Advertisement

Automated generation of examples for a tutorial in case-based argumentation

  • Vincent Aleven
  • Kevin D. Ashley
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 608)

Abstract

Examples in our domain are argumentation problems involving small sets of legal cases that are related in interesting ways. We call these collections of cases Argument Contexts. We have identified several types of Argument Contexts that can be used to teach the Issues in our curriculum for case-based argumentation. We have developed a program that generates Argument Contexts that address these Issues and have other pedagogically desirable properties, such as being clear and concise. In a preliminary feasibility study a human tutor used examples generated by the program with encouraging results. Because assembling Argument Contexts by hand is time-consuming, we believe that our program can be a useful tool for law professors who teach reasoning with cases. Also, we plan to use it as a component of an intelligent tutoring system for case-based argumentation that we are currently developing.

Keywords

Point Precedent Intelligent Tutoring System Trade Secret Legal Case Pedagogical Relevance 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. [Ashley and Aleven, 1991a]
    Kevin D. Ashley and Vincent Aleven. A Computational Approach to Explaining Case-Based Concepts of Relevance in a Tutorial Context. In Proceedings of DARPA Case-Based Reasoning Workshop, pp. 257–268, Washington, DC, 1991.Google Scholar
  2. [Ashley and Aleven, 1991b]
    Kevin D. Ashley and Vincent Aleven. Toward an Intelligent Tutoring System for Teaching Law Students to Argue with Cases. In Proceedings of the Third International Conference on Articial Intelligence and Law, pp. 42–52, Oxford, England, 1991.Google Scholar
  3. [Ashley and Aleven, 1992]
    Kevin D. Ashley and Vincent Aleven. Generating Dialectical Examples Automatically. In Proceedings AAAI-92. San Jose, CA, July 1992.Google Scholar
  4. [Ashley, 1990]
    Kevin D. Ashley. Modeling Legal Argument: Reasoning with Cases and Hypotheticals. MIT Press, Cambridge, 1990.Google Scholar
  5. [Ashley, 1991]
    Kevin D. Ashley. Reasoning with Cases and Hypotheticals in HYPO. International Journal of Man-Machine Studies, 1991.Google Scholar
  6. [Barr et al., 1976]
    A. Barr, M. Beard, and R.C. Atkinson. The Computer as a Tutorial Laboratory: The Stanford BIP Project. International Journal of Man-Machine Studies, 8:567–596, 1976.Google Scholar
  7. [Burton, 1982]
    R.R. Burton. Diagnosing Bugs in a Simple Procedural Skill. In D.H. Sleeman and J.S. Brown, editors, Intelligent Tutoring Systems, pp. 157–183. Acadamic Press, London, 1982.Google Scholar
  8. [Collins and Stevens, 1982]
    Allan Collins and Albert L. Stevens. Goals and Strategies of Inquiry Teachers. In Robert Glaser, editor, Advances in Instructional Psychology, volume 2. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Hillsdale, NJ, 1982.Google Scholar
  9. [Lesgold et al., 1987]
    A.M. Lesgold, J.G. Bonar, J.M. Ivill, and A. Bowen. An intelligent tutoring system for electronics troubleshooting: DC-circuit understanding. Technical report, Learning Research and Development Center, University of Pittsburgh, 1987.Google Scholar
  10. [MacGregor, 1988]
    Robert M. MacGregor. A Deductive Pattern Matcher. In Proceedings AAAI-88, pp. 403–408, Saint Paul, MN, August 1988.Google Scholar
  11. [Saunders, 1991]
    Kurt M. Saunders. Interview re legal methods instruction. Recorded transcript, 1991. Assistant Professor of Law, University of Pittsburgh School of Law.Google Scholar
  12. [Sleeman, 1982]
    D.H. Sleeman. Assessing Aspects of Competence in Basic Algebra. In D.H. Sleeman and J.S. Brown, editors, Intelligent Tutoring Systems, pp. 185–199. Acadamic Press, London, 1982.Google Scholar
  13. [Suthers and Rissland, 1988]
    D. Suthers and E. Rissland. Constraint Manipulation for Example Generation. Technical Report 88–71, Department of Computer and Information Sciences, University of Massachusetts, Amherst, MA, 1988.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 1992

Authors and Affiliations

  • Vincent Aleven
    • 1
  • Kevin D. Ashley
    • 1
  1. 1.Intelligent Systems Program, Learning Research and Development Center, and School of LawUniversity of PittsburghPittsburgh

Personalised recommendations