effectively applied Wigmore’s methodology to intelligence analysis, and other complex inferential systems such as weather forecasting. If Wigmore’s method was to be able to cope it had to be able to deal with inference networks referring to the ways that evidence was dealt with in previously decided cases. All inference networks require chains of reasoning—links—and nothing is ever final, there is always a missing link. These factors constitute the complexity of inference networks. Wigmore’s Chart was designed to take this into consideration. Therefore, as developed it allowed the construction of complex arguments, detailing chains of reasoning and linking evidence to matters to be proven, which is why it is a useful method to be applied to investigative and analytic tasks. Technically a Wigmore Chart can be described as a form of Directed Acyclic Graph (DAG). Figure 7.26: meaning of Directed Acyclic Graph • It is—Directed if it shows the direction of reasoning via arrows (when belief in the connecting established). • It is—Acyclic if you following any reasoning path or path of probabilistic inference you are NEVER led back to exactly where you started. This must never happen because if it does you are actually stuck in a probabilistic inferential loop from which there is no escape! • It is a—Graph because it is a symbol based representation with translation. Wigmore’s Chart is most immediately concerned with the issue of the relevancy, credibility and the probative force of evidence. The linking of these issues in the mind of the student is essential. When joined to critical analysis the student will be placed in a position to construct the best argument that is available. 7.10.2.1 Uses and limitations of the Wigmore Chart Method As has been indicated the chart in its full form is extremely time consuming to create and for that reason may be of extremely limited use to practitioners. However, it has great potential as a learning tool. Indeed, Wigmore used it for over 40 years with his own law students. It was its educational value that caught the serious attention of Anderson and Twining. The chart method creates awareness about the nature and construction of argument and as a result students recognise how arguments are constructed using relations between propositions supported by proof. This awareness is not often directly encouraged within the parameters of legal education. The chart therefore brings argumentative structure out into the open as an object of consideration. Then judgements can be made about its probative and persuasive force. Twining absolutely correctly says that if a student goes through the process of analysis in just one case in a disciplined way they gain an awareness of how easy it is to get argument wrong because they can see:

DOI link for effectively applied Wigmore’s methodology to intelligence analysis, and other complex inferential systems such as weather forecasting. If Wigmore’s method was to be able to cope it had to be able to deal with inference networks referring to the ways that evidence was dealt with in previously decided cases. All inference networks require chains of reasoning—links—and nothing is ever final, there is always a missing link. These factors constitute the complexity of inference networks. Wigmore’s Chart was designed to take this into consideration. Therefore, as developed it allowed the construction of complex arguments, detailing chains of reasoning and linking evidence to matters to be proven, which is why it is a useful method to be applied to investigative and analytic tasks. Technically a Wigmore Chart can be described as a form of Directed Acyclic Graph (DAG). Figure 7.26: meaning of Directed Acyclic Graph • It is—Directed if it shows the direction of reasoning via arrows (when belief in the connecting established). • It is—Acyclic if you following any reasoning path or path of probabilistic inference you are NEVER led back to exactly where you started. This must never happen because if it does you are actually stuck in a probabilistic inferential loop from which there is no escape! • It is a—Graph because it is a symbol based representation with translation. Wigmore’s Chart is most immediately concerned with the issue of the relevancy, credibility and the probative force of evidence. The linking of these issues in the mind of the student is essential. When joined to critical analysis the student will be placed in a position to construct the best argument that is available. 7.10.2.1 Uses and limitations of the Wigmore Chart Method As has been indicated the chart in its full form is extremely time consuming to create and for that reason may be of extremely limited use to practitioners. However, it has great potential as a learning tool. Indeed, Wigmore used it for over 40 years with his own law students. It was its educational value that caught the serious attention of Anderson and Twining. The chart method creates awareness about the nature and construction of argument and as a result students recognise how arguments are constructed using relations between propositions supported by proof. This awareness is not often directly encouraged within the parameters of legal education. The chart therefore brings argumentative structure out into the open as an object of consideration. Then judgements can be made about its probative and persuasive force. Twining absolutely correctly says that if a student goes through the process of analysis in just one case in a disciplined way they gain an awareness of how easy it is to get argument wrong because they can see:

effectively applied Wigmore’s methodology to intelligence analysis, and other complex inferential systems such as weather forecasting. If Wigmore’s method was to be able to cope it had to be able to deal with inference networks referring to the ways that evidence was dealt with in previously decided cases. All inference networks require chains of reasoning—links—and nothing is ever final, there is always a missing link. These factors constitute the complexity of inference networks. Wigmore’s Chart was designed to take this into consideration. Therefore, as developed it allowed the construction of complex arguments, detailing chains of reasoning and linking evidence to matters to be proven, which is why it is a useful method to be applied to investigative and analytic tasks. Technically a Wigmore Chart can be described as a form of Directed Acyclic Graph (DAG). Figure 7.26: meaning of Directed Acyclic Graph • It is—Directed if it shows the direction of reasoning via arrows (when belief in the connecting established). • It is—Acyclic if you following any reasoning path or path of probabilistic inference you are NEVER led back to exactly where you started. This must never happen because if it does you are actually stuck in a probabilistic inferential loop from which there is no escape! • It is a—Graph because it is a symbol based representation with translation. Wigmore’s Chart is most immediately concerned with the issue of the relevancy, credibility and the probative force of evidence. The linking of these issues in the mind of the student is essential. When joined to critical analysis the student will be placed in a position to construct the best argument that is available. 7.10.2.1 Uses and limitations of the Wigmore Chart Method As has been indicated the chart in its full form is extremely time consuming to create and for that reason may be of extremely limited use to practitioners. However, it has great potential as a learning tool. Indeed, Wigmore used it for over 40 years with his own law students. It was its educational value that caught the serious attention of Anderson and Twining. The chart method creates awareness about the nature and construction of argument and as a result students recognise how arguments are constructed using relations between propositions supported by proof. This awareness is not often directly encouraged within the parameters of legal education. The chart therefore brings argumentative structure out into the open as an object of consideration. Then judgements can be made about its probative and persuasive force. Twining absolutely correctly says that if a student goes through the process of analysis in just one case in a disciplined way they gain an awareness of how easy it is to get argument wrong because they can see: