AI & SOCIETY

, Volume 28, Issue 4, pp 509–530

An argumentation model of forensic evidence in fine art attribution

25TH ANNIVERSARY VOLUME A FAUSTIAN EXCHANGE: WHAT IS TO BE HUMAN IN THE ERA OF UBIQUITOUS TECHNOLOGY?

DOI: 10.1007/s00146-013-0447-1

Cite this article as:
Walton, D. AI & Soc (2013) 28: 509. doi:10.1007/s00146-013-0447-1

Abstract

In this paper, a case study is conducted to test the capability of the Carneades Argumentation System to model the argumentation in a case where forensic evidence was collected in an investigation triggered by a conflict among art experts on the attribution of a painting to Leonardo da Vinci. A claim that a portrait of a young woman in a Renaissance dress could be attributed to da Vinci was initially dismissed by art experts. Forensic investigations were carried out, and evidence was collected by art history experts and scientific experts. The expert opinions were initially in conflict, but new evidence shifted the burden of proof onto the side of the skeptics. This paper presents an analysis of the structure of the interlocking argumentation in the case using argument mapping tools to track the accumulation of evidence pro and con.

Keywords

The Carneades Argumentation System Argument from expert opinion Fraudulent art Evidential reasoning Inquiry dialogue Burden of proof Leonardo da Vinci 

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag London 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Centre for Research in Reasoning, Argumentation and Rhetoric (CRRAR)University of WindsorWindsorCanada