This paper provides a formal model for the burden of persuasion in dialogues, and in particular, in legal proceedings. The model shows how an allocation of the burden of persuasion may induce single outcomes in dialectical contexts in which, without such an allocation, the status of conflicting arguments would remain undecided. Our approach is based on a two-stage labelling. The first-stage labelling determines what arguments are accepted, rejected or undecided, regardless of the allocation of burden. The second-stage labelling revises the dialectical status of first-stage undecided arguments, according to burdens of persuasion. The labelling is finally extended in such a way as to obtain a complete labelling. Our model combines two ideas that have emerged in the debate on the burden of persuasion: the idea that the burden of persuasion determines the solution of conflicts between arguments, and the idea that its satisfaction depends on the dialectical status of the arguments concerned. Our approach also addresses inversions of the burden of persuasion, namely, cases in which the burden of persuasion over an argument does not extend to its subarguments.

中文翻译：

---

论证中的说服负担

本文为对话中的说服负担提供了一个正式模型，特别是在法律诉讼中。该模型显示了在辩证环境中，说服负担的分配如何导致单一结果，在这种情况下，如果没有这种分配，相互冲突的论点的地位将保持未定。我们的方法基于两阶段标记。第一阶段的标签决定了接受、拒绝或未决定的论点，而不管负担的分配。根据说服的负担，第二阶段的标签修改了第一阶段未定论点的辩证状态。最终以这样的方式扩展标签以获得完整的标签。我们的模型结合了在关于说服负担的辩论中出现的两个想法：说服的负担决定论据之间冲突的解决的观点，其满足取决于有关论点的辩证地位的观点。我们的方法还解决了说服责任的倒置问题，即对一个论点的说服责任不扩展到其子论点的情况。