The burden of persuasion in structured argumentation

Author(s):  
Roberta Calegari ◽  
Régis Riveret ◽  
Giovanni Sartor
2021 ◽  
Vol 26 (4) ◽  
Author(s):  
Mazen Mohamad ◽  
Jan-Philipp Steghöfer ◽  
Riccardo Scandariato

AbstractSecurity Assurance Cases (SAC) are a form of structured argumentation used to reason about the security properties of a system. After the successful adoption of assurance cases for safety, SAC are getting significant traction in recent years, especially in safety-critical industries (e.g., automotive), where there is an increasing pressure to be compliant with several security standards and regulations. Accordingly, research in the field of SAC has flourished in the past decade, with different approaches being investigated. In an effort to systematize this active field of research, we conducted a systematic literature review (SLR) of the existing academic studies on SAC. Our review resulted in an in-depth analysis and comparison of 51 papers. Our results indicate that, while there are numerous papers discussing the importance of SAC and their usage scenarios, the literature is still immature with respect to concrete support for practitioners on how to build and maintain a SAC. More importantly, even though some methodologies are available, their validation and tool support is still lacking.


1993 ◽  
Vol 72 (2) ◽  
pp. 607-614 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jon M. Hawes ◽  
Thomas L. Baker ◽  
James T. Strong

Purchasing and sales professionals spend considerable portions of the work week interacting. Usually the burden of persuasion is faced by the seller and a very important objective of any sales call is an improvement in the buyer-seller relationship. This research examined the views of a sample of 173 purchasing executives and 193 manufacturers' representatives concerning sellers' performance on a number of variables related to exchange relationships. Analysis indicated that buyers held significantly more modest views of the performance of sales representatives than did members of the business-to-business sales force.


2016 ◽  
Vol 49 ◽  
pp. 149-166 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andrea Cohen ◽  
Alejandro J. García ◽  
Guillermo R. Simari

Author(s):  
John Lowrance ◽  
Ian Harrison ◽  
Andres Rodriguez ◽  
Eric Yeh ◽  
Tom Boyce ◽  
...  

Author(s):  
Vladimir Sklyar ◽  
Vyacheslav S. Kharchenko

Two existing notations for the assurance case (claim, argument and evidence [CAE] and goal structuring notation [GSN]) are considered. Supporting software tools for development of the assurance case are considered. Some ways for improvement and modification are proposed for both assurance case notations (CAE and GSN). For CAE, the authors obtained annex with acceptance and coverage criteria as well as an algorithm of the assurance case update through life cycle stages. For GSN, they improve structured argumentation with support of structured text using. Recommendations for using the assurance case notations and tools for I&C systems are formulated.


Author(s):  
Joost Pauwelyn

The burden of proving a defence is said to be on the party invoking it. As trite as this proposition may sound, in international law it hides a far more complex litigation reality. Distinctions must be made both in terms of types of claims in defence, and types of burdens this may impose on the respondent. This chapter distinguishes six different claims in defence: (i) objections to jurisdiction, (ii) objections to admissibility, (iii) exemptions, (iv) absence of breach, (v) exceptions, and (vi) defences under secondary rules. For each of these six claims in defence, five types of burdens are identified: (i) burden of raising a claim in defence, (ii) burden of production of evidence, (iii) burden of persuasion, (iv) quantum of proof, and (v) standard of review. Although for some claims in defence some types of burden are on the defendant, this is certainly not the case for all.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document