- Allen et al, 1990.llen, James; Hendler, james; and Tate, Austin 1990. Readings in Planning. Morgan Kaufman, San Mateo, California.Google Scholar
- Ashley, 1988.Ashley, Kevin D. 1988. Modelling legal argument: reasoning with cases and hypotheticals. Technical Report 88~01, University of Massachusetts, Amherst, Department of Computer and Information Science. (PhD Thesis). Google ScholarDigital Library
- Bench-Capon and Sergot, 1988.Bench-Capon, Trevor and Sergot, Marek j. 1988. Towards a rule-based representation of open texture in law. in Computer power and legal language. Quorum Books, New York. 39-60.Google Scholar
- Gardner, 1987.Gardner, Anne v.d.L. 1987. An artzficial intelligence approach to legal reasonin9. MIT Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts. Google ScholarDigital Library
- McCarty and Sridharan, 1982.McCarty, L. Thorne and Sridharan, N.S. 1982. A computational theory of legal argument. Technical Report LRP-TR-13, Laboratory for Computer Science Research, Rutgers University.Google Scholar
- McCarty, 1977.McCarty, L. Thorne 1977. Reflections on TAXMAN' an experiment in artificial intelligence and legal reasoning. Harvard Law Review 90:837-893.Google ScholarCross Ref
- McCarty, 1980.McCarty, L. Thorne 1980. The TAX- MAN project' towards a cognitive theory of legal argument. In Niblett, Bryan, editor 1980, Computer Science and Law. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, England. 23-43.Google Scholar
- McCarty, 1983.McCarty, L. Thorne 1983. Permissions and obligations. In Proceedings of the Eighth International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Karlsruhe, West Germany. 287-294.Google Scholar
- McCarty, 1989a.McCarty, L. Thorne 1989a. Computing with prototypes (preliminary report). In Proceedings of the Bar-ilan Symposium on the Foundations of Artificial Intelligence.Google Scholar
- McCarty, 1989b.McCarty, L. Thorne 1989b. A language for legal discourse: I. basic features. In Proceedings of the Second international Conference on Artificial intelligence and Law, Vancouver, British Columbia. 180-189. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Rissland and Skalak, 1991.Rissland, Edwina L. and Skalak, David B. 1991. CABAaET: rule interpretation in a hybrid architecture. International Journal of Man-Machine Studies. (to appear.). Google ScholarDigital Library
- Sanders, 1991.Sanders, Kathryn E. 1991. Planning in an open-textured domain: a thesis proposal. Technical Report 91-08, Brown University. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Schlobohm and McCarty, 1989.Schlobohm, Dean and McCarty, L. Thorne 1989. EPS Ii: Estate planning with prototypes. In Proceedings of the Second International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Law, Vancouver, British Columbia. 1-10. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Shoham, 1988.Shoham, Yoav 1988. Reasoning about change' time and causation from the standpoint of artificial intelligence. MIT Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Steels, 1990.Steels, Luc 1990. Components of expertise. Artificial Intelligence Magazine 11:30-49. Google ScholarDigital Library
Recommendations
Representing paraconsistent reasoning via quantified propositional logic
Inconsistency ToleranceQuantified propositional logic is an extension of classical propositional logic where quantifications over atomic formulas are permitted. As such, quantified propositional logic is a fragment of second-order logic, and its sentences are usually referred ...
First-order logics of quasiary predicates
Composition nominative logics of quasiary predicates are studied. The spectrum of composition nominative logics is considered and various classes of first-order logics of quasiary predicates are described. Sequent calculi are constructed for the general ...
Reasoning about ignorance and contradiction: many-valued logics versus epistemic logic
This paper tries to reinterpret three- and four-valued logics of partial ignorance and contradiction in the light of epistemic logic. First, we try to cast Kleene three-valued logic in the setting of a simplified form of epistemic logic. It is a two-...
Comments