62,434 research outputs found
Recommended from our members
The Rumsfeld Effect: The unknown unknown
A set of studies tested whether people can use awareness of ignorance to provide enhanced test consistency over time if they are allowed to place uncertain items into a âdonât knowâ category. For factual knowledge this did occur, but for a range of other forms of knowledge relating to conceptual knowledge and personal identity, no such effect was seen. Known unknowns would appear to be largely restricted to factual kinds of knowledge
Judgment aggregation in general logics
Within social choice theory, the new field of judgment aggregation aims to merge many individual sets of judgments on logically interconnected propositions into a single collective set of judgments on these propositions. Commonly, judgment aggregation is studied using standard propositional logic, with a limited expressive power and a problematic representation of conditional statements ('if P then Q') as material conditionals. In this methodological paper, I present a generalised model, in which most realistic decision problems can be represented. The model is not restricted to a particular logic but is open to several logics, including standard propositional logic, predicate calculi, modal logics and conditional logics. To illustrate the model, I prove an impossibility theorem, which generalises earlier results.judgement aggregation, discursive dilemma, modelling methodology, formal logics, impossibility theorem
PriCL: Creating a Precedent A Framework for Reasoning about Privacy Case Law
We introduce PriCL: the first framework for expressing and automatically
reasoning about privacy case law by means of precedent. PriCL is parametric in
an underlying logic for expressing world properties, and provides support for
court decisions, their justification, the circumstances in which the
justification applies as well as court hierarchies. Moreover, the framework
offers a tight connection between privacy case law and the notion of norms that
underlies existing rule-based privacy research. In terms of automation, we
identify the major reasoning tasks for privacy cases such as deducing legal
permissions or extracting norms. For solving these tasks, we provide generic
algorithms that have particularly efficient realizations within an expressive
underlying logic. Finally, we derive a definition of deducibility based on
legal concepts and subsequently propose an equivalent characterization in terms
of logic satisfiability.Comment: Extended versio
The Uneasy and Often Unhelpful Interaction of Tort Law and Constitutional Law in First Amendment Litigation
There are increasing tensions between the First Amendment and the common law torts of intentional infliction of emotional distress, defamation, and privacy. This Article discusses the conflicting interactions among the three models that are competing for primacy as the tort law governing expressive activities evolves to accommodate the requirements of the First Amendment. At one extreme there is the model that expression containing information which has been lawfully obtained that contains neither intentional falsehoods nor incitements to immediate violence can only be sanctioned in narrowly defined exceptional circumstances, even if that expression involves matters that are universally regarded as being of no public interest. At the other extreme is the model that some expression which, though lawfully obtained, reveals to a wider audience intimate private information about another should be subject to sanction, as should verbal abuse of a private figure even if there is no implicit threat of physical violence. Some provisions of the American Restatement adopted with scant attention to constitutional developments have taken, and to some extent continue to take, that position. Finally, there is an intermediate modelânow gaining wide-spread support in Europe and to some extent in America, even among some members of the United States Supreme Courtâthat expression which does not concern matters of âpublic concernâ can be subject to public sanction even if it has been lawfully acquired and involves no threats of physical aggression against others. This Article sets out how this confusing impasse has come about and the dangers that this lack of clarity present for freedom of expression
How can a forensic result be a âdecisionâ? A critical analysis of ongoing reforms of forensic reporting formats for federal examiners
The decade since the publication of the 2009 National Research Council report on forensic science has seen the increasing use of a new word to describe forensic results. What were once called âfacts,â âdeterminations,â âconclusions,â or âopinions,â are increasingly described as âdecisions.â Prior to 2009, however, the term âdecisionâ was rarely used to describe forensic results. Lay audiences, such as lawyers, might be forgiven for perceiving this as a surprising turn. In its plain English meaning, a âdecisionâ would seem to be a strange word choice to describe the outcome of a scientific analysis, given its connotation of choice and preference. In this Article, we trace the recent history of the term âdecisionâ in forensic analysis. We simply and clearly explain the scientific fields of âdecision theoryâ and âdecision analysisâ and their application to forensic science. We then analyze the Department of Justice (DOJ) Uniform Language for Testimony and Reporting (ULTR) documents that use the term. We argue that these documents fail to articulate coherent frameworks for reporting forensic results. The Article identifies what we perceive to be some key stumbling blocks to developing such frameworks. These include a reluctance to observe decision theory principles, a reluctance to cohere with sound probabilistic principles, and a reluctance to conform to particular logical concepts associated with these theories, such as proper scoring rules. The Article elucidates each of these perceived stumbling blocks and proposes a way to move forward to more defensible reporting frameworks. Finally, we explain what the use of the term âdecisionâ could accomplish for forensic science and what an appropriate deployment of the term would require
- âŠ