SEMDR: A Semantic-Aware Dual Encoder Model for Legal Judgment Prediction with Legal Clue Tracing

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2408.09717v1
• Date: Mon, 19 Aug 2024 06:13:19 GMT
• Title: SEMDR: A Semantic-Aware Dual Encoder Model for Legal Judgment Prediction with Legal Clue Tracing
• Authors: Pengjie Liu, Wang Zhang, Yulong Ding, Xuefeng Zhang, Shuang-Hua Yang,
• Abstract summary: Legal Judgment Prediction (LJP) aims to form legal judgments based on the criminal fact description. Researchers struggle to classify confusing criminal cases, such as robbery and theft. We propose a Semantic-Aware Dual Model (SEMDR) to conduct fine-grained semantic reasoning between criminal facts and instruments.
• Score: 4.756864134579646
• License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
• Abstract: Legal Judgment Prediction (LJP) aims to form legal judgments based on the criminal fact description. However, researchers struggle to classify confusing criminal cases, such as robbery and theft, which requires LJP models to distinguish the nuances between similar crimes. Existing methods usually design handcrafted features to pick up necessary semantic legal clues to make more accurate legal judgment predictions. In this paper, we propose a Semantic-Aware Dual Encoder Model (SEMDR), which designs a novel legal clue tracing mechanism to conduct fine-grained semantic reasoning between criminal facts and instruments. Our legal clue tracing mechanism is built from three reasoning levels: 1) Lexicon-Tracing, which aims to extract criminal facts from criminal descriptions; 2) Sentence Representation Learning, which contrastively trains language models to better represent confusing criminal facts; 3) Multi-Fact Reasoning, which builds a reasons graph to propagate semantic clues among fact nodes to capture the subtle difference among criminal facts. Our legal clue tracing mechanism helps SEMDR achieve state-of-the-art on the CAIL2018 dataset and shows its advance in few-shot scenarios. Our experiments show that SEMDR has a strong ability to learn more uniform and distinguished representations for criminal facts, which helps to make more accurate predictions on confusing criminal cases and reduces the model uncertainty during making judgments. All codes will be released via GitHub.

Related papers

• AnnoCaseLaw: A Richly-Annotated Dataset For Benchmarking Explainable Legal Judgment Prediction [56.797874973414636]
  AnnoCaseLaw is a first-of-its-kind dataset of 471 meticulously annotated U.S. Appeals Court negligence cases. Our dataset lays the groundwork for more human-aligned, explainable Legal Judgment Prediction models. Results demonstrate that LJP remains a formidable task, with application of legal precedent proving particularly difficult.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-02-28T19:14:48Z)
• Beyond Guilt: Legal Judgment Prediction with Trichotomous Reasoning [12.589047235741194]
  We introduce LJPIV, the first benchmark dataset for Legal Judgment Prediction with Innocent Verdicts. Adhering to the trichotomous dogmatics, we extend three widely-used legal datasets through LLM-based augmentation and manual verification. Our experiments with state-of-the-art legal LLMs and novel strategies that integrate trichotomous reasoning into zero-shot prompting and fine-tuning reveal: (1) current legal LLMs have significant room for improvement, with even the best models achieving an F1 score of less than 0.3 on LJPIV.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-12-19T07:14:13Z)
• 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)
• 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)
• Two-step Automated Cybercrime Coded Word Detection using Multi-level Representation Learning [2.048226951354646]
  In social network service platforms, crime suspects are likely to use cybercrime coded words for communication. We propose a new two-step approach, in which a mean latent vector is constructed for each cybercrime through one of five different AutoEncoder models. To deeply understand cybercrime coded words detected through the two-step approach, we propose three novel methods.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-03-16T07:18:29Z)
• LegalDuet: Learning Effective Representations for Legal Judgment Prediction through a Dual-View Legal Clue Reasoning [40.412070416260136]
  We propose a LegalDuet model, which pretrains language models to learn a tailored embedding space for making legal judgments. Our experiments show that LegalDuet achieves state-of-the-art performance on the CAIL2018 dataset.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-01-27T10:28:27Z)
• Multi-Defendant Legal Judgment Prediction via Hierarchical Reasoning [49.23103067844278]
  We propose the task of multi-defendant LJP, which aims to automatically predict the judgment results for each defendant of multi-defendant cases. Two challenges arise with the task of multi-defendant LJP: (1) indistinguishable judgment results among various defendants; and (2) the lack of a real-world dataset for training and evaluation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-12-10T04:46:30Z)
• Legal Syllogism Prompting: Teaching Large Language Models for Legal Judgment Prediction [0.6091702876917281]
  Legal syllogism prompting (LoT) is a simple prompting method to teach large language models for legal judgment prediction. LoT teaches only that in the legal syllogism the major premise is law, the minor premise is the fact, and the conclusion is judgment. Our results show that LLMs with LoT achieve better performance than the baseline and chain of thought prompting.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-07-17T08:38:46Z)
• 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)
• 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)
• Distinguish Confusing Law Articles for Legal Judgment Prediction [30.083642130015317]
  Legal Judgment Prediction (LJP) is the task of automatically predicting a law case's judgment results given a text describing its facts. We present an end-to-end model, LADAN, to solve the task of LJP.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-04-06T11:09:44Z)

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.