Skip to main content
Springer Nature Link
Log in

Constructing and Explaining Case Models: A Case-Based Argumentation Perspective

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
New Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence (JSAI-isAI 2023)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNAI,volume 14644))

Included in the following conference series:

  • 147 Accesses

Abstract

In this paper, we investigate constructing and explaining case models, which have been proposed as formal models for presumptive reasoning and evaluating arguments from cases. Recent research shows applications of case models and relationships between case models and other computational reasoning models. However, formal methods for constructing and explaining case models have not been investigated yet. Therefore, in this paper, we present methods for constructing and explaining case models based on the formalism of abstract argumentation for case-based reasoning (AA-CBR). The methods are illustrated in this paper with a legal example of paying penalties for a delivery company. With these two methods, we show an intended property that a dispute tree explaining the case model constructed from an AA-CBR case-base is homomorhpic to a dispute tree explaining the case-base itself. Additionally, we analyze that the methods are tractable in terms of number of cases and number of propositions used for representing each case.

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

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
€32.70 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Chapter
EUR 29.95
Price includes VAT (China (P.R.))
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
EUR 102.71
Price includes VAT (China (P.R.))
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
EUR 57.99
Price excludes VAT (China (P.R.))
  • 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

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. 1.

    In the original work, those elements are called factors but we use the new terms in order to distinguish them from factors in CATO [1].

  2. 2.

    The original work uses (N, ?) that attacks all case-pairs of which situations are not subsets of N, but, to simplify definitions in the rest of the present paper, we adapt this part of the definition following [2] instead.

References

  1. Aleven, V.: Teaching case-based argumentation through a model and examples. Ph.D. thesis, University of Pittsburgh (1997)

    Google Scholar 

  2. Athakravi, D., Satoh, K., Law, M., Broda, K., Russo, A.: Automated inference of rules with exception from past legal cases using ASP. In: Calimeri, F., Ianni, G., Truszczynski, M. (eds.) LPNMR 2015. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 9345, pp. 83–96. Springer, Cham (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-23264-5_8

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  3. Atkinson, K., Bench-Capon, T., Bollegala, D.: Explanation in AI and law: past, present and future. Artif. Intell. 289, 103387 (2020)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  4. Bench-Capon, T.J.: Hypo’s legacy: introduction to the virtual special issue. Artif. Intell. Law 25(2), 205–250 (2017)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Bonner, A.J.: A logic for hypothetical reasoning. In: Proceedings of the National Conference on Artificial Intelligence (AAAI), pp. 480–484 (1988)

    Google Scholar 

  6. Cocarascu, O., Stylianou, A., Čyras, K., Toni, F.: Data-empowered argumentation for dialectically explainable predictions. In: ECAI 2020, pp. 2449–2456. IOS Press, Amsterdam, The Netherlands (2020)

    Google Scholar 

  7. Cyras, K., Satoh, K., Toni, F.: Abstract argumentation for case-based reasoning. In: Fifteenth International Conference on the Principles of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning, pp. 243–254. AAAI Press, CA, USA (2016)

    Google Scholar 

  8. Cyras, K., Satoh, K., Toni, F.: Explanation for case-based reasoning via abstract argumentation. In: Computational Models of Argument, pp. 243–254. IOS Press, Amsterdam, The Netherlands (2016)

    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(2), 321–357 (1995)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  10. Henderson, J., Bench-Capon, T.: Describing the development of case law. In: Proceedings of the Seventeenth International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Law, pp. 32–41. ICAIL 2019, Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA (2019)

    Google Scholar 

  11. Horty, J.F., Bench-Capon, T.J.: A factor-based definition of precedential constraint. Artif. Intell. Law 20(2), 181–214 (2012)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. van Leeuwen, L., Verheij, B.: A comparison of two hybrid methods for analyzing evidential reasoning. In: Legal Knowledge and Information Systems, pp. 53–62. IOS Press, Amsterdam, The Netherlands (2019)

    Google Scholar 

  13. Liu, X., Lorini, E., Rotolo, A., Sartor, G.: Modelling and explaining legal case-based reasoners through classifiers. In: Legal Knowledge and Information Systems, pp. 83–92. IOS Press, Amsterdam, The Netherlands (2022)

    Google Scholar 

  14. Prakken, H.: A tool in modelling disagreement in law: preferring the most specific argument. In: Proceedings of the 3rd international conference on Artificial intelligence and law, pp. 165–174. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA (1991)

    Google Scholar 

  15. Prakken, H., Ratsma, R.: A top-level model of case-based argumentation for explanation: formalisation and experiments. Argument Comput. 13(2), 159–194 (2022)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Satoh, K., Kubota, M., Nishigai, Y., Takano, C.: Translating the Japanese presupposed ultimate fact theory into logic programming. In: Proceedings of the 2009 Conference on Legal Knowledge and Information Systems: JURIX 2009: The Twenty-Second Annual Conference, pp. 162–171. IOS Press, Amsterdam, The Netherlands (2009)

    Google Scholar 

  17. Verheij, B.: Formalizing value-guided argumentation for ethical systems design. Artif. Intell. Law 24(4), 387–407 (2016)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Verheij, B.: Formalizing arguments, rules and cases. In: Proceedings of the 16th Edition of the International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Law, pp. 199–208. ICAIL 2017, Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA (2017)

    Google Scholar 

  19. Verheij, B.: Proof with and without probabilities: correct evidential reasoning with presumptive arguments, coherent hypotheses and degrees of uncertainty. Artif. Intell. Law 25, 127–154 (2017)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. van Woerkom, W., Grossi, D., Prakken, H., Verheij, B.: Justification in case-based reasoning. In: Proceedings of the First International Workshop on Argumentation for eXplainable AI, pp. 1–13. CEUR Workshop Proceedings, Utrecht University, The Netherlands (2022)

    Google Scholar 

  21. Zheng, H., Grossi, D., Verheij, B.: Logical comparison of cases. In: Rodríguez-Doncel, V., Palmirani, M., Araszkiewicz, M., Casanovas, P., Pagallo, U., Sartor, G. (eds.) AICOL/XAILA 2018/2020. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 13048, pp. 125–140. Springer, Cham (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-89811-3_9

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This work was supported by JSPS KAKENHI Grant Numbers, JP17H06103 and JP19H05470 and JST, AIP Trilateral AI Research, Grant Number JPMJCR20G4.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. National Institute of Informatics and SOKENDAI, Tokyo, Japan

    Wachara Fungwacharakorn & Ken Satoh

  2. Artificial Intelligence, University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands

    Bart Verheij

Authors
  1. Wachara Fungwacharakorn
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Ken Satoh
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Bart Verheij
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Wachara Fungwacharakorn .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. National Institute of Informatics, Tokyo, Japan

    Mayumi Bono

  2. Tokyo Metropolitan University, Tokyo, Japan

    Yasufumi Takama

  3. National Institute of Informatics, Tokyo, Japan

    Ken Satoh

  4. Japan Advanced Institute of Science and Technology, Ishikawa, Nomi, Japan

    Le-Minh Nguyen

  5. University of Tsukuba, Tokyo, Tokyo, Japan

    Setsuya Kurahashi

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2024 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this paper

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this paper

Fungwacharakorn, W., Satoh, K., Verheij, B. (2024). Constructing and Explaining Case Models: A Case-Based Argumentation Perspective. In: Bono, M., Takama, Y., Satoh, K., Nguyen, LM., Kurahashi, S. (eds) New Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence. JSAI-isAI 2023. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 14644. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-60511-6_7

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-60511-6_7

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-031-60510-9

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-031-60511-6

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation