Predicting trade secret case outcomes using argument schemes and learned quantitative value effect tradeoffs

ABSTRACT

This paper presents the Value Judgment Formalism and its experimental implementation in the VJAP system, which is capable of arguing about, and predicting outcomes of, a set of trade secret misappropriation cases. VJAP creates an argument graph for each case using argument schemes and a representation of values underlying trade secret law and effects of facts on these values. It balances effects on values in each case and analogizes it to tradeoffs in precedents. It predicts case outcomes using a confidence measure computed from the graph and generates textual legal arguments justifying its predictions. The confidence propagation uses quantitative weights learned from past cases using an iterative optimization method. Prediction performance on a limited dataset is competitive with common machine learning models. The results and VJAP's behavior are discussed in detail.

References

1. Alexy, R., On Balancing and Subsumption: A Structural Comparison, Ratio Juris, 2003, 16, 433--49
2. Ashley, K. D., Evaluating the uses of Values in A model of Legal Reasoning with Cases Incorporating Theories and Values, From Knowledge Representation to Argumentation in AI, Law and Policy Making, Festschrift in Honour of Trevor Bench-Capon, 2013
3. Aleven, V., Using background knowledge in case-based legal reasoning: a computational model and an intelligent learning environment, Artificial Intelligence, Elsevier, 2003, 150, 183--237
4. Ashley, K. D., Modeling legal arguments: Reasoning with cases and hypotheticals, MIT press, 1991
5. Ashley, K. D. & Brüninghaus, S., Computer models for legal prediction, Jurimetrics, 2006, 309--352
6. Atkinson, K. & Bench-Capon, T., Legal case-based reasoning as practical reasoning, Artificial Intelligence and Law, Springer, 2005, 13, 93--131
7. Bench-Capon, T. & Sartor, G. A model of legal reasoning with cases incorporating theories and values, Artificial Intelligence, 2003, 150, 97--143
8. Bench-Capon, T., Persuasion in practical argument using value-based argumentation frameworks, Journal of Logic and Computation, 2003, 13
9. Bench-Capon, T. & Atkinson, K., Action-state semantics for practical reasoning, AAAI Fall Symposium, Technical Report FS-09--06, 2009, 8--13
10. Berman, D. H. & Hafner, C. D., Representing teleological structure in case-based legal reasoning: the missing link, Proceedings ICAIL 1993, ACM, 50--59
11. Branting, L. K., Building explanations from rules and structured cases, International journal of man-machine studies, Elsevier, 1991, 34, 797--837
12. Brüninghaus, S. & Ashley, K. D., Predicting outcomes of case based legal arguments, Proceedings ICAIL 2003, ACM, 233--242
13. Chorley, A. & Bench-Capon, T. AGATHA: Using heuristic search to automate the construction of case law theories, Art. Int. and Law, 2005, 13, 9--51
14. Chorley, A. & Bench-Capon, T., An empirical investigation of reasoning with legal cases through theory construction and application, Artificial Intelligence and Law, 2005, 13, 323--371
15. Chorley, A. & Bench-Capon, T., Reasoning with legal cases as theory construction: Some experimental results, Proceedings JURIX 2003, IOS Press, 2003
16. Feteris, E. T., The role of pragmatic argumentation referring to consequences, goals, and values in the justification of judicial decisions, Proc. ISSA 2014, 414--425
17. Grabmair, M., Modeling Purposive Legal Argumentation and Case Outcome Prediction using Argument Schemes in the Value Judgment Formalism, Doctoral Dissertation, University of Pittsburgh, 2016
18. Grabmair, M. & Ashley, K. D., Argumentation with Value Judgments - An Example of Hypothetical Reasoning, Proceedings JURIX 2010, 67--76
19. Grabmair, M. & Ashley, K. D., Facilitating case comparison using value judgments and intermediate legal concepts, Proceedings ICAIL 2011, ACM, 161--170
20. Greenwood, K.; Bench-Capon, T. & McBurney, P., Towards a computational account of persuasion in law, Proceedings ICAIL 2003, 22--31
21. Frank, E., Hall, M., Witten, I.H., Weka-a machine learning workbench for data mining, Online Appendix for "Data Mining: Practical Machine Learning Tools and Techniques", Morgan Kaufmann, 2016
22. Kirkpatrick, S., Gelatt, C. D., & Vecchi, M. P., Optimization by simulated annealing, Science, 1983, 220(4598), 671--680
23. McCarty, L. T., An implementation of Eisner v. Macomber, Proceedings ICAIL 1995, ACM, 276--286
24. Modgil, S., Value Based Argumentation in Hierarchical Argumentation Frameworks, Proceeding COMMA 2006, IOS Press, 297--308
25. Quinlan, J. R., C4. 5: programs for machine learning, Elsevier, 2014

Index Terms

• Applied computing

  • Law, social and behavioral sciences

    • Law

  • Operations research

    • Decision analysis