Proof With and Without Probabilities. Correct Evidential Reasoning with Presumptive Arguments, Coherent Hypotheses and Degrees of UncertaintyBart VerheijEvidential reasoning is hard, and errors can lead to miscarriages of justice with serious consequences. Analytic methods for the correct handling of evidence come in different styles, typically focusing on one of three tools: arguments, scenarios or probabilities. Recent research used Bayesian Networks for connecting arguments, scenarios, and probabilities. Well-known issues with Bayesian Networks were encountered: More numbers are needed than are available, and there is a risk of misinterpretation of the graph underlying the Bayesian Network, for instance as a causal model. The formalism presented here models presumptive arguments about coherent hypotheses that are compared in terms of their strength. No choice is needed between qualitative or quantitative analytic styles, since the formalism can be interpreted with and without numbers. The formalism is applied to key concepts in argumentative, scenario and probabilistic analyses of evidential reasoning, and is illustrated with a fictional crime investigation example based on Alfred Hitchcock's film `To Catch A Thief'.Manuscript (in PDF-format) Reference: Verheij, B. (2017). Proof With and Without Probabilities. Correct Evidential Reasoning with Presumptive Arguments, Coherent Hypotheses and Degrees of Uncertainty. Artificial Intelligence and Law 25 (1), 127-154. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10506-017-9199-4. Bart Verheij's home page - research - publications |