Augmenting Legal Decision Support Systems with LLM-based NLI for Analyzing Social Media Evidence

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2410.15990v1
• Date: Mon, 21 Oct 2024 13:20:15 GMT
• Title: Augmenting Legal Decision Support Systems with LLM-based NLI for Analyzing Social Media Evidence
• Authors: Ram Mohan Rao Kadiyala, Siddartha Pullakhandam, Kanwal Mehreen, Subhasya Tippareddy, Ashay Srivastava,
• Abstract summary: This paper presents our system description and error analysis of our entry for NLLP 2024 shared task on Legal Natural Language Inference (L-NLI) The task required classifying relationships as entailed, contradicted, or neutral, indicating any association between the review and the complaint. Our system emerged as the winning submission, significantly outperforming other entries with a substantial margin and demonstrating the effectiveness of our approach in legal text analysis.
• Score: 0.0
• License:
• Abstract: This paper presents our system description and error analysis of our entry for NLLP 2024 shared task on Legal Natural Language Inference (L-NLI) \citep{hagag2024legallenssharedtask2024}. The task required classifying these relationships as entailed, contradicted, or neutral, indicating any association between the review and the complaint. Our system emerged as the winning submission, significantly outperforming other entries with a substantial margin and demonstrating the effectiveness of our approach in legal text analysis. We provide a detailed analysis of the strengths and limitations of each model and approach tested, along with a thorough error analysis and suggestions for future improvements. This paper aims to contribute to the growing field of legal NLP by offering insights into advanced techniques for natural language inference in legal contexts, making it accessible to both experts and newcomers in the field.

Related papers

• Legal Evalutions and Challenges of Large Language Models [42.51294752406578]
  We use the OPENAI o1 model as a case study to evaluate the performance of large models in applying legal provisions. We compare current state-of-the-art LLMs, including open-source, closed-source, and legal-specific models trained specifically for the legal domain.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-11-15T12:23:12Z)
• Hybrid Deep Learning for Legal Text Analysis: Predicting Punishment Durations in Indonesian Court Rulings [0.0]
  This study develops a deep learning-based predictive system for court sentence lengths. Our model, combining CNN and BiLSTM with attention mechanism, achieved an R-squared score of 0.5893.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-26T07:07:48Z)
• Empowering Prior to Court Legal Analysis: A Transparent and Accessible Dataset for Defensive Statement Classification and Interpretation [5.646219481667151]
  This paper introduces a novel dataset tailored for classification of statements made during police interviews, prior to court proceedings. We introduce a fine-tuned DistilBERT model that achieves state-of-the-art performance in distinguishing truthful from deceptive statements. We also present an XAI interface that empowers both legal professionals and non-specialists to interact with and benefit from our system.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-05-17T11:22:27Z)
• A Survey on Large Language Models for Critical Societal Domains: Finance, Healthcare, and Law [65.87885628115946]
  Large language models (LLMs) are revolutionizing the landscapes of finance, healthcare, and law. We highlight the instrumental role of LLMs in enhancing diagnostic and treatment methodologies in healthcare, innovating financial analytics, and refining legal interpretation and compliance strategies. We critically examine the ethics for LLM applications in these fields, pointing out the existing ethical concerns and the need for transparent, fair, and robust AI systems.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-05-02T22:43:02Z)
• Leveraging Large Language Models for NLG Evaluation: Advances and Challenges [57.88520765782177]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) have opened new avenues for assessing generated content quality, e.g., coherence, creativity, and context relevance. We propose a coherent taxonomy for organizing existing LLM-based evaluation metrics, offering a structured framework to understand and compare these methods. By discussing unresolved challenges, including bias, robustness, domain-specificity, and unified evaluation, this paper seeks to offer insights to researchers and advocate for fairer and more advanced NLG evaluation techniques.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-01-13T15:59:09Z)
• INACIA: Integrating Large Language Models in Brazilian Audit Courts: Opportunities and Challenges [7.366861473623427]
  INACIA is a groundbreaking system designed to integrate Large Language Models (LLMs) into the operational framework of Brazilian Federal Court of Accounts (TCU) We demonstrate INACIA's potential in extracting relevant information from case documents, evaluating its legal plausibility, and formulating propositions for judicial decision-making.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-01-10T17:13:28Z)
• Little Giants: Exploring the Potential of Small LLMs as Evaluation Metrics in Summarization in the Eval4NLP 2023 Shared Task [53.163534619649866]
  This paper focuses on assessing the effectiveness of prompt-based techniques to empower Large Language Models to handle the task of quality estimation. We conducted systematic experiments with various prompting techniques, including standard prompting, prompts informed by annotator instructions, and innovative chain-of-thought prompting. Our work reveals that combining these approaches using a "small", open source model (orca_mini_v3_7B) yields competitive results.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-11-01T17:44:35Z)
• NeCo@ALQAC 2023: Legal Domain Knowledge Acquisition for Low-Resource Languages through Data Enrichment [2.441072488254427]
  This paper presents NeCo Team's solutions to the Vietnamese text processing tasks provided in the Automated Legal Question Answering Competition 2023 (ALQAC 2023) Our methods for the legal document retrieval task employ a combination of similarity ranking and deep learning models, while for the second task, we propose a range of adaptive techniques to handle different question types. Our approaches achieve outstanding results on both tasks of the competition, demonstrating the potential benefits and effectiveness of question answering systems in the legal field.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-09-11T14:43:45Z)
• Automatically Correcting Large Language Models: Surveying the landscape of diverse self-correction strategies [104.32199881187607]
  Large language models (LLMs) have demonstrated remarkable performance across a wide array of NLP tasks. A promising approach to rectify these flaws is self-correction, where the LLM itself is prompted or guided to fix problems in its own output. This paper presents a comprehensive review of this emerging class of techniques.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-08-06T18:38:52Z)
• AR-LSAT: Investigating Analytical Reasoning of Text [57.1542673852013]
  We study the challenge of analytical reasoning of text and introduce a new dataset consisting of questions from the Law School Admission Test from 1991 to 2016. We analyze what knowledge understanding and reasoning abilities are required to do well on this task.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-04-14T02:53:32Z)

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.