About: The Use of Structured Argumentation to Support Conclusions: A Video Authentication Case Study

Not logged in : Login

(Sponging disallowed)

Facets (new session)
Description
Metadata
Settings
- Rule:
- Inverse Functional Properties:
- "Same As":

About: The Use of Structured Argumentation to Support Conclusions: A Video Authentication Case Study Goto Sponge NotDistinct Permalink

An Entity of Type : bibo:AcademicArticle, within Data Space : demo.openlinksw.com associated with source document(s)

Attributes	Values
type	http://eprints.org/ontology/ConferenceItemEPrint http://eprints.org/ontology/EPrint Article Academic Article
seeAlso	HTML Summary of #89066 The Use of Structured Argumentation to Support Conclusions: A Video Authentication Case Study
http://eprints.org/ontology/hasDocument	The Use of Structured Argumentation to Support Conclusions: A Video Authentication Case Study (Archive (ZIP))
http://eprints.org...y/hasPresentation	The Use of Structured Argumentation to Support Conclusions: A Video Authentication Case Study (Archive (ZIP))
Title	The Use of Structured Argumentation to Support Conclusions: A Video Authentication Case Study
described by	https://demo.openlinksw.com/about/id/entity/https/www.cs.kent.ac.uk/people/staff/akj22/materials/CO644/export_kar_RDFN3.n3
Date	2021-02-15
Creator	Graeme Horsman Joseph Remy Patricia Mullaney Virginia N. L. Franqueira
status	non peer reviewed published
Publisher	American Academy of Forensic Sciences
abstract	Digital forensics can narrow key issues pending before a criminal or civil tribunal, resulting in a plea/settlement or a judicially economical trial. To support this, measures facilitating effective discourse between all parties regarding evidential matters may have value to judicial processes, where this session introduces the concept of Structured Argumentation (SA) for this purpose. The use of SA, applied to digital forensics investigations, was proposed and illustrated by Franqueira and Horsman (2020). It allows elaboration of investigative hypotheses, exposing not only how different (digital and/or non-digital) evidence logically fit together, but also the processes followed and conclusions reached, avoiding needless delay when arriving at a plea/disposition in a matter and/or narrowing the issues at a subsequent trial/proceeding. This session will be organised into 3 parts. First, the SA scheme (i.e., claim, ground, warrant, backing and rebuttal) and its dynamics will be described. Second, the results of an evaluation of SA applied to an anonymised video authentication case, from the field, will be presented. Finally, lessons learned and discussion points in relation to the use of SA, in theory and practice, will be elaborated.
Is Part Of	https://kar.kent.ac.uk/id/repository
Subject	QA Mathematics (inc Computing science)
list of authors	https://kar.kent.ac.uk/id/eprint/89066#authors
presented at	(W03) Scientific Working Group on Digital Evidence (SWGDE) and Digital Evidence: The Look of Modern Criminal Investigations
is topic of	https://www.cs.kent.ac.uk/people/staff/akj22/materials/CO644/export_kar_RDFN3.n3
is primary topic of	HTML Summary of #89066 The Use of Structured Argumentation to Support Conclusions: A Video Authentication Case Study

Faceted Search & Find service v1.17_git144 as of Jul 26 2024

Alternative Linked Data Documents: iSPARQL | ODE Content Formats:

RDF

ODATA

Microdata

About

OpenLink Virtuoso version 08.03.3331 as of Aug 25 2024, on Linux (x86_64-ubuntu_noble-linux-glibc2.38-64), Single-Server Edition (378 GB total memory, 45 GB memory in use)
Data on this page belongs to its respective rights holders.
Virtuoso Faceted Browser Copyright © 2009-2024 OpenLink Software