Predicting Indian Supreme Court Judgments, Decisions, Or Appeals
- URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2110.09251v2
- Date: Mon, 25 Oct 2021 21:42:44 GMT
- Title: Predicting Indian Supreme Court Judgments, Decisions, Or Appeals
- Authors: Sugam Sharma, Ritu Shandilya, and Swadesh Sharma
- Abstract summary: We introduce our newly developed ML-enabled legal prediction model and its operational prototype, eLegPredict.
eLegPredict is trained and tested over 3072 supreme court cases and has achieved 76% accuracy (F1-score)
The eLegPredict is equipped with a mechanism to aid end users, where as soon as a document with new case description is dropped into a designated directory, the system quickly reads through its content and generates prediction.
- Score: 0.403831199243454
- License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/
- Abstract: Legal predictive models are of enormous interest and value to legal
community. The stakeholders, specially, the judges and attorneys can take the
best advantages of these models to predict the case outcomes to further augment
their future course of actions, for example speeding up the decision making,
support the arguments, strengthening the defense, etc. However, accurately
predicting the legal decisions and case outcomes is an arduous process, which
involves several complex steps -- finding suitable bulk case documents, data
extracting, cleansing and engineering, etc. Additionally, the legal complexity
further adds to its intricacies. In this paper, we introduce our newly
developed ML-enabled legal prediction model and its operational prototype,
eLegPredict; which successfully predicts the Indian supreme court decisions.
The eLegPredict is trained and tested over 3072 supreme court cases and has
achieved 76% accuracy (F1-score). The eLegPredict is equipped with a mechanism
to aid end users, where as soon as a document with new case description is
dropped into a designated directory, the system quickly reads through its
content and generates prediction. To our best understanding, eLegPredict is the
first legal prediction model to predict Indian supreme court decisions.
Related papers
- Towards Explainability in Legal Outcome Prediction Models [64.00172507827499]
We argue that precedent is a natural way of facilitating explainability for legal NLP models.
By developing a taxonomy of legal precedent, we are able to compare human judges and neural models.
We find that while the models learn to predict outcomes reasonably well, their use of precedent is unlike that of human judges.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-03-25T15:15:41Z) - PILOT: Legal Case Outcome Prediction with Case Law [43.680862577060765]
We identify two unique challenges in making legal case outcome predictions with case law.
First, it is crucial to identify relevant precedent cases that serve as fundamental evidence for judges during decision-making.
Second, it is necessary to consider the evolution of legal principles over time, as early cases may adhere to different legal contexts.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-01-28T21:18:05Z) - SLJP: Semantic Extraction based Legal Judgment Prediction [0.0]
Legal Judgment Prediction (LJP) is a judicial assistance system that recommends the legal components such as applicable statues, prison term and penalty term.
Most of the existing Indian models did not adequately concentrate on the semantics embedded in the fact description (FD) that impacts the decision.
The proposed semantic extraction based LJP (SLJP) model provides the advantages of pretrained transformers for complex unstructured legal case document understanding.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2023-12-13T08:50:02Z) - Precedent-Enhanced Legal Judgment Prediction with LLM and Domain-Model
Collaboration [52.57055162778548]
Legal Judgment Prediction (LJP) has become an increasingly crucial task in Legal AI.
Precedents are the previous legal cases with similar facts, which are the basis for the judgment of the subsequent case in national legal systems.
Recent advances in deep learning have enabled a variety of techniques to be used to solve the LJP task.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2023-10-13T16:47:20Z) - Exploiting Contrastive Learning and Numerical Evidence for Confusing
Legal Judgment Prediction [46.71918729837462]
Given the fact description text of a legal case, legal judgment prediction aims to predict the case's charge, law article and penalty term.
Previous studies fail to distinguish different classification errors with a standard cross-entropy classification loss.
We propose a moco-based supervised contrastive learning to learn distinguishable representations.
We further enhance the representation of the fact description with extracted crime amounts which are encoded by a pre-trained numeracy model.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2022-11-15T15:53:56Z) - Do Charge Prediction Models Learn Legal Theory? [59.74220430434435]
We argue that trustworthy charge prediction models should take legal theories into consideration.
We propose three principles for trustworthy models should follow in this task, which are sensitive, selective, and presumption of innocence.
Our findings indicate that, while existing charge prediction models meet the selective principle on a benchmark dataset, most of them are still not sensitive enough and do not satisfy the presumption of innocence.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2022-10-31T07:32:12Z) - JUSTICE: A Benchmark Dataset for Supreme Court's Judgment Prediction [0.0]
We aim to create a high-quality dataset of SCOTUS court cases so that they may be readily used in natural language processing (NLP) research and other data-driven applications.
By using advanced NLP algorithms to analyze previous court cases, the trained models are able to predict and classify a court's judgment.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2021-12-06T23:19:08Z) - ILDC for CJPE: Indian Legal Documents Corpus for Court Judgment
Prediction and Explanation [3.285073688021526]
We propose the task of Court Judgment Prediction and Explanation (CJPE)
CJPE requires an automated system to predict an explainable outcome of a case.
Our best prediction model has an accuracy of 78% versus 94% for human legal experts.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2021-05-28T03:07:32Z) - What About the Precedent: An Information-Theoretic Analysis of Common
Law [64.49276556192073]
In common law, the outcome of a new case is determined mostly by precedent cases, rather than existing statutes.
We are the first to approach this question by comparing two longstanding jurisprudential views.
We find that the precedent's arguments share 0.38 nats of information with the case's outcome, whereas precedent's facts only share 0.18 nats of information.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2021-04-25T11:20:09Z) - Legal Judgment Prediction (LJP) Amid the Advent of Autonomous AI Legal
Reasoning [0.0]
Legal Judgment Prediction is a longstanding and open topic in the theory and practice-of-law.
Various methods and techniques to predict legal cases and judicial actions have emerged over time.
The advent of AI Legal Reasoning will have a pronounced impact on how LJP is performed and its predictive accuracy.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2020-09-29T00:12:42Z)
This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.
This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.