legal-abductive-reasoning

Legal abductive reasoning skill for generating and evaluating the most reasonable explanatory hypotheses when evidence is incomplete or facts are ambiguous. Combines Mill’s five methods (agreement, difference, joint method, residues, concomitant variation) for structured causal inference. Triggered when the user needs to “propose possible legal explanations,” “generate defense/prosecution hypotheses,” “evaluate multiple readings of evidence,” or “infer the best explanation from incomplete facts.” Applies to case analysis, evidence evaluation, disputes over rule application, causal inference, a