The rising tide of threats, from financial cybercrime to asymmetric military conflicts, demands greater sophistication in tools and techniques of law enforcement, commercial and domestic security professionals, and terrorism prevention. Concentrating on computational solutions to determine or anticipate an adversary's intent, Adversarial Reasoning:

"This book examines the issue of rational cooperation, especially cooperation between people with conflicting moral commitments. The first part considers how the two main aspects of cooperation - the choice by a group of a particular cooperative scheme and the decision by each member to contribute to that scheme - can be understood as guided by reason. The second part explores how the activity of reasoning itself can take a cooperative form. The book is distinctive in offering an account of what people can accomplish by reasoning together, of the role of deliberation in democratic decision making, and of the negotiation of the proper use of concepts. Presenting for the first time a detailed analysis of the general problem of cooperation and collective reasoning between people with different moral commitments, this book will be of particular interest to philosophers of the social sciences and to students in political science, sociology and economics." --Cambridge Press.

A critical challenge in deep learning is the vulnerability of deep learning networks to security attacks from intelligent cyber adversaries. Even innocuous perturbations to the training data can be used to manipulate the behaviour of deep networks in unintended ways. In this book, we review the latest developments in adversarial attack technologies in computer vision; natural language processing; and cybersecurity with regard to multidimensional, textual and image data, sequence data, and temporal data. In turn, we assess the robustness properties of deep learning networks to produce a taxonomy of adversarial examples that characterises the security of learning systems using game theoretical adversarial deep learning algorithms. The state-of-the-art in adversarial perturbation-based privacy protection mechanisms is also reviewed. We propose new adversary types for game theoretical objectives in non-stationary computational learning environments. Proper quantification of the hypothesis set in the decision problems of our research leads to various functional problems, oracular problems, sampling tasks, and optimization problems. We also address the defence mechanisms currently available for deep learning models deployed in real-world environments. The learning theories used in these defence mechanisms concern data representations, feature manipulations, misclassifications costs, sensitivity landscapes, distributional robustness, and complexity classes of the adversarial deep learning algorithms and their applications. In closing, we propose future research directions in adversarial deep learning applications for resilient learning system design and review formalized learning assumptions concerning the attack surfaces and robustness characteristics of artificial intelligence applications so as to deconstruct the contemporary adversarial deep learning designs. Given its scope, the book will be of interest to Adversarial Machine Learning practitioners and Adversarial Artificial Intelligence researchers whose work involves the design and application of Adversarial Deep Learning.

This is the first book to bring together distinguished jurisprudential theorists, as well as up-and-coming scholars, to critically assess the nature of legal reasoning. The volume is divided into 3 parts: The first part, General Jurisprudence and Legal Reasoning, addresses issues at the intersection of general jurisprudence - those pertaining to the nature of law itself - and legal reasoning. The second part, Rules and Reasons, addresses two concepts central to two prominent types of theory of legal reasoning. The essays in the third and final part, Doctrine and Practice, delve into the mechanics of legal practice and doctrine, from a legal reasoning perspective.

CSISE2011 is an integrated conference concentrating its focus upon Computer Science,Intelligent System and Environment. In the proceeding, you can learn much more knowledge about Computer Science, Intelligent System and Environment of researchers all around the world. The international conference will provide a forum for engineers, scientist, teachers and all researchers to discuss their latest research achievements and their future research plan. The main role of the proceeding is to be used as an exchange pillar for researchers who are working in the mentioned field. In order to meet high standard of Springer ́s Advances in Intelligent and Soft Computing ,the organization committee has made their efforts to do the following things. Firstly, poor quality paper has been refused after reviewing course by anonymous referee experts. Secondly, periodically review meetings have been held around the reviewers about five times for exchanging reviewing suggestions. Finally, the conference organization had several preliminary sessions before the conference. Through efforts of different people and departments, the conference will be successful and fruitful. We hope that you can get much more knowledges from our CSISE2011, and we also hope that you can give us good suggestions to improve our work in the future.

This collection of essays, first published two decades ago, presents central feminist critiques and analyses of natural and social sciences and their philosophies. This work provides a splendid opportunity for upper-level undergraduate and graduate students in philosophy and the social sciences to explore some of the most intriguing and controversial challenges to disciplinary projects and to public policy today.

This book analyses the straw man fallacy and its deployment in philosophical reasoning. While commonly invoked in both academic dialogue and public discourse, it has not until now received the attention it deserves as a rhetorical device. Scott Aikin and John Casey propose that straw manning essentially consists in expressing distorted representations of one's critical interlocutor. To this end, the straw man comprises three dialectical forms, and not only the one that is usually suggested: the straw man, the weak man and the hollow man. Moreover, they demonstrate that straw manning is unique among fallacies as it has no particular logical form in itself, because it is an instance of inappropriate meta-argument, or argument about arguments. They discuss the importance of the onlooking audience to the successful deployment of the straw man, reasoning that the existence of an audience complicates the dialectical boundaries of argument. Providing a lively, provocative and thorough analysis of the straw man fallacy, this book will appeal to postgraduates and researchers alike, working in a range of fields including fallacies, rhetoric, argumentation theory and informal logic.

"Modeling Legal Argument "provides a comprehensive treatment of case-based reasoning and a detailed description of a computer program called Hypo, that models the way attorneys argue with cases, real and hypothetical. The program offers significant advantages over "keyword" case retrieval systems in the legal field and demonstrates how to design expert systems that assist the user by presenting reasonable alternative answers on all sides of an issue and by citing case examples to explain their advice.Hypo analyzes problem situations dealing with trade secrets disputes, retrieves relevant legal cases from its database and fashions them into reasonable legal arguments about who should win. The arguments demonstrate the program's ability to reason symbolically with past cases, to draw factual analogies between cases, to cite them in arguments, to distinguish them, and to pose counter-examples and hypotheticals based on past cases."Modeling Legal Argument "discusses the law as a paradigm of case-based argument, introduces Hypo and its adversarial reasoning process, provides an overview of the Hypo program, and gives extended examples of the model's reasoning capabilities. It describes the case knowledge base, a dimensional index, basic mechanisms of case-based reasoning, and offers a theory of case-based argument in Hypo. Ashley evaluates Hypo's performance and takes up adversarial case-based reasoning beyond the law and extensions of the Hypo model.Kevin D. Ashley is a Research Scientist at the Learning Research an Development Center and Assistant Professor of Law at the University of Pittsburgh. "Modeling Legal Argument is "included in the Artificial Intelligence and Legal Reasoning series, edited by L. Thorne McCarty and Edwina L. Rissland.

Contemporary metaphor theory has recently begun to address the relation between metaphor, culture and ideology. In this wide-ranging book, Andrew Goatly, using lexical data from his database Metalude, investigates how conceptual metaphor themes construct our thinking and social behaviour in fields as diverse as architecture, engineering, education, genetics, ecology, economics, politics, industrial time-management, medicine, immigration, race, and sex. He argues that metaphor themes are created not only through the universal body but also through cultural experience, so that an apparently universal metaphor such as event-structure as realized in English grammar is, in fact, culturally relative, compared with e.g. the construal of 'cause and effect' in the Algonquin language Blackfoot. Moreover, event-structure as a model is both scientifically reactionary and, as the basis for technological mega-projects, has proved environmentally harmful. Furthermore, the ideologies of early capitalism created or exploited a selection of metaphor themes historically traceable through Hobbes, Hume, Smith, Malthus and Darwin. These metaphorical concepts support neo-Darwinian and neo-conservative ideologies apparent at the beginning of the 21st century, ideologies underpinning our social and environmental crises. The conclusion therefore recommends skepticism of metaphor's reductionist tendencies.

Political philosophy seems both impossible to do and impossible to avoid. Impossible to do, because we cannot agree on a single set of political principles. Impossible to avoid, because we're always living with some kind of political system, and thus some set of principles. So, if we can't do the philosophy, but can't escape the politics, what are we to do? Jonathan Floyd argues that the answer lies in political philosophy's deepest methodological commitments. First, he shows how political philosophy is practiced as a kind of 'thinking about thinking'. Second, he unpicks the different types of thought we think about, such as considered judgements, or intuitive responses to moral dilemmas, and assesses whether any are fit for purpose. Third, he offers an alternative approach - 'normative behaviourism' - which holds that rather than studying our thinking, we should study our behaviour. Perhaps, just sometimes, actions speak louder than thoughts.