Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in
Book cover

JSAI International Symposium on Artificial Intelligence

JSAI-isAI 2018: New Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence pp 115–130Cite as

Reasoning by a Bipolar Argumentation Framework for PROLEG

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:

  • 894 Accesses

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNAI,volume 11717))

Abstract

We develop a system allowing lawyers and law school students to analyze court judgments. We describe a transformation from the logic programming language PROLEG to a bipolar argumentation framework (BAF) and the legal reasoning involved. Legal knowledge written in a PROLEG program is transformed into a BAF, in which the structure of argumentation in a judgment is clear. We describe two types of reasoning by the BAF: clarification of the entire structure and causality of arguments, and identification of the required evidence, and we show its applications on legal reasoning.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD   54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    Note that the examples shown here are simplified versions of the actual penal code; the conditions per se are simplified and the legal terminology is not precise.

  2. 2.

    Note that, in the following figures, we omit the dotted rectangle over existence arguments to avoid making a figure messy.

References

  1. Bench-Capon, T., Prakken, H., Sartor, G.: Argumentation in legal reasoning. In: Simari, G., Rahwan, I. (eds.) Argumentation in Artificial Intelligence, pp. 363–382. Springer, Boston (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-98197-0_18

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  2. Boella, G., Gabbay, D.M., van der Torre, L., Villata, S.: Support in abstract argumentation. In: Proceedings of COMMA 2010, pp. 40–51 (2010)

    Google Scholar 

  3. Brewka, G., Woltran, S.: Abstract dialectical frameworks. In: Proceedings of KR 2010, pp. 102–111 (2010)

    Google Scholar 

  4. Brewka, G., Ellmauthaler, S., Strass, H., Wallner, J.P., Woltran, S.: Abstract dialectical frameworks revisited. In: Proceedings of IJCAI 2013, pp. 803–809 (2013)

    Google Scholar 

  5. Caminada, M.: On the issue of reinstatement in argumentation. In: Fisher, M., van der Hoek, W., Konev, B., Lisitsa, A. (eds.) JELIA 2006. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 4160, pp. 111–123. Springer, Heidelberg (2006). https://doi.org/10.1007/11853886_11

    Chapter  MATH  Google Scholar 

  6. Cayrol, C., Lagasquie-Schiex, M.C.: On the acceptability of arguments in bipolar argumentation frameworks. In: Godo, L. (ed.) ECSQARU 2005. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 3571, pp. 378–389. Springer, Heidelberg (2005). https://doi.org/10.1007/11518655_33

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  7. Cayrol, C., Lagasquie-Schiex, M.: Coalitions of arguments: a tool for handling bipolar argumentation frameworks. Int. J. Intell. Syst. 25, 83–109 (2010)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Cayrol, C., Lagasquie-Schiex, M.: Bipolarity in argumentation graphs: towards a better understanding. Int. J. Approximate Reasoning 54, 876–899 (2013)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  9. Dung, P.M.: On the acceptability of arguments and its fundamental role in nonmonotonic reasoning, logic programming and n-person games. Artif. Intell. 77, 321–357 (1995)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  10. Gelfond, M., Lifschitz, V.: The stable model semantics for logic programming. In: Proceedings of ICLP, pp. 1070–1080 (1988)

    Google Scholar 

  11. Kawasaki, T., Moriguchi, S., Takahashi, K.: Transformation from PROLEG to a bipolar argumentation framework. In: Proceedings of SAFA 2018, pp. 36–47 (2018)

    Google Scholar 

  12. Nouioua, F., Risch, V.: Argumentation frameworks with necessities. In: Benferhat, S., Grant, J. (eds.) SUM 2011. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 6929, pp. 163–176. Springer, Heidelberg (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-23963-2_14

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  13. Oren, N., Norman, T.J.: Semantics for evidence-based argumentation. In: Proceedings of COMMA 2008, pp. 276–284 (2008)

    Google Scholar 

  14. Prakken, H., Reed, C., Walton, D.: Dialogues about the burden of proof. In: Proceedings of ICAIL 2005, pp. 115–124 (2005)

    Google Scholar 

  15. Rahwan, I., Simari, G. (eds.): Argumentation in Artificial Intelligence. Springer, Boston (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-98197-0

    Book  Google Scholar 

  16. Reed, C., Rowe, G.: Araucaria: software for argument analysis, diagramming and representation. Int. J. AI Tools 13, 961–980 (2004)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Satoh, K., et al.: PROLEG: an implementation of the presupposed ultimate fact theory of Japanese civil code by PROLOG technology. In: Onada, T., Bekki, D., McCready, E. (eds.) JSAI-isAI 2010. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 6797, pp. 153–164. Springer, Heidelberg (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-25655-4_14

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  18. Satoh, K., et al.: On generality of PROLEG knowledge representation. In: Proceedings of JURISIN 2012, pp. 115–128 (2012)

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgment

This work was supported by JSPS KAKENHI Grant Number JP17H06103.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Science and Technology, Kwansei Gakuin University, 2-1, Gakuen, Sanda, 669-1337, Japan

    Tatsuki Kawasaki, Sosuke Moriguchi & Kazuko Takahashi

Authors
  1. Tatsuki Kawasaki
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Sosuke Moriguchi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Kazuko Takahashi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Kazuko Takahashi .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. National Institute of Advanced Industrial Science and Technology, Ibaraki, Japan

    Kazuhiro Kojima

  2. University of Electro-Communications, Tokyo, Japan

    Maki Sakamoto

  3. Ochanomizu University, Tokyo, Japan

    Koji Mineshima

  4. National Institute of Informatics, Tokyo, Japan

    Ken Satoh

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2019 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this paper

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this paper

Kawasaki, T., Moriguchi, S., Takahashi, K. (2019). Reasoning by a Bipolar Argumentation Framework for PROLEG. In: Kojima, K., Sakamoto, M., Mineshima, K., Satoh, K. (eds) New Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence. JSAI-isAI 2018. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 11717. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-31605-1_10

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-31605-1_10

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-030-31604-4

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-030-31605-1

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation