Explicitly Integrating Judgment Prediction with Legal Document Retrieval: A Law-Guided Generative Approach
0
Sign in to get full access
Introduction
This paper proposes a novel approach to incorporating legal judgment prediction into the task of retrieving relevant legal cases, called "Law-aware Generative Retrieval." The key idea is to leverage information about predicted legal outcomes to improve the process of retrieving cases that are most relevant to a given legal query.
Overview
- Introduces a new method for incorporating legal judgment prediction into legal case retrieval
- Aims to improve the relevance of retrieved cases by considering predicted legal outcomes
- Proposes a "Law-aware Generative Retrieval" approach to achieve this
Plain English Explanation
When people search for relevant legal cases, they often care not just about the textual similarity of the cases, but also about the predicted legal outcomes. The authors of this paper recognized this and developed a new way to incorporate judgment prediction into the case retrieval process.
Their "Law-aware Generative Retrieval" approach uses machine learning models to not only find cases that are textually similar to the query, but also to predict the likely legal outcomes of those cases. This additional information about predicted outcomes is then used to improve the ranking and selection of the most relevant cases for the user.
The key insight is that by considering both textual similarity and predicted legal outcomes, the system can better identify the cases that are truly most helpful for the user's needs. This could be particularly useful for legal professionals who are searching for precedents or trying to understand how a court might rule on a particular issue.
Methodology
Task Formulation
The paper formulates the task of "Law-aware Generative Retrieval" as follows: given a legal query (e.g., a description of a legal issue), the system should retrieve a ranked list of relevant legal cases, where the ranking considers both the textual similarity of the cases to the query and the predicted legal outcomes of the cases.
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
Explicitly Integrating Judgment Prediction with Legal Document Retrieval: A Law-Guided Generative Approach
Weicong Qin, Zelin Cao, Weijie Yu, Zihua Si, Sirui Chen, Jun Xu
Legal document retrieval and judgment prediction are crucial tasks in intelligent legal systems. In practice, determining whether two documents share the same judgments is essential for establishing their relevance in legal retrieval. However, existing legal retrieval studies either ignore the vital role of judgment prediction or rely on implicit training objectives, expecting a proper alignment of legal documents in vector space based on their judgments. Neither approach provides explicit evidence of judgment consistency for relevance modeling, leading to inaccuracies and a lack of transparency in retrieval. To address this issue, we propose a law-guided method, namely GEAR, within the generative retrieval framework. GEAR explicitly integrates judgment prediction with legal document retrieval in a sequence-to-sequence manner. Experiments on two Chinese legal case retrieval datasets show the superiority of GEAR over state-of-the-art methods while maintaining competitive judgment prediction performance. Moreover, we validate its robustness across languages and domains on a French statutory article retrieval dataset.
Read more4/16/2024
0
Distinguish Confusion in Legal Judgment Prediction via Revised Relation Knowledge
Nuo Xu, Pinghui Wang, Junzhou Zhao, Feiyang Sun, Lin Lan, Jing Tao, Li Pan, Xiaohong Guan
Legal Judgment Prediction (LJP) aims to automatically predict a law case's judgment results based on the text description of its facts. In practice, the confusing law articles (or charges) problem frequently occurs, reflecting that the law cases applicable to similar articles (or charges) tend to be misjudged. Although some recent works based on prior knowledge solve this issue well, they ignore that confusion also occurs between law articles with a high posterior semantic similarity due to the data imbalance problem instead of only between the prior highly similar ones, which is this work's further finding. This paper proposes an end-to-end model named textit{D-LADAN} to solve the above challenges. On the one hand, D-LADAN constructs a graph among law articles based on their text definition and proposes a graph distillation operation (GDO) to distinguish the ones with a high prior semantic similarity. On the other hand, D-LADAN presents a novel momentum-updated memory mechanism to dynamically sense the posterior similarity between law articles (or charges) and a weighted GDO to adaptively capture the distinctions for revising the inductive bias caused by the data imbalance problem. We perform extensive experiments to demonstrate that D-LADAN significantly outperforms state-of-the-art methods in accuracy and robustness.
Read more8/20/2024
0
Leveraging Large Language Models for Relevance Judgments in Legal Case Retrieval
Shengjie Ma, Chong Chen, Qi Chu, Jiaxin Mao
Collecting relevant judgments for legal case retrieval is a challenging and time-consuming task. Accurately judging the relevance between two legal cases requires a considerable effort to read the lengthy text and a high level of domain expertise to extract Legal Facts and make juridical judgments. With the advent of advanced large language models, some recent studies have suggested that it is promising to use LLMs for relevance judgment. Nonetheless, the method of employing a general large language model for reliable relevance judgments in legal case retrieval is yet to be thoroughly explored. To fill this research gap, we devise a novel few-shot workflow tailored to the relevant judgment of legal cases. The proposed workflow breaks down the annotation process into a series of stages, imitating the process employed by human annotators and enabling a flexible integration of expert reasoning to enhance the accuracy of relevance judgments. By comparing the relevance judgments of LLMs and human experts, we empirically show that we can obtain reliable relevance judgments with the proposed workflow. Furthermore, we demonstrate the capacity to augment existing legal case retrieval models through the synthesis of data generated by the large language model.
Read more7/16/2024
0
Learning Interpretable Legal Case Retrieval via Knowledge-Guided Case Reformulation
Chenlong Deng, Kelong Mao, Zhicheng Dou
Legal case retrieval for sourcing similar cases is critical in upholding judicial fairness. Different from general web search, legal case retrieval involves processing lengthy, complex, and highly specialized legal documents. Existing methods in this domain often overlook the incorporation of legal expert knowledge, which is crucial for accurately understanding and modeling legal cases, leading to unsatisfactory retrieval performance. This paper introduces KELLER, a legal knowledge-guided case reformulation approach based on large language models (LLMs) for effective and interpretable legal case retrieval. By incorporating professional legal knowledge about crimes and law articles, we enable large language models to accurately reformulate the original legal case into concise sub-facts of crimes, which contain the essential information of the case. Extensive experiments on two legal case retrieval benchmarks demonstrate superior retrieval performance and robustness on complex legal case queries of KELLER over existing methods.
Read more7/1/2024