J. Bex, H. Prakken & B. Verheij (2007) Formalising argumentative story-based analysis of evidence. Proceedings of the 11th International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Law, 1-10. New York: ACM Press.

F.J. Bex, S.W. van den Braak, H. van Oostendorp, H. Prakken, H.B. Verheij & G.A.W. Vreeswijk (2007) Sense-making software for crime investigation: how to combine stories and arguments? Law, Probability & Risk 6:145-168

F.J. Bex, P.J. van Koppen, H. Prakken & B. Verheij (2010) A Hybrid Formal Theory of Arguments, Stories and Criminal Evidence. Artificial Intelligence and Law 18:2, 123-152

F.J. Bex (2011) Arguments, Stories and Criminal Evidence: A Formal Hybrid Theory. Springer, Dordrecht.