Law, Probability and Risk Advance Access originally published online on October 10, 2007
Law, Probability and Risk 2007 6(1-4):119-140; doi:10.1093/lpr/mgm033
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
© The Author [2007]. Published by Oxford University Press. All rights reserved.
Visualization tools, argumentation schemes and expert opinion evidence in law
Department of Philosophy, University of Winnipeg, Winnipeg, Manitoba R3B 2E9, Canada
Email: d.walton{at}uwinnipeg.ca
Received on 27 January 2007. Revised on 13 July 2007. Accepted on 14 July 2007.
 |
Abstract |
|---|
New models of evidential reasoning have been closely tied in with the development of visualization tools in artificial intelligence, especially automated systems for argument diagramming. Surveying several models and visualization tools recently developed in artificial intelligence, this paper argues that any discussion of visualization methods or tools of this sort should focus on their suitability for visualizing argumentation schemes, including critical questions. The classic scheme, used in this paper to illustrate how schemes need to be a vital part of advancing argumentation technology in tools for evidence visualization in law, is that for argument from expert opinion. The visualization of argumentation schemes is illustrated using a new version of the scheme, which takes into consideration Supreme Court rulings on the admissibility of expert witness testimony.
Keywords: questioning expert testimony; evidential reasoning; argument diagrams; artificial intelligence in law; argumentation technology
Presented at the workshop on "Graphic and visual representations of evidence and inference in legal settings" at Cardozo School of Law, New York City, 28th – 29th January 2007.