AIMS.au: A Dataset for the Analysis of Modern Slavery Countermeasures in Corporate Statements

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2502.07022v1
• Date: Mon, 10 Feb 2025 20:30:32 GMT
• Title: AIMS.au: A Dataset for the Analysis of Modern Slavery Countermeasures in Corporate Statements
• Authors: Adriana Eufrosiana Bora, Pierre-Luc St-Charles, Mirko Bronzi, Arsène Fansi Tchango, Bruno Rousseau, Kerrie Mengersen,
• Abstract summary: We introduce a dataset composed of 5,731 modern slavery statements taken from the Australian Modern Slavery Register and annotated at the sentence level.<n>We propose a machine learning methodology for the detection of sentences relevant to mandatory reporting requirements set by the Australian Modern Slavery Act.
• Score: 3.0847285957317654
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: Despite over a decade of legislative efforts to address modern slavery in the supply chains of large corporations, the effectiveness of government oversight remains hampered by the challenge of scrutinizing thousands of statements annually. While Large Language Models (LLMs) can be considered a well established solution for the automatic analysis and summarization of documents, recognizing concrete modern slavery countermeasures taken by companies and differentiating those from vague claims remains a challenging task. To help evaluate and fine-tune LLMs for the assessment of corporate statements, we introduce a dataset composed of 5,731 modern slavery statements taken from the Australian Modern Slavery Register and annotated at the sentence level. This paper details the construction steps for the dataset that include the careful design of annotation specifications, the selection and preprocessing of statements, and the creation of high-quality annotation subsets for effective model evaluations. To demonstrate our dataset's utility, we propose a machine learning methodology for the detection of sentences relevant to mandatory reporting requirements set by the Australian Modern Slavery Act. We then follow this methodology to benchmark modern language models under zero-shot and supervised learning settings.

Related papers

• AIMSCheck: Leveraging LLMs for AI-Assisted Review of Modern Slavery Statements Across Jurisdictions [1.3858903828439308]
  We present AIMS.uk and AIMS.ca, newly annotated datasets from the UK and Canada.<n>Second, we introduce AIMSCheck, an end-to-end framework for compliance validation.<n>Our experiments show that models trained on an Australian dataset generalize well across UK and Canadian jurisdictions.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-06-02T13:40:59Z)
• When LLMs Struggle: Reference-less Translation Evaluation for Low-resource Languages [9.138590152838754]
  Segment-level quality estimation (QE) is a challenging cross-lingual language understanding task.<n>We comprehensively evaluate large language models (LLMs) in zero/few-shot scenarios.<n>Our results indicate that prompt-based approaches are outperformed by the encoder-based fine-tuned QE models.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-01-08T12:54:05Z)
• Are Large Language Models Good Classifiers? A Study on Edit Intent Classification in Scientific Document Revisions [62.12545440385489]
  Large language models (LLMs) have brought substantial advancements in text generation, but their potential for enhancing classification tasks remains underexplored. We propose a framework for thoroughly investigating fine-tuning LLMs for classification, including both generation- and encoding-based approaches. We instantiate this framework in edit intent classification (EIC), a challenging and underexplored classification task.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-02T20:48:28Z)
• 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)
• Rethinking Legal Compliance Automation: Opportunities with Large Language Models [2.9088208525097365]
  We argue that the examination of (textual) legal artifacts should, first employ broader context than sentences. We present a compliance analysis approach designed to address these limitations.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-04-22T17:10:27Z)
• Modeling Legal Reasoning: LM Annotation at the Edge of Human Agreement [3.537369004801589]
  We study the classification of legal reasoning according to jurisprudential philosophy. We use a novel dataset of historical United States Supreme Court opinions annotated by a team of domain experts. We find that generative models perform poorly when given instructions equal to the instructions presented to human annotators.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-27T19:27:59Z)
• Assessing Privacy Risks in Language Models: A Case Study on Summarization Tasks [65.21536453075275]
  We focus on the summarization task and investigate the membership inference (MI) attack. We exploit text similarity and the model's resistance to document modifications as potential MI signals. We discuss several safeguards for training summarization models to protect against MI attacks and discuss the inherent trade-off between privacy and utility.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-20T05:44:39Z)
• Enhancing Pre-Trained Language Models with Sentence Position Embeddings for Rhetorical Roles Recognition in Legal Opinions [0.16385815610837165]
  The size of legal opinions continues to grow, making it increasingly challenging to develop a model that can accurately predict the rhetorical roles of legal opinions. We propose a novel model architecture for automatically predicting rhetorical roles using pre-trained language models (PLMs) enhanced with knowledge of sentence position information. Based on an annotated corpus from the LegalEval@SemEval2023 competition, we demonstrate that our approach requires fewer parameters, resulting in lower computational costs.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-08T20:33:55Z)
• Bring Your Own Data! Self-Supervised Evaluation for Large Language Models [52.15056231665816]
  We propose a framework for self-supervised evaluation of Large Language Models (LLMs) We demonstrate self-supervised evaluation strategies for measuring closed-book knowledge, toxicity, and long-range context dependence. We find strong correlations between self-supervised and human-supervised evaluations.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-06-23T17:59:09Z)
• Information Association for Language Model Updating by Mitigating LM-Logical Discrepancy [68.31760483418901]
  Large Language Models(LLMs) struggle with providing current information due to the outdated pre-training data. Existing methods for updating LLMs, such as knowledge editing and continual fine-tuning, have significant drawbacks in generalizability of new information. We identify the core challenge behind these drawbacks: the LM-logical discrepancy featuring the difference between language modeling probabilities and logical probabilities.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-05-29T19:48:37Z)
• WiCE: Real-World Entailment for Claims in Wikipedia [63.234352061821625]
  We propose WiCE, a new fine-grained textual entailment dataset built on natural claim and evidence pairs extracted from Wikipedia. In addition to standard claim-level entailment, WiCE provides entailment judgments over sub-sentence units of the claim. We show that real claims in our dataset involve challenging verification and retrieval problems that existing models fail to address.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-03-02T17:45:32Z)
• When Does Translation Require Context? A Data-driven, Multilingual Exploration [71.43817945875433]
  proper handling of discourse significantly contributes to the quality of machine translation (MT) Recent works in context-aware MT attempt to target a small set of discourse phenomena during evaluation. We develop the Multilingual Discourse-Aware benchmark, a series of taggers that identify and evaluate model performance on discourse phenomena.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-09-15T17:29:30Z)

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.