On balance

Lauritsen, Marc

doi:10.1007/s10506-015-9163-0

Cited by 17 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 20 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…At the top level, rules tend to express the need to accommodate several values in the reasoning (thus in Table 3, node 1 refers to all five values). This accords both with work such as [15] in which the value conflicts on which the case turns do indeed appear low in the tree, and [31], which observes that "often balances are encountered at particular nodes in a process that involves rules and other reasoning strategies". Moreover, the account presented here allows for different preferences to be expressed at different nodes, so that assessment of the relative importance of pair of values can be made contextually dependent.…”

Section: Degrees Of Presencesupporting

confidence: 60%

Factors, issues and values

Al-Abdulkarim

Atkinson

Bench‐Capon

2015

Proceedings of the 15th International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Law

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this paper we revisit reasoning with legal cases, with a view to articulating the relationships between issues, factors, facts and values, and to identifying areas for future work on these topics. We start from the different ways in which attempts have been made to go beyond a fortori reasoning from the precedent base, so that conclusions not fully justified by the precedents can be drawn. We then use a particular example domain taken from the literature to illustrate our preferred approach and to relate factors and values. From this we observe that much current work depends critically on the ascription of factors to cases in a Boolean manner, while in practice there are compelling reasons to see the presence of factors as a matter of degree. On the basis of our observations we make suggestions for the directions of future work on this topic.

show abstract

Section: Degrees Of Presencesupporting

confidence: 60%

Factors, issues and values

Al-Abdulkarim

Atkinson

Bench‐Capon

2015

Proceedings of the 15th International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Law

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In such cases it may seem necessary to trade off one factor against another, so that the more serious the suspected crime the greater the intrusion on privacy that is justified. Such balancing of interests has been discussed in [35] and [26]. We would, however, in line with the two stage approach, follow [10] Fig.…”

Section: Factors With Magnitudementioning

confidence: 70%

Using Issues to Explain Legal Decisions

Bench-Capon

2021

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The need to explain the output from Machine Learning systems designed to predict the outcomes of legal cases has led to a renewed interest in the explanations offered by traditional AI and Law systems, especially those using factor based reasoning and precedent cases. In this paper we consider what sort of explanations we should expect from such systems, with a particular focus on the structure that can be provided by the use of issues in cases.

show abstract

“…There literature of the subject of balancing is vast in the research on AI and Law [7,9,10]. A limitation which can be seen as regards the adoption of this view in the PPSS is that this project intends to be closely based on actual wording of judicial opinions, which sometimes do not explicitly mention the relevant values and goals.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%