The Logic of Expert Judging Systems and the Rights of the Accused

AI and Society 2 (3):266-269 (1988)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

Deals with the problem of enthymemes in expert systems designed to model legal reasoning; suggests that interactivity is crucial.

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 91,219

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Legal implications in development and use of expert systems in agriculture.Willard Downs & Kelley Ann Newton - 1989 - Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 2 (1):53-58.
Model for knowledge and legal expert systems.Anja Oskamp - 1992 - Artificial Intelligence and Law 1 (4):245-274.
What kind of expert should a system be?Paul E. Johnson - 1983 - Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 8 (1):77-97.
Probabilistic Reasoning in Expert Systems Reconstructed in Probability Semantics.Roger M. Cooke - 1986 - PSA: Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association 1986:409 - 421.

Analytics

Added to PP
2013-05-31

Downloads
46 (#330,292)

6 months
4 (#698,851)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

References found in this work

Defeasible Reasoning.John L. Pollock - 1987 - Cognitive Science 11 (4):481-518.
Belief, awareness, and limited reasoning.Ronald Fagin & Joseph Y. Halpern - 1987 - Artificial Intelligence 34 (1):39-76.
Counterfactuals.Matthew L. Ginsberg - 1986 - Artificial Intelligence 30 (1):35-79.

Add more references