An Argument Structure Abstraction for Bayesian Belief Networks: Just Outcomes in On-line Dispute Resolution

There are many different approaches for settling disputes on-line, such as simple email systems, fixed bid systems and intelligent systems. However, to date there have been no attempts to integrate decision support methods into the dispute resolution process for the purpose of supporting outcomes that are consistent with judicial reasoning. This paper describes how a model of judicial reasoning can be used to assist divorcees with the resolution of property issues online, in a manner that is consistent with decisions a judge would make if the matter was heard in Court. The approach uses an argument based model of the discretionary nature of decisions made by judges in Australian Family Law. This is integrated with a protocol for online dispute dialogue. Predictions of the likelihood of alternates outcomes is achieved with a series of Bayesian Belief Networks.

[1]  Giovanni Sartor,et al.  Introduction: from legal theories to neural networks and fuzzy reasoning , 1999, Artificial Intelligence and Law.

[2]  John Zeleznikow,et al.  Family_Winner: Integrating Game Theory and Heuristics to Provide Negotiation Support , 2003 .

[3]  Jeroen Keppens,et al.  Linguistic Bayesian Networks for reasoning with subjective probabilities in forensic statistics , 2003, ICAIL.

[4]  Andrew Stranieri,et al.  The generic/actual argument model of practical reasoning , 2006, Decis. Support Syst..

[5]  Andrew Stranieri,et al.  Using Argumentation for the Decomposition and Classification of Tasks for Hybrid System Development , 1997, ICONIP.

[6]  Andrew Stranieri,et al.  Knowledge Discovery from Legal Databases , 2005 .

[7]  A. Lodder DiaLaw: On Legal Justification and Dialogical Models of Argumentation , 1999 .

[8]  George C. Christie An Essay on Discretion , 1986 .

[9]  S. Toulmin The uses of argument , 1960 .

[10]  Ronald Dworkin,et al.  Taking Rights Seriously , 1977 .

[11]  John Zeleznikow,et al.  Trade-Off Manipulations in the Development of Negotiation Decision Support Systems , 2005, Proceedings of the 38th Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences.

[12]  Gary A. Davis,et al.  Bayesian networks and traffic accident reconstruction , 2003, ICAIL.

[13]  Jurgen Harms,et al.  Online Dispute Resolution Systems as Web Services , 2006 .

[14]  M. Menlowe,et al.  Procedural Justice: Allocating to Individuals , 1990 .

[15]  Andrew Stranieri,et al.  Argumentation structures that integrate dialectical and non-dialectical reasoning , 2001, The Knowledge Engineering Review.

[16]  Jürgen Hollatz Analogy making in legal reasoning with neural networks and fuzzy logic , 2004, Artificial Intelligence and Law.