Logic Rules as Explanations for Legal Case Retrieval

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2403.01457v1
• Date: Sun, 3 Mar 2024 09:22:21 GMT
• Title: Logic Rules as Explanations for Legal Case Retrieval
• Authors: Zhongxiang Sun, Kepu Zhang, Weijie Yu, Haoyu Wang, Jun Xu
• Abstract summary: We propose a framework that conducts reasoning on the matching of legal cases through learning case-level and law-level logic rules. Benefiting from the logic and interpretable nature of the logic rules, NS-LCR is equipped with built-in faithful explainability.
• Score: 9.240902132139187
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/
• Abstract: In this paper, we address the issue of using logic rules to explain the results from legal case retrieval. The task is critical to legal case retrieval because the users (e.g., lawyers or judges) are highly specialized and require the system to provide logical, faithful, and interpretable explanations before making legal decisions. Recently, research efforts have been made to learn explainable legal case retrieval models. However, these methods usually select rationales (key sentences) from the legal cases as explanations, failing to provide faithful and logically correct explanations. In this paper, we propose Neural-Symbolic enhanced Legal Case Retrieval (NS-LCR), a framework that explicitly conducts reasoning on the matching of legal cases through learning case-level and law-level logic rules. The learned rules are then integrated into the retrieval process in a neuro-symbolic manner. Benefiting from the logic and interpretable nature of the logic rules, NS-LCR is equipped with built-in faithful explainability. We also show that NS-LCR is a model-agnostic framework that can be plugged in for multiple legal retrieval models. To showcase NS-LCR's superiority, we enhance existing benchmarks by adding manually annotated logic rules and introducing a novel explainability metric using Large Language Models (LLMs). Our comprehensive experiments reveal NS-LCR's effectiveness for ranking, alongside its proficiency in delivering reliable explanations for legal case retrieval.

Related papers

• Explaining Non-monotonic Normative Reasoning using Argumentation Theory with Deontic Logic [7.162465547358201]
  This paper explores how to provide designers with effective explanations for their legally relevant design decisions. We extend the previous system for providing explanations by specifying norms and the key legal or ethical principles for justifying actions in normative contexts. Considering that first-order logic has strong expressive power, in the current paper we adopt a first-order deontic logic system with deontic operators and preferences.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-09-18T08:03:29Z)
• DELTA: Pre-train a Discriminative Encoder for Legal Case Retrieval via Structural Word Alignment [55.91429725404988]
  We introduce DELTA, a discriminative model designed for legal case retrieval. We leverage shallow decoders to create information bottlenecks, aiming to enhance the representation ability. Our approach can outperform existing state-of-the-art methods in legal case retrieval.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-03-27T10:40:14Z)
• Can LLMs Reason with Rules? Logic Scaffolding for Stress-Testing and Improving LLMs [87.34281749422756]
  Large language models (LLMs) have achieved impressive human-like performance across various reasoning tasks. However, their mastery of underlying inferential rules still falls short of human capabilities. We propose a logic scaffolding inferential rule generation framework, to construct an inferential rule base, ULogic.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-02-18T03:38:51Z)
• LaRS: Latent Reasoning Skills for Chain-of-Thought Reasoning [61.7853049843921]
  Chain-of-thought (CoT) prompting is a popular in-context learning approach for large language models (LLMs) This paper introduces a new approach named Latent Reasoning Skills (LaRS) that employs unsupervised learning to create a latent space representation of rationales.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-12-07T20:36:10Z)
• SAILER: Structure-aware Pre-trained Language Model for Legal Case Retrieval [75.05173891207214]
  Legal case retrieval plays a core role in the intelligent legal system. Most existing language models have difficulty understanding the long-distance dependencies between different structures. We propose a new Structure-Aware pre-traIned language model for LEgal case Retrieval.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-04-22T10:47:01Z)
• Law to Binary Tree -- An Formal Interpretation of Legal Natural Language [3.1468624343533844]
  We propose a new approach based on legal science, specifically legal taxonomy, for representing and reasoning with legal documents. Our approach interprets the regulations in legal documents as binary trees, which facilitates legal reasoning systems to make decisions and resolve logical contradictions.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-12-16T08:26:32Z)
• Legal Element-oriented Modeling with Multi-view Contrastive Learning for Legal Case Retrieval [3.909749182759558]
  We propose an interaction-focused network for legal case retrieval with a multi-view contrastive learning objective. Case-view contrastive learning minimizes the hidden space distance between relevant legal case representations. We employ a legal element knowledge-aware indicator to detect legal elements of cases.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-10-11T06:47:23Z)
• Neuro-Symbolic Inductive Logic Programming with Logical Neural Networks [65.23508422635862]
  We propose learning rules with the recently proposed logical neural networks (LNN) Compared to others, LNNs offer strong connection to classical Boolean logic. Our experiments on standard benchmarking tasks confirm that LNN rules are highly interpretable.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-12-06T19:38:30Z)
• RNNLogic: Learning Logic Rules for Reasoning on Knowledge Graphs [91.71504177786792]
  This paper studies learning logic rules for reasoning on knowledge graphs. Logic rules provide interpretable explanations when used for prediction as well as being able to generalize to other tasks. Existing methods either suffer from the problem of searching in a large search space or ineffective optimization due to sparse rewards.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-10-08T14:47:02Z)
• Modelling Value-oriented Legal Reasoning in LogiKEy [0.0]
  We show how LogiKEy can harness interactive and automated theorem proving technology to provide a testbed for the development and formal verification of legal domain-specific languages and theories. We establish novel bridges between latest research in knowledge representation and reasoning in non-classical logics, automated theorem proving, and applications in legal reasoning.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-06-23T06:57:15Z)

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.