Argumentation and Defeasible Reasoning in the Law

Marco Billi, Roberta Calegari, Giuseppe Contissa, Francesca Lagioia, Giuseppe Pisano, Galileo Sartor and Giovanni Sartor
Additional contact information
Marco Billi: Alma AI—Alma Mater Research Institute for Human-Centered Artificial Intelligence, Alma Mater Studiorum —Università di Bologna, 40100 Bologna, Italy
Roberta Calegari: Alma AI—Alma Mater Research Institute for Human-Centered Artificial Intelligence, Alma Mater Studiorum —Università di Bologna, 40100 Bologna, Italy
Giuseppe Contissa: Alma AI—Alma Mater Research Institute for Human-Centered Artificial Intelligence, Alma Mater Studiorum —Università di Bologna, 40100 Bologna, Italy
Francesca Lagioia: Alma AI—Alma Mater Research Institute for Human-Centered Artificial Intelligence, Alma Mater Studiorum —Università di Bologna, 40100 Bologna, Italy
Giuseppe Pisano: Alma AI—Alma Mater Research Institute for Human-Centered Artificial Intelligence, Alma Mater Studiorum —Università di Bologna, 40100 Bologna, Italy
Galileo Sartor: Computer Science Department, University of Torino, 10124 Torino, Italy
Giovanni Sartor: Alma AI—Alma Mater Research Institute for Human-Centered Artificial Intelligence, Alma Mater Studiorum —Università di Bologna, 40100 Bologna, Italy

J, 2021, vol. 4, issue 4, 1-18

Abstract: Different formalisms for defeasible reasoning have been used to represent knowledge and reason in the legal field. In this work, we provide an overview of the following logic-based approaches to defeasible reasoning: defeasible logic, Answer Set Programming, ABA+, ASPIC+, and DeLP. We compare features of these approaches under three perspectives: the logical model (knowledge representation), the method (computational mechanisms), and the technology (available software resources). On top of that, two real examples in the legal domain are designed and implemented in ASPIC+ to showcase the benefit of an argumentation approach in real-world domains. The CrossJustice and Interlex projects are taken as a testbed, and experiments are conducted with the Arg2P technology.

Keywords: argumentation; defeasible reasoning; tools and technologies; Arg2P (search for similar items in EconPapers)
JEL-codes: I1 I10 I12 I13 I14 I18 I19 (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2021
References: View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (1)

Downloads: (external link)
https://www.mdpi.com/2571-8800/4/4/61/pdf (application/pdf)
https://www.mdpi.com/2571-8800/4/4/61/ (text/html)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:gam:jjopen:v:4:y:2021:i:4:p:61-914:d:705862

Access Statistics for this article

J is currently edited by Ms. Angelia Su

More articles in J from MDPI
Bibliographic data for series maintained by MDPI Indexing Manager ().