REVIEW 3 cited by
Swiss-Judgment-Prediction: A Multilingual Legal Judgment Prediction Benchmark
Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.
This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.
SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event
T0 review · schema-true
One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.
pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp
read the original abstract
In many jurisdictions, the excessive workload of courts leads to high delays. Suitable predictive AI models can assist legal professionals in their work, and thus enhance and speed up the process. So far, Legal Judgment Prediction (LJP) datasets have been released in English, French, and Chinese. We publicly release a multilingual (German, French, and Italian), diachronic (2000-2020) corpus of 85K cases from the Federal Supreme Court of Switzerland (FSCS). We evaluate state-of-the-art BERT-based methods including two variants of BERT that overcome the BERT input (text) length limitation (up to 512 tokens). Hierarchical BERT has the best performance (approx. 68-70% Macro-F1-Score in German and French). Furthermore, we study how several factors (canton of origin, year of publication, text length, legal area) affect performance. We release both the benchmark dataset and our code to accelerate future research and ensure reproducibility.
Forward citations
Cited by 3 Pith papers
-
ASP2LJ : An Adversarial Self-Play Laywer Augmented Legal Judgment Framework
ASP2LJ combines synthetic case generation with adversarial self-play for lawyer agents, improving legal judgment prediction on a Chinese benchmark and on a new rare-case dataset.
-
The Judge Variable: Challenging Judge-Agnostic Legal Judgment Prediction
Models trained on individual judges' past child-custody rulings predict those judges' future rulings better than a model trained on all judges together, a result the paper reads as support for legal realism.
-
When Large Language Models Meet Law: Dual-Lens Taxonomy, Technical Advances, and Ethical Governance
A literature review that classifies LLM-for-law research using a dual-lens taxonomy of Toulmin argumentation components and legal practitioner roles.
Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.