Similarity, precedent and argument from analogy

In this paper, it is shown (1) that there are two schemes for argument from analogy that seem to be competitors but are not, (2) how one of them is based on a distinctive type of similarity premise, (3) how to analyze the notion of similarity using story schemes illustrated by some cases, (4) how arguments from precedent are based on arguments from analogy, and in many instances arguments from classification, and (5) that when similarity is defined by means of story schemes, we can get a clearer idea of how it integrates with the use of argument from classification and argument from precedent in case-based reasoning by using a dialogue structure. Key words: stories; case-based reasoning; argument from classification; argumentation. This paper is about the logical structure of argument from analogy and its relationship to legal arguments from classification and precedent. Its main purpose is to provide guidance for researchers in AI and law on which argumentation scheme for argument from analogy to use, among the leading candidates that are currently available. Arguments from precedent cases to a case at issue are based on underlying arguments from analogy of a kind extremely commo