Abstract
This paper is about software to support argumentative tasks for lawyers. The focus is on the visualization and evaluation of warranted defeasible arguments. The opportunities provided by ‘boxes-and-arrows’ diagrams of arguments are treated, but the paper also addresses limitations. It is argued that finding natural design, improving usefulness and including content are central research challenges for the field of argumentation support software. It is of highest priority that claims about the extent to which these challenges have been met become better supported by evidence, e.g. by empirical studies.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
