Arguments, cases and their hardness: a Formal Theory with Case Studies in AI and Law

Heng Zheng

Research output: ThesisThesis fully internal (DIV)

289 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

This dissertation presents a logic-based theory of arguments, cases, and their hardness. In this theory, we compare cases in terms of general logical formulas and define argument relations in terms of their validity strengths. We utilize the theory to study the internal structure of case models. A case model is made up of a set of cases and their preference. The theory also contributes to the study of how hard it is to decide about an issue on topics in Artificial Intelligence & Law, such as legal and evidential reasoning. The issues in our theory are conceptualized as pairs of arguments that share the same premises but opposing conclusions. For instance, we should decide whether or not to apply a legal rule in a current case following decisions in precedents. We apply the theory to model legal rules and cases as well as crime investigation in evidential reasoning. The theory demonstrates the feasibility of employing formal argumentation theory to perform AI tasks that involve combining data and knowledge, such as automated legal reasoning and legal knowledge representation. The logical foundation of the theory renders it explainable and helps mitigate human bias, thus promoting responsible AI applications in human practices and activities.
Original languageEnglish
QualificationDoctor of Philosophy
Awarding Institution
  • University of Groningen
Supervisors/Advisors
  • Verheij, Bart, Supervisor
  • Grossi, Davide, Supervisor
Award date12-Feb-2024
Place of Publication[Groningen]
Publisher
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2024

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Arguments, cases and their hardness: a Formal Theory with Case Studies in AI and Law'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this