Related papers: The Law and NLP: Bridging Disciplinary Disconnects

The Law and NLP: Bridging Disciplinary Disconnects

URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2310.14346v1
Date: Sun, 22 Oct 2023 16:34:31 GMT
Title: The Law and NLP: Bridging Disciplinary Disconnects
Authors: Robert Mahari, Dominik Stammbach, Elliott Ash, Alex 'Sandy' Pentland
Abstract summary: We argue that the slow uptake of NLP in legal practice is exacerbated by a disconnect between the needs of the legal community and the focus of NLP researchers. We discuss examples of legal NLP tasks that promise to bridge disciplinary disconnects and highlight interesting areas for legal NLP research that remain underexplored.
Score: 11.828797013800594
License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
Abstract: Legal practice is intrinsically rooted in the fabric of language, yet legal practitioners and scholars have been slow to adopt tools from natural language processing (NLP). At the same time, the legal system is experiencing an access to justice crisis, which could be partially alleviated with NLP. In this position paper, we argue that the slow uptake of NLP in legal practice is exacerbated by a disconnect between the needs of the legal community and the focus of NLP researchers. In a review of recent trends in the legal NLP literature, we find limited overlap between the legal NLP community and legal academia. Our interpretation is that some of the most popular legal NLP tasks fail to address the needs of legal practitioners. We discuss examples of legal NLP tasks that promise to bridge disciplinary disconnects and highlight interesting areas for legal NLP research that remain underexplored.

Related papers

The Nature of NLP: Analyzing Contributions in NLP Papers [77.31665252336157]
We quantitatively investigate what constitutes NLP research by examining research papers. Our findings reveal a rising involvement of machine learning in NLP since the early nineties. In post-2020, there has been a resurgence of focus on language and people.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-09-29T01:29:28Z)
Towards Supporting Legal Argumentation with NLP: Is More Data Really All You Need? [1.6311895940869516]
Legal reasoning and argumentation justifying decisions in cases has always been central to AI & Law. Recent developments in legal NLP have increasingly focused on statistically classifying legal conclusions from text. This paper reviews both traditional symbolic works in AI & Law and recent advances in legal NLP.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-06-16T15:15:44Z)
What Can Natural Language Processing Do for Peer Review? [173.8912784451817]
In modern science, peer review is widely used, yet it is hard, time-consuming, and prone to error. Since the artifacts involved in peer review are largely text-based, Natural Language Processing has great potential to improve reviewing. We detail each step of the process from manuscript submission to camera-ready revision, and discuss the associated challenges and opportunities for NLP assistance.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-05-10T16:06:43Z)
Towards A Structured Overview of Use Cases for Natural Language Processing in the Legal Domain: A German Perspective [43.662441393491584]
In recent years, the field of Legal Tech has risen in prevalence, as the Natural Language Processing (NLP) and legal disciplines have combined forces to digitalize legal processes. In this work, we aim to build a structured overview of Legal Tech use cases, grounded in NLP literature, but also supplemented by voices from legal practice in Germany.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-04-29T14:56:47Z)
Regulation and NLP (RegNLP): Taming Large Language Models [51.41095330188972]
We argue how NLP research can benefit from proximity to regulatory studies and adjacent fields. We advocate for the development of a new multidisciplinary research space on regulation and NLP.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2023-10-09T09:22:40Z)
Lawformer: A Pre-trained Language Model for Chinese Legal Long Documents [56.40163943394202]
We release the Longformer-based pre-trained language model, named as Lawformer, for Chinese legal long documents understanding. We evaluate Lawformer on a variety of LegalAI tasks, including judgment prediction, similar case retrieval, legal reading comprehension, and legal question answering.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2021-05-09T09:39:25Z)
On the Ethical Limits of Natural Language Processing on Legal Text [9.147707153504117]
We argue that researchers struggle when it comes to identifying ethical limits to using natural language processing systems. We place emphasis on three crucial normative parameters which have, to the best of our knowledge, been underestimated by current debates. For each of these three parameters we provide specific recommendations for the legal NLP community.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2021-05-06T15:22:24Z)
Authorized and Unauthorized Practices of Law: The Role of Autonomous Levels of AI Legal Reasoning [0.0]
The legal field has sought to define Authorized Practices of Law (APL) versus Unauthorized Practices of Law (UPL) This paper explores a newly derived instrumental grid depicting the key characteristics underlying APL and UPL as they apply to the AILR autonomous levels.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2020-08-19T18:35:58Z)
How Does NLP Benefit Legal System: A Summary of Legal Artificial Intelligence [81.04070052740596]
Legal Artificial Intelligence (LegalAI) focuses on applying the technology of artificial intelligence, especially natural language processing, to benefit tasks in the legal domain. This paper introduces the history, the current state, and the future directions of research in LegalAI.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2020-04-25T14:45:15Z)

This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.