Titlebook: DiaLaw; On Legal Justificati Arno R. Lodder Book 1999 Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 1999 argumentation.Legal Justification.Prol

只看該作者 · 發(fā)表于 2025-3-25 04:18:41

https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-011-3957-1argumentation; Legal Justification; Prolog

只看該作者 · 發(fā)表于 2025-3-25 07:29:35

978-1-4020-0287-8Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 1999

只看該作者 · 發(fā)表于 2025-3-25 13:53:50

From law to DiaLaw,on. A few millennia later, from the beginning of the 1990s onwards to be exact, researchers involved in the field of AI & Law became interested in dialogical models of argumentation. By approaching argumentation dialogically the research on AI & Law followed in the footsteps of prominent researchers

只看該作者 · 發(fā)表于 2025-3-25 18:03:36

DiaLaw,d. The game DiaLaw builds on the theory of legal argumentation developed over the years by Hage, Leenes and Lodder (Leenes, Lodder & Hage, 1994; Hage, Leenes & Lodder, 1994; Lodder, 1996a, 1996b, 1997b, 1997c), and was first presented in (Lodder & Herczog, 1995).

只看該作者 · 發(fā)表于 2025-3-25 22:04:33

只看該作者 · 發(fā)表于 2025-3-26 00:47:01

In conclusion,legal justification. Subsequently, the answers to the questions that were raised in the first chapter, and answered one by one in the course of this work, are summarized. Finally, the future use in legal practice of dialog models that represent argumentation in a natural way is discussed.

只看該作者 · 發(fā)表于 2025-3-26 04:39:22

Book 1999and ‘structural‘ arguments is added, and different layers in argumentation models are discussed. Finally, in chapter 8 (the former chapter 7) is added a recapitulation of my view on legal justification, and a discussion on the future use in legal practice of dialog models that represent argumentatio

只看該作者 · 發(fā)表于 2025-3-26 09:07:59

1572-4395 ) is added a recapitulation of my view on legal justification, and a discussion on the future use in legal practice of dialog models that represent argumentatio978-1-4020-0287-8978-94-011-3957-1Series ISSN 1572-4395 Series E-ISSN 2215-0315

只看該作者 · 發(fā)表于 2025-3-26 14:10:50

1572-4395 e Universiteit Maastricht. The chapters 1, 4 & 5 (now: 1, 5 & 6) of my dissertation have remained largely unaltered. In chapter 2 I added explicitly the distinction between constructing legal justification and reconstructing it, and tried to elucidate the differences (and similarities) between the p

只看該作者 · 發(fā)表于 2025-3-26 17:04:12

		自動登錄	找回密碼
密碼			To register

關于派博傳思			派博傳思旗下網站			友情鏈接
派博傳思介紹	公司地理位置	論文服務流程	影響因子官網	吾愛論文網	大講堂	北京大學	Oxford Uni.	Harvard Uni.
發(fā)展歷史沿革	期刊點評	投稿經驗總結	SCIENCEGARD	IMPACTFACTOR	派博系數	清華大學	Yale Uni.	Stanford Uni.
\|Archiver\|手機版\|小黑屋\| 派博傳思國際 ( 京公網安備110108008328) GMT+8, 2025-10-19 15:22
Copyright © 2001-2015 派博傳思京公網安備110108008328 版權所有 All rights reserved