用于法律判决预测的具有增强功能的图形对比学习网络

IF 3.1 2区 社会学 Q2 COMPUTER SCIENCE, ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE Artificial Intelligence and Law Pub Date : 2024-06-05 DOI:10.1007/s10506-024-09407-9
Yao Dong, Xinran Li, Jin Shi, Yongfeng Dong, Chen Chen
{"title":"用于法律判决预测的具有增强功能的图形对比学习网络","authors":"Yao Dong,&nbsp;Xinran Li,&nbsp;Jin Shi,&nbsp;Yongfeng Dong,&nbsp;Chen Chen","doi":"10.1007/s10506-024-09407-9","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Legal Judgment Prediction (LJP) is a typical application of Artificial Intelligence in the intelligent judiciary. Current research primarily focuses on automatically predicting law articles, charges, and terms of penalty based on the fact description of cases. However, existing methods for LJP have limitations, such as neglecting document structure and ignoring case similarities. We propose a novel framework called Graph Contrastive Learning with Augmentation (GCLA) for legal judgment prediction to address these issues. GCLA constructs trainable document-level graphs for fact description, capturing local and global context through sentence-level subgraphs. Graph augmentation enhances robustness. We introduce a comparison case relation perspective, using graph contrastive learning to model case-text label relationships effectively. Experimental results on real-world datasets demonstrate the competitive performance of GCLA.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":51336,"journal":{"name":"Artificial Intelligence and Law","volume":"33 4","pages":"889 - 912"},"PeriodicalIF":3.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Graph contrastive learning networks with augmentation for legal judgment prediction\",\"authors\":\"Yao Dong,&nbsp;Xinran Li,&nbsp;Jin Shi,&nbsp;Yongfeng Dong,&nbsp;Chen Chen\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s10506-024-09407-9\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>Legal Judgment Prediction (LJP) is a typical application of Artificial Intelligence in the intelligent judiciary. Current research primarily focuses on automatically predicting law articles, charges, and terms of penalty based on the fact description of cases. However, existing methods for LJP have limitations, such as neglecting document structure and ignoring case similarities. We propose a novel framework called Graph Contrastive Learning with Augmentation (GCLA) for legal judgment prediction to address these issues. GCLA constructs trainable document-level graphs for fact description, capturing local and global context through sentence-level subgraphs. Graph augmentation enhances robustness. We introduce a comparison case relation perspective, using graph contrastive learning to model case-text label relationships effectively. Experimental results on real-world datasets demonstrate the competitive performance of GCLA.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":51336,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Artificial Intelligence and Law\",\"volume\":\"33 4\",\"pages\":\"889 - 912\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-06-05\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Artificial Intelligence and Law\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"94\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10506-024-09407-9\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"COMPUTER SCIENCE, ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Artificial Intelligence and Law","FirstCategoryId":"94","ListUrlMain":"https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10506-024-09407-9","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"COMPUTER SCIENCE, ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

法律判决预测是人工智能在智能司法中的典型应用。目前的研究主要集中在基于案件事实描述自动预测法律条款、罪名和处罚条款。然而,现有的LJP方法存在局限性,例如忽略文档结构和忽略案例相似性。为了解决这些问题,我们提出了一个新的框架,称为图形对比学习与增强(GCLA)的法律判决预测。GCLA为事实描述构建可训练的文档级图,通过句子级子图捕获局部和全局上下文。图增强增强了鲁棒性。我们引入了一个比较案例关系的视角,使用图对比学习来有效地建模案例-文本标签关系。在实际数据集上的实验结果证明了GCLA具有竞争力的性能。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

摘要图片

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Graph contrastive learning networks with augmentation for legal judgment prediction

Legal Judgment Prediction (LJP) is a typical application of Artificial Intelligence in the intelligent judiciary. Current research primarily focuses on automatically predicting law articles, charges, and terms of penalty based on the fact description of cases. However, existing methods for LJP have limitations, such as neglecting document structure and ignoring case similarities. We propose a novel framework called Graph Contrastive Learning with Augmentation (GCLA) for legal judgment prediction to address these issues. GCLA constructs trainable document-level graphs for fact description, capturing local and global context through sentence-level subgraphs. Graph augmentation enhances robustness. We introduce a comparison case relation perspective, using graph contrastive learning to model case-text label relationships effectively. Experimental results on real-world datasets demonstrate the competitive performance of GCLA.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
9.50
自引率
26.80%
发文量
33
期刊介绍: Artificial Intelligence and Law is an international forum for the dissemination of original interdisciplinary research in the following areas: Theoretical or empirical studies in artificial intelligence (AI), cognitive psychology, jurisprudence, linguistics, or philosophy which address the development of formal or computational models of legal knowledge, reasoning, and decision making. In-depth studies of innovative artificial intelligence systems that are being used in the legal domain. Studies which address the legal, ethical and social implications of the field of Artificial Intelligence and Law. Topics of interest include, but are not limited to, the following: Computational models of legal reasoning and decision making; judgmental reasoning, adversarial reasoning, case-based reasoning, deontic reasoning, and normative reasoning. Formal representation of legal knowledge: deontic notions, normative modalities, rights, factors, values, rules. Jurisprudential theories of legal reasoning. Specialized logics for law. Psychological and linguistic studies concerning legal reasoning. Legal expert systems; statutory systems, legal practice systems, predictive systems, and normative systems. AI and law support for legislative drafting, judicial decision-making, and public administration. Intelligent processing of legal documents; conceptual retrieval of cases and statutes, automatic text understanding, intelligent document assembly systems, hypertext, and semantic markup of legal documents. Intelligent processing of legal information on the World Wide Web, legal ontologies, automated intelligent legal agents, electronic legal institutions, computational models of legal texts. Ramifications for AI and Law in e-Commerce, automatic contracting and negotiation, digital rights management, and automated dispute resolution. Ramifications for AI and Law in e-governance, e-government, e-Democracy, and knowledge-based systems supporting public services, public dialogue and mediation. Intelligent computer-assisted instructional systems in law or ethics. Evaluation and auditing techniques for legal AI systems. Systemic problems in the construction and delivery of legal AI systems. Impact of AI on the law and legal institutions. Ethical issues concerning legal AI systems. In addition to original research contributions, the Journal will include a Book Review section, a series of Technology Reports describing existing and emerging products, applications and technologies, and a Research Notes section of occasional essays posing interesting and timely research challenges for the field of Artificial Intelligence and Law. Financial support for the Journal of Artificial Intelligence and Law is provided by the University of Pittsburgh School of Law.
期刊最新文献
Precedent-based reasoning with incomplete information for human-in-the-loop decision support It cannot be right if it was written by AI: on lawyers’ preferences of documents perceived as authored by an LLM vs a human Mining EU consultations through AI Deciphering disagreement in the annotation of EU legislation A case study for automated attribute extraction from legal documents using large language models
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1