Logo
ScienceStack
Table of Contents
Fetching ...
Sign In

Dispute resolution in legal mediation with quantitative argumentation

Xiao Chi

TL;DR

A QuAM (Quantitative Argumentation Mediate) framework is introduced, which integrates the parties' knowledge and the mediator's knowledge, including facts and legal norms, when determining the acceptability of a mediation goal.

Abstract

Mediation is often treated as an extension of negotiation, without taking into account the unique role that norms and facts play in legal mediation. Additionally, current approaches for updating argument acceptability in response to changing variables frequently require the introduction of new arguments or the removal of existing ones, which can be inefficient and cumbersome in decision-making processes within legal disputes. In this paper, our contribution is two-fold. First, we introduce a QuAM (Quantitative Argumentation Mediate) framework, which integrates the parties' knowledge and the mediator's knowledge, including facts and legal norms, when determining the acceptability of a mediation goal. Second, we develop a new formalism to model the relationship between the acceptability of a goal argument and the values assigned to a variable associated with the argument. We use a real-world legal mediation as a running example to illustrate our approach.

Dispute resolution in legal mediation with quantitative argumentation

TL;DR

A QuAM (Quantitative Argumentation Mediate) framework is introduced, which integrates the parties' knowledge and the mediator's knowledge, including facts and legal norms, when determining the acceptability of a mediation goal.

Abstract

Mediation is often treated as an extension of negotiation, without taking into account the unique role that norms and facts play in legal mediation. Additionally, current approaches for updating argument acceptability in response to changing variables frequently require the introduction of new arguments or the removal of existing ones, which can be inefficient and cumbersome in decision-making processes within legal disputes. In this paper, our contribution is two-fold. First, we introduce a QuAM (Quantitative Argumentation Mediate) framework, which integrates the parties' knowledge and the mediator's knowledge, including facts and legal norms, when determining the acceptability of a mediation goal. Second, we develop a new formalism to model the relationship between the acceptability of a goal argument and the values assigned to a variable associated with the argument. We use a real-world legal mediation as a running example to illustrate our approach.
Paper Structure (8 sections, 4 theorems, 7 equations, 1 figure)

This paper contains 8 sections, 4 theorems, 7 equations, 1 figure.

Table of Contents

  1. Introduction
  2. The QuAD framework
  3. The QuAM mechanism
  4. Input of the QuAM mechanism
  5. Automatic evaluation in a QuAM framework
  6. Transformation function
  7. Properties
  8. Conclusions and future work

Key Result

Proposition 3.1

Let $A_{F}$ and $A_{NM}$ be conflict-free sets. Given $\mathrm{C1}$ and $\mathrm{C2}$, if there exists $b \in \mathcal{R}^{-}(a)$, such that $b \in A_{F} \cup A_{NM}$ and $\pi((b,a)) = 1$, then there exists no $c \in \mathcal{R}^{+}(a)$, such that $c \in A_{F} \cup A_{NM}$, $\pi((c,a)) = 1$.

Figures (1)

  • Figure 1: The QuAM framework for Zhang (on the left) and the supermarket (on the right).

Theorems & Definitions (17)

  • Definition 3.1
  • Example 3.1
  • Example 3.2
  • Proposition 3.1
  • proof
  • Example 3.3
  • Definition 3.2
  • Proposition 3.2
  • Definition 3.3
  • Definition 3.4
  • ...and 7 more