scientific article; zbMATH DE number 1163375
The authors develop a theory of defeasible deontic reasoning. It extends the approach in terms of competing arguments originating with \textit{J. L. Pollock} [``Defeasible reasoning, Cognitive Sci. 11, 481-518 (1987)], and also uses ideas from \textit{H. Prakken} [``Logical tools for modeling legal argument, Ph.D. Thesis, Univ. Amsterdam (1993)] and \textit{Phan Minh Dung} [``On the acceptability of arguments and its fundamental role in nonmonotonic reasoning and logic programming, Proc. IJCAI 1993, 852-857 (1993)]. The authors seek to make this approach sufficiently general to deal with deontic and non-deontic conditionals in the same context, allow for conflicts involving more than two propositions, and include an account of permission. The construction make a distinction between legal rules and legal norms, which are regarded as defeasible in different ways. For the entire collection see [Zbl 0885.00033].
- Contrary-to-duty reasoning: a categorical approach
- Using values and theories to resolve disagreement in law
- A multi-agent default theory of permission
- Changing Legal Systems: Abrogation and Annulment Part I: Revision of Defeasible Theories
- Changing legal systems: legal abrogations and annulments in Defeasible Logic
- scientific article; zbMATH DE number 1735835 (Why is no real title available?)
- Retroactive legal changes and revision theory in defeasible logic
- An algebraic approach for action based default reasoning
- Rights in default logic
- Temporal Deontic Defeasible Logic: An Analytical Approach
- scientific article; zbMATH DE number 7593562 (Why is no real title available?)
- A deontic argumentation framework towards doctrine reification
- A brief comparison of Pollock's defeasible reasoning and ranking functions
This page was built for publication:
Report a bug (only for logged in users!)Click here to report a bug for this page (MaRDI item Q4394902)
