Bibliography

Alchourrón, C. E. (1996). Detachment and defeasibility in deontic logic. Studia Logica, 57:5–18.
Alchourrón, C. E. (1996). On law and logic. Ratio Juris, 9:331–48.
Alchourrón, C. E. and Bulygin, E. (1971). Normative Systems. Springer.
Alchourrón, C. E. and Makinson, D. (1981). Hierarchies of regulations and their logic. In Hilpinen, R., editor, New Studies on Deontic Logic, pages 123–48. Reidel.
Alchourrón, C. E., Gärdenfors, P., and Makinson, D. (1985). On the logic of theory change: Partial meet contraction and revision functions. Journal of Symbolic Logic, 50:510–30.
Alexy, R. (2002). A Theory of Constitutional Rights. Oxford University Press.
Aquinas, T. Summa Theologiae. Ed. and trans. Fathers of the English Dominican Province. Allen, Texas: Benzinger Bros, 1947.
Aristotle, Nicomachean Ethics. Ed. and trans. W. D. Ross. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1954.
Baroni, P., Caminada, M., and Giacomin, M. (2011). An introduction to argumentation semantics. The Knowledge Engineering Review, 26:365–410.
Bench-Capon, T. J. M. and Prakken, H. (2006). Justifying actions by accruing arguments. In Dunne, P. E. and Bench-Capon, T. J. M., editors, Computational Models of Argument. Proceedings of COMMA 2006, pages 247–258. IOS Press.
Bench-Capon, T. J. M. (2003). Persuasion in practical argument using value-based argumentation frameworks. Journal of Logic and Computation, 13:429–448.
Bench-Capon, T. J. M. and Sartor, G. (2003). A model of legal reasoning with cases incorporating theories and values. Artificial Intelligence, 150:97–142.
Blair, J. A. (2012). Groundwork in the Theory of Argumentation. Springer.
Brewka, G. (1991). Nonmonotonic Reasoning: Logical Foundations of Commonsense. Cambridge University Press.
Brewer, S. (1996). Exemplary reasoning: Semantics, pragmatics and the rational force of legal argument by analogy. Harvard Law Review, 109:923–1028.
Brewer, S. (2011). Logocratic method and the analysis of arguments in evidence. Law, Probability and Risk, 10:175–202.
Brozek, B. (2004). Defeasibility of Legal Reasoning. Zakamycze.
Brozek, B. (2008). Revisability vs. defeasibility. Northern Ireland Legal Quarterly, 59:139–47.
Brozek, B. (2014). Law and defeasibility: a few comments on the logic of legal requirements. Revus, 23:165–170.
Celano, B. (2012). True exceptions: Defeasibility and particularism. In Ferrer Beltran, J. and Ratti, G. B., editors, The Logic of Legal Requirements, pages 268–87. Oxford University Press.
Chisholm, R. M. (1957). Perceiving: A Philosophical Study. Cornell University.
Cicero, De inventione (Rhetorici libri duo qui vocantur de inventione). Stutgardiae : in aedibus Teubneri, 1965
Clark, K. L. (1978). Negation as failure. In Gallaire, H. and Minker, J., editors, Logic and Data Bases, pages 293–332. Plenum.
Dancy, J. (2004). Ethics Without Principles. Oxford University Press.
Dascal, M. and Wróblewski, J. (1988). Understanding and interpretation in pragmatics and in law. Law and Philosophy, pages 203–24.
Duarte, D. (2011). Linguistic objectivity in norm sentences: Alternatives in literal meaning. Ratio Juris, 24:112–39.
Duarte d’Almeida, L. (2012). A proof-based account of legal exceptions. Oxford Journal of Legal Studies, pages 1–36.
Dung, P. M. (1995). On the acceptability of arguments and its fundamental role in nonmono- tonic reasoning, logic programming, and n–person games. Artificial Intelligence, 77:321–57.
Fenton, N., Neil, M., and Berger, D. (2016). Bayes and the law. Annual Review of Statistics and Its Application, 3:51–77.
Ferrer Beltran, J. and Ratti, G. B., editors (2012). The Logic of Legal Requirements: Essays on Defeasibility. Oxford University Press.
Ferrer Beltran, J. and Ratti, G. B. (2012). Defeasibility and legality: A survey. In Ferrer Beltran, J. and Ratti, G. B., editors, The Logic of Legal Requirements: Essays on Defeasibility, pages 11–38. Oxford University Press.
Gazzo Castañeda, L. E. and Knauff, M. (2016). Defeasible reasoning with legal conditionals. Memory and Cognition, 44:499–517.
Gärdenfors, P. (1987). Knowledge in Flux. MIT.
Ginzberg, M. L., editor (1987). Readings in Nonmonotonic Reasoning. Morgan Kaufmann.
Gordon, T. F. (1988). The importance of nonmonotonicity for legal reasoning. In Fiedler, H., Haft, F., and Traunmüller, R., editors, Expert Systems in Law: Impacts on Legal Theory and Computer Law, pages 111–26. Attempto.
Gordon, T. F. (1995). The Pleadings Game. An Artificial Intelligence Model of Procedural Justice. Kluwer.
Gordon, T. F., Prakken, H., and Walton, D. N. (2007). The Carneades model of argument and burden of proof. Artificial Intelligence, 171:875–96.
Governatori, G., Maher, M. J., Billington, D., and Antoniou, G. (2004). Argumentation semantics for defeasible logics. Journal of Logic and Computation, 14:675–702.
Governatori, G., Rotolo, A., and Sartor, G. (2005). Temporalised normative positions in defeasible logic. In Proceedings of the Tenth International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Law (ICAIL 2005), pages 25–34. ACM.
Governatori, G. and Rotolo, A. (2010). Changing legal systems: legal abrogations and annulments in defeasible logic. Logic Journal of IGPL, 18:157–94.
Guastini, R. (2012). Defeasibility, axiological gaps, and interpretation. In Ferrer Beltran, J. and Ratti, G. B., editors, The Logic of Legal Requirements, pages 182–92. Oxford University Press.
Hage, J. C. (1997). Reasoning with Rules: An Essay on Legal Reasoning and Its Underlying Logic. Kluwer.
Hage, J. C. and Peczenik, A. (2000). Law, morals and defeasibility. Ratio Juris, 13:305–25.
Hage, J. C. (2005). Studies in Legal Logics. Springer.
Hart, H. L. A. (1951). The ascription of responsibility and rights. In Flew, A., editor, Logic and Language, pages 145–66.
Hitchcock, D. (2017). On Reasoning and Argument: Essays in Informal Logic and on Critical Thinking. Springer.
Holland, J. (2012). Signals and Boundaries Building Blocks for Complex Adaptive Systems. MIT.
Holland, J., Holyoak, K. J., Nisbett, R. E., and Thagard, P. R. (1989). Induction. Processes of Inference, Learning and Discovery. MIT.
Holyoak, K. and Thagard, P. (1996). Mental Leaps: Analogy in Creative Thought. MIT.
Horty, J. (2001). Nonmonotonic logic. In Goble, L., editor, The Blackwell Guide to Philosophical Logic, pages 336–61. Blackwell.
Horty, J. F. (2007). Defaults with priorities. Journal of Philosophical Logic, 36:367–413.
Horty, J. F. (2011). Rules and reasons in the theory of precedent. Legal theory, 10:1–33.
Horty, J. F. (2012). Reasons as Defaults. Oxford University Press.
Hunter, A. (2013). A probabilistic approach to modelling uncertain logical arguments. International Journal of Approximate Reasoning, (54):47–81.
Idelberger, F., Governatori, G., Riveret, R., and Sartor, G. (2016). Logic based smart contracts and blockchain systems. In Proceedings of RuleML 2016, pages 167–183. Springer.
Koons, R. (2009). Defeasible reasoning. In Zalta, E. N., editor, The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
Leibniz, G. W. De legum interpretatione, rationibus, applicatione, systemate. In Sämtliche Schriften und Briefe. Edited by the Academy of Sciences of Berlin. Series VI, Vol iv. Darmstadt/Leipzig/Berlin, 1923
Loui, R. P. and Norman, J. (1995). Rationales and argument moves. Artificial Intelligence and Law, 3:159–89.
MacCormick, D. N. (1995). Defeasibility in law and logic. In Bankowski, Z., White, I., and Hahn, U., editors, Informatics and the Foundations of Legal Reasoning, pages 99–117. Kluwer Academic.
Maranhao, J. S. A. (2013). Defeasibility, contributory conditionals, and refinement of legal systems. In Ferrer Beltran, J. and Ratti, G. B., editors, The Logic of Legal Requirements, pages 53–76. Oxford University Press
McCarthy, J. (1980). Circumscription: A form of non-monotonic reasoning. Artificial Intelligence, 13:27–39.
Modgil, S. and Prakken, H. (2010). Reasoning about preferences in structured extended argumentation frameworks. In Baroni, P., Cerutti, F., Giacomin, M., and Simari, G., editors, Computational Models of Argument. Proceedings of COMMA 2010, pages 347–58. IOS.
Nute, D. (1994). Defeasible logic. In Handbook of logic in artificial intelligence and logic programming. Volume 3: Nonmonotonic reasoning and uncertain reasoning, pages 353–395. Oxford University Press.
Peczenik, A. (2005). Scientia Juris: Treatise of Legal Philosophy and General Jurisprudence - Volume 4. Springer.
Perelman, C. and Olbrechts-Tyteca, L. (1969). The New Rhetoric: A Treatise on Argumentation. University of Notre Dame Press
Pollock, J. L. (1995). Cognitive Carpentry: A Blueprint for How to Build a Person. MIT.
Pollock, J. L. (1998). Perceiving and reasoning about a changing world. Computational Intelligence, 14:498–562.
Pollock, J. L. (2010). Defeasible reasoning and degrees of justification. Argument and Computation, pages 7–22.
Popper, K. R. (1959). The Logic of Scientific Discovery. Hutchinson.
Prakken, H. (1997). Logical Tools for Modelling Legal Argument: A Study of Defeasible Reasoning in Law. Kluwer.
Prakken, H. (2005). A study of accrual of arguments, with applications to evidential reasoning. In Proceedings of the Tenth International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Law (ICAIL 2005), pages 85–94. ACM.
Prakken, H. (2010). An abstract framework for argumentation with structured arguments. Argument and Computation, 1:93–124.
Prakken, H. and Sartor, G. (1996). Rules about rules: Assessing conflicting arguments in legal reasoning. Artificial Intelligence and Law, 4:331–68.
Prakken, H. and Sartor, G. (1998). Modelling reasoning with precedents in a formal dialogue game. Artificial Intelligence and Law, 6:231–87.
Prakken, H. and Sartor, G. (2009). A logical analysis of burdens of proof. In Kaptein, H., Prakken, H., and Verheij, B., editors, Legal Evidence and Proof: Statistics, Stories, Logic, pages 223–53. Ashgate.
Prakken, H. and Sartor, G. (2015). Law and logic: A review from an argumentation perspective. Artificial Intelligence, 227:214–45.
Prakken, H. and Vreeswijk, G. A. W. (2002). Logical systems for defeasible argumentation. In Gabbay, D. and Günthner, F., editors, Handbook of Philosophical Logic, pages 218–319. Kluwer.
Rahwan, I. and Simari, G. R. (2009). Argumentation in Artificial Intelligence. Springer.
Raz, J. (1975). Practical Reason and Norms. Hutchinson.
Raz, J. (1985). Authority, law, and morality. The Monist, 68:295–323.
Rescher, N. (1977). Dialectics: A Controversy-oriented Approach to the Theory of Knowl- edge. State University of New York Press.
Rescher, N. (2006). Presumption and the Practices of Tentative Cognition. Cambridge University Press.
Reiter, R. (1980). Logic for default reasoning. Artificial Intelligence, 13:81–132.
Riveret, R., Prakken, H., Rotolo, A., and Sartor, G. (2008). Heuristics in argumentation: A game-theoretical investigation. In Computational Models of Argument. Proceedings of COMMA-08, pages 324–35. IOS.
Riveret, R., Rotolo, A., and Sartor, G. (2012). Probabilistic rule-based argumentation for norm-governed learning agents. Artificial intelligence and Law, 20:383–420.
Rodriguez, J. (2012). Against defeasibility of legal rules. In Ferrer Beltran, J. and Ratti, G. B., editors, The Logic of Legal Requirements, pages 89–107. Oxford University Press.
Ross, W. D. (1930). The Right and the Good. Clarendon.
Ross, W. D. (1939). Foundations of Ethics. Clarendon.
Russell, S. J. and Norvig, P. (2010). Artificial Intelligence. A Modern Approach. Prentice Hall, 3rd edition
Sartor, G. (1994). A formal model of legal argumentation. Ratio Juris, 7:212–26.
Sartor, G. (2005). Legal Reasoning: A Cognitive Approach to the Law. Springer.
Sartor, G. (2013). The logic of proportionality: Reasoning with non-numerical magnitudes. German Law Journal, 14:1419–57.
Sergot, M. J., Sadri, F., Kowalski, R. A., Kriwaczek, F., Hammond, P., and Cory, H. (1986). The British Nationality Act as a logic program. Communications of the ACM, 29:370–86.
Schauer, F. F. (2012). Is defeasibility an essential property of law? In Ferrer Beltran, J. and Ratti, G. B., editors, The Logic of Legal Requirements, pages 77–88. Oxford University Press.
Stone Sweet, A. (2004). The Judicial Construction of Europe. Oxford University Press.
Toulmin, S. (1958). The Uses of Argument. Cambridge University Press.
Verheij, B., Bex, F., Timmer, S., Vlek, C., Meyer, J.-J., Renooij, S., and Prakken, H. (2016). Arguments, scenarios and probabilities: connections between three normative frameworks for evidential reasoning. Law, Probability and Risk, 15:35–70.
Viehweg, T. (1965). Topik und Jurisprudenz. Ein Beitrag zur rechtswissenschaflichen Grundlagenforschung. Beck, 3 edition.
Walton, D. N. (2006). Fundamentals of Critical Argumentation. Cambridge University Press.
Walton, D. N. (2013). Methods of Argumentation. Cambridge University Press.
Walton, D. N., Reed, C., and Macagno, F. (2008). Argumentation Schemes. Cambridge University Press.
Walton, D. and Sartor, G. (2013). Teleological justification of argumentation schemes. Argumentation, pages 111–142
Walton, D., Sartor, G., and Macagno, F. (2016). An argumentation framework for contested cases of statutory interpretation. Artificial Intelligence and Law, 24:51–91.