Mediation is often treated as an extension of negotiation, without taking into account the unique role that norms and facts play in legal mediation. Additionally, current approaches for updating argument acceptability in response to changing variables frequently require the introduction of new arguments or the removal of existing ones, which can be inefficient and cumbersome in decision-making processes within legal disputes. In this paper, our contribution is two-fold. First, we introduce a QuAM (Quantitative Argumentation Mediate) framework, which integrates the parties' knowledge and the mediator's knowledge, including facts and legal norms, when determining the acceptability of a mediation goal. Second, we develop a new formalism to model the relationship between the acceptability of a goal argument and the values assigned to a variable associated with the argument. We use a real-world legal mediation as a running example to illustrate our approach.

翻译：调解常被视为谈判的延伸，而未充分考虑规范与事实在法律调解中的独特作用。此外，当前针对变量变化更新论证可接受性的方法通常需要引入新论证或移除现有论证，这在法律纠纷的决策过程中往往效率低下且操作繁琐。本文的贡献体现在两个方面：首先，我们提出了QuAM（量化论证调解）框架，该框架在判定调解目标的可接受性时，整合了当事方与调解方的知识体系（包括事实与法律规范）；其次，我们构建了一种新的形式化模型，用以刻画目标论证的可接受性与该论证关联变量赋值之间的动态关系。我们通过一个真实法律调解案例作为贯穿全文的示例，以阐明所提方法的实际应用。