因子归因的论证方案

Q3 Arts and Humanities

Comma Pub Date : 2022-01-01 DOI:10.3233/FAIA220142

Trevor J. M. Bench-Capon, Katie Atkinson

{"title":"因子归因的论证方案","authors":"Trevor J. M. Bench-Capon, Katie Atkinson","doi":"10.3233/FAIA220142","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":". Reasoning with legal cases by balancing factors (reasons to decide for and against the disputing parties) is a two stage process: first the factors must be ascribed and then these reasons for and against weighed to reach a decision. While the task of determining which set of reasons is stronger has received much attention, the task of factor ascription has not. Here we present a set of argument schemes for factor ascription, illustrated with a detailed example.","PeriodicalId":36616,"journal":{"name":"Comma","volume":"42 1","pages":"68-79"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"4","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Argument Schemes for Factor Ascription\",\"authors\":\"Trevor J. M. Bench-Capon, Katie Atkinson\",\"doi\":\"10.3233/FAIA220142\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\". Reasoning with legal cases by balancing factors (reasons to decide for and against the disputing parties) is a two stage process: first the factors must be ascribed and then these reasons for and against weighed to reach a decision. While the task of determining which set of reasons is stronger has received much attention, the task of factor ascription has not. Here we present a set of argument schemes for factor ascription, illustrated with a detailed example.\",\"PeriodicalId\":36616,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Comma\",\"volume\":\"42 1\",\"pages\":\"68-79\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"4\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Comma\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3233/FAIA220142\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"Arts and Humanities\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Comma","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3233/FAIA220142","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Arts and Humanities","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 4

摘要

．通过平衡因素(决定支持或反对争议各方的理由)来对法律案件进行推理是一个两个阶段的过程:首先必须归因于因素，然后权衡这些支持和反对的理由以达成决定。虽然确定哪一组原因更强的任务受到了很多关注，但因素归因的任务却没有受到关注。在这里，我们提出了一套论证方案的因素归因，说明了一个详细的例子。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

查看原文本刊更多论文

Argument Schemes for Factor Ascription

. Reasoning with legal cases by balancing factors (reasons to decide for and against the disputing parties) is a two stage process: first the factors must be ascribed and then these reasons for and against weighed to reach a decision. While the task of determining which set of reasons is stronger has received much attention, the task of factor ascription has not. Here we present a set of argument schemes for factor ascription, illustrated with a detailed example.

求助全文

通过发布文献求助，成功后即可免费获取论文全文。去求助

来源期刊

Comma Arts and Humanities-Conservation

CiteScore

0.20

自引率

0.00%

发文量