skip to main content
10.1145/3462757.3466094acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesicailConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

A dataset for evaluating legal question answering on private international law

Published: 27 July 2021 Publication History

Abstract

International Private Law (PIL) is a complex legal domain that presents frequent conflicting norms between the hierarchy of legal sources, legal domains, and the adopted procedures. Scientific research on PIL reveals the need to create a bridge between European and national laws. In this context, legal experts have to access heterogeneous sources, being able to recall all the norms and to combine them using case-laws and following the principles of interpretation theory. This clearly poses a daunting challenge to humans, whenever Regulations change frequently or are big-enough in size. Automated reasoning over legal texts is not a trivial task, because legal language is very specific and in many ways different from a commonly used natural language. When applying state-of-the-art language models to legalese understanding, one of the challenges is always to figure how to optimally use the available amount of data. This makes hard to apply state-of-the-art sub-symbolic question answering algorithms on legislative texts, especially the PIL ones, because of data scarcity. In this paper we try to expand previous works on legal question answering, publishing a larger and more curated dataset for the evaluation of automated question answering on PIL.

References

[1]
Kevin D Ashley. 2017. Artificial intelligence and legal analytics: new tools for law practice in the digital age. Cambridge University Press.
[2]
Trevor Bench-Capon, Michał Araszkiewicz, Kevin Ashley, Katie Atkinson, Floris Bex, Filipe Borges, Daniele Bourcier, Paul Bourgine, Jack G Conrad, Enrico Francesconi, et al. 2012. A history of AI and Law in 50 papers: 25 years of the international conference on AI and Law. Artificial Intelligence and Law 20, 3 (2012), 215--319.
[3]
Michael J Bommarito II, Daniel Martin Katz, and Eric M Detterman. 2018. LexNLP: Natural language processing and information extraction for legal and regulatory texts. arXiv preprint arXiv:1806.03688 (2018).
[4]
Pompeu Casanovas, Monica Palmirani, Silvio Peroni, Tom Van Engers, and Fabio Vitali. 2016. Semantic web for the legal domain: the next step. Semantic Web 7, 3 (2016), 213--227.
[5]
Ilias Chalkidis and Dimitrios Kampas. 2019. Deep learning in law: early adaptation and legal word embeddings trained on large corpora. Artificial Intelligence and Law 27, 2 (2019), 171--198.
[6]
Jack G Conrad and John Zeleznikow. 2013. The significance of evaluation in AI and law: a case study re-examining ICAIL proceedings. In Proceedings of the Fourteenth International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Law. 186--191.
[7]
Phong-Khac Do, Huy-Tien Nguyen, Chien-Xuan Tran, Minh-Tien Nguyen, and Minh-Le Nguyen. 2017. Legal question answering using ranking SVM and deep convolutional neural network. arXiv preprint arXiv:1703.05320 (2017).
[8]
Meritxell Fernández-Barrera and Giovanni Sartor. 2011. The legal theory perspective: doctrinal conceptual systems vs. computational ontologies. In Approaches to Legal Ontologies. Springer, 15--47.
[9]
Nils Holzenberger, Andrew Blair-Stanek, and Benjamin Van Durme. 2020. A Dataset for Statutory Reasoning in Tax Law Entailment and Question Answering. arXiv preprint arXiv:2005.05257 (2020).
[10]
Mi-Young Kim, Ying Xu, and Randy Goebel. 2015. A convolutional neural network in legal question answering. In JURISIN Workshop.
[11]
Friedrich V Kratochwil. 1991. Rules, norms, and decisions: on the conditions of practical and legal reasoning in international relations and domestic affairs. Number 2. Cambridge University Press.
[12]
Abhilasha Ravichander, Alan W Black, Shomir Wilson, Thomas Norton, and Norman Sadeh. 2019. Question answering for privacy policies: Combining computational and legal perspectives. arXiv preprint arXiv:1911.00841 (2019).
[13]
Francesco Sovrano, Monica Palmirani, and Fabio Vitali. 2020. Legal Knowledge Extraction for Knowledge Graph Based Question-Answering. In Legal Knowledge and Information Systems: JURIX 2020. The Thirty-third Annual Conference, Vol. 334. IOS Press, 143--153.

Cited By

View all

Recommendations

Comments

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

cover image ACM Conferences
ICAIL '21: Proceedings of the Eighteenth International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Law
June 2021
319 pages
ISBN:9781450385268
DOI:10.1145/3462757
Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

Sponsors

Publisher

Association for Computing Machinery

New York, NY, United States

Publication History

Published: 27 July 2021

Permissions

Request permissions for this article.

Check for updates

Author Tags

  1. knowledge graph extraction
  2. legal question answering
  3. private international law

Qualifiers

  • Research-article

Conference

ICAIL '21
Sponsor:

Acceptance Rates

Overall Acceptance Rate 69 of 169 submissions, 41%

Contributors

Other Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

  • Downloads (Last 12 months)70
  • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)12
Reflects downloads up to 17 Jan 2025

Other Metrics

Citations

Cited By

View all

View Options

Login options

View options

PDF

View or Download as a PDF file.

PDF

eReader

View online with eReader.

eReader

Media

Figures

Other

Tables

Share

Share

Share this Publication link

Share on social media