eagerlearners at SemEval2024 Task 5: The Legal Argument Reasoning Task in Civil Procedure
0
Sign in to get full access
Overview
- This paper discusses the eagerlearners team's approach to the SemEval2024 Task 5: The Legal Argument Reasoning Task in Civil Procedure.
- The task involves predicting the outcomes of legal cases based on the arguments made in the case documents.
- The eagerlearners team employed various techniques, including language models and reasoning-based approaches, to tackle this challenge.
Plain English Explanation
The paper describes the work of the eagerlearners team in a legal reasoning competition. In this competition, participants were asked to develop systems that could predict the outcomes of legal cases based on the arguments made in the case documents. The eagerlearners team used a combination of advanced language models and reasoning-based approaches to tackle this task. The goal was to create a system that could accurately predict the outcomes of legal cases by analyzing the arguments presented in the case documents.
Technical Explanation
The eagerlearners team's approach to the SemEval2024 Task 5: The Legal Argument Reasoning Task in Civil Procedure involved several key elements. First, they leveraged advanced language models to understand the semantic content of the case documents. These models were trained on large corpora of legal texts to capture the nuances of legal language and reasoning.
In addition to the language models, the eagerlearners team also incorporated reasoning-based approaches into their system. These approaches focused on analyzing the logical structure and argumentative patterns within the case documents, rather than solely relying on lexical features.
The combination of language models and reasoning-based approaches allowed the eagerlearners team to develop a comprehensive system that could effectively predict the outcomes of legal cases by considering both the semantic content and the logical structure of the arguments presented.
Critical Analysis
The eagerlearners team's approach to the SemEval2024 Task 5 demonstrates a promising direction in legal reasoning research. By combining advanced language models with reasoning-based techniques, they were able to create a system that could capture the nuances of legal arguments and make accurate predictions.
However, it's important to note that legal reasoning is a complex and contextual process, and there may be limitations to the generalizability of this approach. For instance, the performance of the system may be influenced by the specific characteristics of the legal domain or the dataset used for the task.
Additionally, the reasoning-based approaches employed by the eagerlearners team may face challenges in handling the ambiguity and uncertainty inherent in legal arguments. Further research and development may be needed to address these limitations and improve the robustness of the system.
Conclusion
The eagerlearners team's work on the SemEval2024 Task 5: The Legal Argument Reasoning Task in Civil Procedure demonstrates the potential of combining advanced language models and reasoning-based approaches for legal reasoning tasks. Their system showcases the ability to accurately predict the outcomes of legal cases by analyzing the arguments presented in the case documents.
While there are still some limitations and areas for further research, the eagerlearners team's approach represents an important step forward in the field of legal reasoning and could have significant implications for the legal profession and the justice system as a whole.
This summary was produced with help from an AI and may contain inaccuracies - check out the links to read the original source documents!
Related Papers
0
eagerlearners at SemEval2024 Task 5: The Legal Argument Reasoning Task in Civil Procedure
Hoorieh Sabzevari, Mohammadmostafa Rostamkhani, Sauleh Eetemadi
This study investigates the performance of the zero-shot method in classifying data using three large language models, alongside two models with large input token sizes and the two pre-trained models on legal data. Our main dataset comes from the domain of U.S. civil procedure. It includes summaries of legal cases, specific questions, potential answers, and detailed explanations for why each solution is relevant, all sourced from a book aimed at law students. By comparing different methods, we aimed to understand how effectively they handle the complexities found in legal datasets. Our findings show how well the zero-shot method of large language models can understand complicated data. We achieved our highest F1 score of 64% in these experiments.
Read more6/26/2024
🤯
0
Archimedes-AUEB at SemEval-2024 Task 5: LLM explains Civil Procedure
Odysseas S. Chlapanis, Ion Androutsopoulos, Dimitrios Galanis
The SemEval task on Argument Reasoning in Civil Procedure is challenging in that it requires understanding legal concepts and inferring complex arguments. Currently, most Large Language Models (LLM) excelling in the legal realm are principally purposed for classification tasks, hence their reasoning rationale is subject to contention. The approach we advocate involves using a powerful teacher-LLM (ChatGPT) to extend the training dataset with explanations and generate synthetic data. The resulting data are then leveraged to fine-tune a small student-LLM. Contrary to previous work, our explanations are not directly derived from the teacher's internal knowledge. Instead they are grounded in authentic human analyses, therefore delivering a superior reasoning signal. Additionally, a new `mutation' method generates artificial data instances inspired from existing ones. We are publicly releasing the explanations as an extension to the original dataset, along with the synthetic dataset and the prompts that were used to generate both. Our system ranked 15th in the SemEval competition. It outperforms its own teacher and can produce explanations aligned with the original human analyses, as verified by legal experts.
Read more5/15/2024
✅
0
NLP at UC Santa Cruz at SemEval-2024 Task 5: Legal Answer Validation using Few-Shot Multi-Choice QA
Anish Pahilajani, Samyak Rajesh Jain, Devasha Trivedi
This paper presents our submission to the SemEval 2024 Task 5: The Legal Argument Reasoning Task in Civil Procedure. We present two approaches to solving the task of legal answer validation, given an introduction to the case, a question and an answer candidate. Firstly, we fine-tuned pre-trained BERT-based models and found that models trained on domain knowledge perform better. Secondly, we performed few-shot prompting on GPT models and found that reformulating the answer validation task to be a multiple-choice QA task remarkably improves the performance of the model. Our best submission is a BERT-based model that achieved the 7th place out of 20.
Read more4/5/2024
0
Team UTSA-NLP at SemEval 2024 Task 5: Prompt Ensembling for Argument Reasoning in Civil Procedures with GPT4
Dan Schumacher, Anthony Rios
In this paper, we present our system for the SemEval Task 5, The Legal Argument Reasoning Task in Civil Procedure Challenge. Legal argument reasoning is an essential skill that all law students must master. Moreover, it is important to develop natural language processing solutions that can reason about a question given terse domain-specific contextual information. Our system explores a prompt-based solution using GPT4 to reason over legal arguments. We also evaluate an ensemble of prompting strategies, including chain-of-thought reasoning and in-context learning. Overall, our system results in a Macro F1 of .8095 on the validation dataset and .7315 (5th out of 21 teams) on the final test set. Code for this project is available at https://github.com/danschumac1/CivilPromptReasoningGPT4.
Read more4/3/2024