There is more to legal reasoning with analogies than case based reasoning, but what?

Ruth Kannai, Uri J. Schild, John Zeleznikow

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

1 Scopus citations

Abstract

In common law countries, legal researchers have often used analogical reasoning to justify the outcomes of new cases. Such analogical reasoning has often been performed by arguing directly with cases.

We observe that there is a second equally valid approach to conducting analogical reasoning: namely abducing rules and the deductively using the rules to justify the outcomes of new cases. We apply this research in the domain of Artificial Intelligence and Law.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)440-451
Number of pages12
JournalLecture Notes in Computer Science (including subseries Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence and Lecture Notes in Bioinformatics)
Volume8002
DOIs
StatePublished - 1 Jan 2014
Externally publishedYes

Keywords

  • Abduction
  • Analogical reasoning
  • Case based reasoning

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Theoretical Computer Science
  • Computer Science (all)

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'There is more to legal reasoning with analogies than case based reasoning, but what?'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this