English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

The aim of this paper is to provide a theoretical model of judicial reasoning that satisfactorily integrates the partial explanations offered by three different theoretical research paradigms: Philosophy of Law, Legal Epistemology, and Artificial Intelligence and Law. The model emerges from the application of knowledge elicitation and knowledge representation methods. The model employs the theory of neural net works as a theoretical metaphor in order to generate its explanations and its visual representations. The epistemological status of the model is of a constructivist stripe. It is in line with contemporary research tendencies within cognitive psychology that propose that judicial reasoning may be better understood if we assume a coherentist and a connectionist approach.

Pasos hacia una teoría constructivista y conexionista del razonamiento judicial en la tradición del derecho romano-germánico