Fetching the paper…
Reading the bibliography…
Legal Artificial Intelligence (LegalAI) focuses on applying the technology of artificial intelligence, especially natural language processing, to benefit tasks in the legal domain.
Xlnet: Generalized autoregressive pretraining for language understanding
Zhilin Yang, Zihang Dai, Yiming Yang, Jaime Carbonell, Ruslan Salakhutdinov, and Quoc V Le. 2019 · 1906
Earlier work this paper cites.
Roberta: A robustly optimized bert pretraining approach
Yinhan Liu, Myle Ott, Naman Goyal, Jingfei Du, Mandar Joshi, Danqi Chen, Omer Levy, Mike Lewis, Luke Zettlemoyer, and Veselin Stoyanov. 2019a · 1907
Earlier work this paper cites.
Latent relation language models
Hiroaki Hayashi, Zecong Hu, Chenyan Xiong, and Graham Neubig. 2019 · 1908
Earlier work this paper cites.
Creating auxiliary representations from charge definitions for criminal charge prediction
Liangyi Kang, Jie Liu, Lingqiao Liu, Qinfeng Shi, and Dan Ye. 2019 · 1911
Earlier work this paper cites.
Cail2019-scm: A dataset of similar case matching in legal domain
Chaojun Xiao, Haoxi Zhong, Zhipeng Guo, Cunchao Tu, Zhiyuan Liu, Maosong Sun, Tianyang Zhang, Xianpei Han, Heng Wang, Jianfeng Xu, et al. 2019 · 1911
Earlier work this paper cites.
Jec-qa: A legal-domain question answering dataset
Haoxi Zhong, Chaojun Xiao, Cunchao Tu, Tianyang Zhang, Zhiyuan Liu, and Maosong Sun. 2019a · 1911
Earlier work this paper cites.
Predicting supreme court decisions mathematically: A quantitative analysis of the ”right to counsel” cases
Fred Kort. 1957 · 1957
Earlier work this paper cites.
Applying correlation analysis to case prediction
Stuart S Nagel. 1963 · 1963
Earlier work this paper cites.
Quantitative analysis of judicial processes: Some practical and theoretical applications
S Sidney Ulmer. 1963 · 1963
Earlier work this paper cites.
Mathematical models for legal prediction
R Keown. 1980 · 1980
Earlier work this paper cites.
Predicting supreme court cases probabilistically: The search and seizure cases, 1962-1981
Jeffrey A Segal. 1984 · 1981
Earlier work this paper cites.
An artificial intelligence approach to legal reasoning
Anne von der Lieth Gardner. 1984 · 1984
Earlier work this paper cites.
Term-weighting approaches in automatic text retrieval
Gerard Salton and Christopher Buckley. 1988 · 1988
Earlier work this paper cites.
Some simple effective approximations to the 2-poisson model for probabilistic weighted retrieval
Stephen E Robertson and Steve Walker. 1994 · 1994
Earlier work this paper cites.
Text retrieval in the legal world
Howard Turtle. 1995 · 1995
Earlier work this paper cites.
Long short-term memory
Sepp Hochreiter and Jürgen Schmidhuber. 1997 · 1997
Earlier work this paper cites.
Better search engines for law
Deanna Barmakian. 2000 · 2000
Earlier work this paper cites.
Psychology of learning and motivation: advances in research and theory
Douglas L Medin. 2000 · 2000
Earlier work this paper cites.
Semantic mark-up of Italian legal texts through NLP-based techniques
Roberto Bartolini, Alessandro Lenci, Simonetta Montemagni, Vito Pirrelli, and Claudia Soria. 2004 · 2004
Earlier work this paper cites.
Extractive summarisation of legal texts
Ben Hachey and Claire Grover. 2006 · 2006
Earlier work this paper cites.
Concept and context in legal information retrieval
K Tamsin Maxwell and Burkhard Schafer. 2008 · 2008
Earlier work this paper cites.
Using graphs for shallow question answering on legal documents
Alfredo Monroy, Hiram Calvo, and Alexander Gelbukh. 2008 · 2008
Earlier work this paper cites.
Using citation analysis techniques for computer-assisted legal research in continental jurisdictions
Anton Geist. 2009 · 2009
Earlier work this paper cites.
Ontology learning from italian legal texts
Alessandro Lenci, Simonetta Montemagni, Vito Pirrelli, and Giulia Venturi. 2009 · 2009
Earlier work this paper cites.
Nlp for shallow question answering of legal documents using graphs
Alfredo Monroy, Hiram Calvo, and Alexander Gelbukh. 2009 · 2009
Earlier work this paper cites.
Named entity recognition in the legal domain for ontology population
Mírian Bruckschen, Caio Northfleet, Paulo Bridi, Roger Granada, Renata Vieira, Prasad Rao, and Tomas Sander. 2010 · 2010
Earlier work this paper cites.
Answering questions with an n-gram based passage retrieval engine
Davide Buscaldi, Paolo Rosso, José Manuel Gómez-Soriano, and Emilio Sanchis. 2010 · 2010
Earlier work this paper cites.
Factorization machines
Steffen Rendle. 2010 · 2010
Earlier work this paper cites.
Relevance ranking using kernels
Jun Xu, Hang Li, and Chaoliang Zhong. 2010 · 2010
Earlier work this paper cites.
Clickthrough-based latent semantic models for web search
Jianfeng Gao, Kristina Toutanova, and Wen-tau Yih. 2011 · 2011
Earlier work this paper cites.
Legal electronic dictionary for Czech
František Cvrček, Karel Pala, and Pavel Rychlý. 2012 · 2012
Earlier work this paper cites.
The supreme court’s many median justices
Benjamin E Lauderdale and Tom S Clark. 2012 · 2012
Earlier work this paper cites.
Translating embeddings for modeling multi-relational data
Antoine Bordes, Nicolas Usunier, Alberto Garcia-Duran, Jason Weston, and Oksana Yakhnenko. 2013 · 2013
Earlier work this paper cites.
Learning deep structured semantic models for web search using clickthrough data
Po-Sen Huang, Xiaodong He, Jianfeng Gao, Li Deng, Alex Acero, and Larry Heck. 2013 · 2013
Earlier work this paper cites.
Fism: factored item similarity models for top-n recommender systems
Santosh Kabbur, Xia Ning, and George Karypis. 2013 · 2013
Earlier work this paper cites.
Answering yes/no questions in legal bar exams
Mi-Young Kim, Ying Xu, Randy Goebel, and Ken Satoh. 2013 · 2013
Earlier work this paper cites.
Efficient estimation of word representations in vector space
Tomas Mikolov, Kai Chen, Greg Corrado, and Jeffrey Dean. 2013 · 2013
Earlier work this paper cites.
Link analysis for representing and retrieving legal information
Alfredo López Monroy, Hiram Calvo, Alexander Gelbukh, and Georgina García Pacheco. 2013 · 2013
Cited alongside, same era.
Answering legal questions by mining reference information
Oanh Thi Tran, Bach Xuan Ngo, Minh Le Nguyen, and Akira Shimazu. 2013 · 2013
Cited alongside, same era.
Learning query and document similarities from click-through bipartite graph with metadata
Wei Wu, Hang Li, and Jun Xu. 2013 · 2013
Cited alongside, same era.
Convolutional neural network architectures for matching natural language sentences
Baotian Hu, Zhengdong Lu, Hang Li, and Qingcai Chen. 2014 · 2014
Cited alongside, same era.
Convolutional neural networks for sentence classification
Yoon Kim. 2014 · 2014
Cited alongside, same era.
Glove: Global vectors for word representation
Jeffrey Pennington, Richard Socher, and Christopher D. Manning. 2014 · 2014
A sequence approach to case outcome detection
Tom Vacek and Frank Schilder. 2017 · 2017
Later among the works it cites.
On the concept of relevance in legal information retrieval
Marc Van Opijnen and Cristiana Santos. 2017 · 2017
Later among the works it cites.
Event identification as a decision process with non-linear representation of text
Yukun Yan, Daqi Zheng, Zhengdong Lu, and Sen Song. 2017 · 2017
Later among the works it cites.
An ontological chinese legal consultation system
Ni Zhang, Yi-Fei Pu, Sui-Quan Yang, Ji-Liu Zhou, and Jin-Kang Gao. 2017 · 2017
Later among the works it cites.
Named entity recognition, linking and generation for greek legislation
Iosif ANGELIDIS, Ilias CHALKIDIS, and Manolis KOUBARAKIS. 2018 · 2018
Later among the works it cites.
A walk-based model on entity graphs for relation extraction
alphaXiv searches the wider corpus for related work and actual follow-ups.
alphaXiv is searching for related work…
Cited alongside, same era.
A latent semantic model with convolutional-pooling structure for information retrieval
Yelong Shen, Xiaodong He, Jianfeng Gao, Li Deng, and Grégoire Mesnil. 2014 · 2014
Cited alongside, same era.
Legal aspects of text mining
Maarten Truyens and Patrick Van Eecke. 2014 · 2014
Cited alongside, same era.
Embedding entities and relations for learning and inference in knowledge bases
Bishan Yang, Wen-tau Yih, Xiaodong He, Jianfeng Gao, and Li Deng. 2014 · 2014
Cited alongside, same era.
Event extraction via dynamic multi-pooling convolutional neural networks
Yubo Chen, Liheng Xu, Kang Liu, Daojian Zeng, and Jun Zhao. 2015 · 2015
Cited alongside, same era.
Using legal ontologies with rules for legal textual entailment
Biralatei Fawei, Adam Wyner, Jeff Z Pan, and Martin Kollingbaum. 2015 · 2015
Cited alongside, same era.
A convolutional neural network in legal question answering
Mi-Young Kim, Ying Xu, and Randy Goebel. 2015 · 2015
Cited alongside, same era.
Fenia Christopoulou, Makoto Miwa, and Sophia Ananiadou. 2018 · 2018
Later among the works it cites.
Few-shot charge prediction with discriminative legal attributes
Zikun Hu, Xiang Li, Cunchao Tu, Zhiyuan Liu, and Maosong Sun. 2018 · 2018
Later among the works it cites.
Coliee-2018: Evaluation of the competition on legal information extraction and entailment
Yoshinobu Kano, Mi-Young Kim, Masaharu Yoshioka, Yao Lu, Juliano Rabelo, Naoki Kiyota, Randy Goebel, and Ken Satoh. 2018 · 2018
Later among the works it cites.
A test collection for evaluating legal case law search
Daniel Locke and Guido Zuccon. 2018 · 2018
Later among the works it cites.
Graph convolutional networks with argument-aware pooling for event detection
Thien Huu Nguyen and Ralph Grishman. 2018 · 2018
Later among the works it cites.
Deep contextualized word representations
Matthew E Peters, Mark Neumann, Mohit Iyyer, Matt Gardner, Christopher Clark, Kenton Lee, and Luke Zettlemoyer. 2018 · 2018
Later among the works it cites.
Know what you don’t know: Unanswerable questions for SQuAD
Pranav Rajpurkar, Robin Jia, and Percy Liang. 2018 · 2018
Later among the works it cites.
Legal document retrieval using document vector embeddings and deep learning
Keet Sugathadasa, Buddhi Ayesha, Nisansa de Silva, Amal Shehan Perera, Vindula Jayawardana, Dimuthu Lakmal, and Madhavi Perera. 2018 · 2018
Later among the works it cites.
Artificial intelligence and law: An overview
Harry Surden. 2018 · 2018
Later among the works it cites.
A co-matching model for multi-choice reading comprehension
Shuohang Wang, Mo Yu, Jing Jiang, and Shiyu Chang. 2018 · 2018
Later among the works it cites.
Cail2018: A large-scale legal dataset for judgment prediction
Chaojun Xiao, Haoxi Zhong, Zhipeng Guo, Cunchao Tu, Zhiyuan Liu, Maosong Sun, Yansong Feng, Xianpei Han, Zhen Hu, Heng Wang, et al. 2018 · 2018
Later among the works it cites.
Interpretable charge predictions for criminal cases: Learning to generate court views from fact descriptions
Hai Ye, Xin Jiang, Zhunchen Luo, and Wenhan Chao. 2018 · 2018
Later among the works it cites.
Neural entity reasoner for global consistency in ner
Xiaoxiao Yin, Daqi Zheng, Zhengdong Lu, and Ruifang Liu. 2018 · 2018
Later among the works it cites.
Legal judgment prediction via topological learning
Haoxi Zhong, Zhipeng Guo, Cunchao Tu, Chaojun Xiao, Zhiyuan Liu, and Maosong Sun. 2018 · 2018
Later among the works it cites.
Hierarchical attention flow for multiple-choice reading comprehension
Haichao Zhu, Furu Wei, Bing Qin, and Ting Liu. 2018 · 2018
Later among the works it cites.
Pooled contextualized embeddings for named entity recognition
Alan Akbik, Tanja Bergmann, and Roland Vollgraf. 2019 · 2019
Later among the works it cites.
A comparative study of summarization algorithms applied to legal case judgments
Paheli Bhattacharya, Kaustubh Hiware, Subham Rajgaria, Nilay Pochhi, Kripabandhu Ghosh, and Saptarshi Ghosh. 2019 · 2019
Later among the works it cites.
Deep learning in law: early adaptation and legal word embeddings trained on large corpora
Ilias Chalkidis and Dimitrios Kampas. 2019 · 2019
Later among the works it cites.
Charge-based prison term prediction with deep gating network
Huajie Chen, Deng Cai, Wei Dai, Zehui Dai, and Yadong Ding. 2019 · 2019
Later among the works it cites.
BERT: Pre-training of deep bidirectional transformers for language understanding
Jacob Devlin, Ming-Wei Chang, Kenton Lee, and Kristina Toutanova. 2019 · 2019
Later among the works it cites.
Cjrc: A reliable human-annotated benchmark dataset for chinese judicial reading comprehension
Xingyi Duan, Baoxin Wang, Ziyue Wang, Wentao Ma, Yiming Cui, Dayong Wu, Shijin Wang, Ting Liu, Tianxiang Huo, Zhen Hu, et al. 2019 · 2019
Later among the works it cites.
Semantic text matching for long-form documents
Jyun-Yu Jiang, Mingyang Zhang, Cheng Li, Michael Bendersky, Nadav Golbandi, and Marc Najork. 2019 · 2019
Later among the works it cites.
Charge prediction for multi-defendant cases with multi-scale attention
Sicheng Pan, Tun Lu, Ning Gu, Huajuan Zhang, and Chunlin Xu. 2019 · 2019
Later among the works it cites.
Knowledge enhanced contextual word representations
Matthew E Peters, Mark Neumann, Robert Logan, Roy Schwartz, Vidur Joshi, Sameer Singh, and Noah A Smith. 2019 · 2019
Later among the works it cites.
Language models are unsupervised multitask learners
Alec Radford, Jeffrey Wu, Rewon Child, David Luan, Dario Amodei, and Ilya Sutskever. 2019 · 2019
Later among the works it cites.
Cail2019-fe
Yi Shu, Yao Zhao, Xianghui Zeng, and Qingli Ma. 2019 · 2019
Later among the works it cites.
Building legal case retrieval systems with lexical matching and summarization using a pre-trained phrase scoring model
Vu Tran, Minh Le Nguyen, and Ken Satoh. 2019 · 2019
Later among the works it cites.
Litigation analytics: Case outcomes extracted from US federal court dockets
Thomas Vacek, Ronald Teo, Dezhao Song, Timothy Nugent, Conner Cowling, and Frank Schilder. 2019 · 2019
Later among the works it cites.
Using case facts to predict accusation based on deep learning
Hui Wang, Tieke He, Zhipeng Zou, Siyuan Shen, and Yu Li. 2019 · 2019
Later among the works it cites.
ERNIE: Enhanced language representation with informative entities
Zhengyan Zhang, Xu Han, Zhiyuan Liu, Xin Jiang, Maosong Sun, and Qun Liu. 2019 · 2019
Later among the works it cites.
Iteratively questioning and answering for interpretable legal judgment prediction
Haoxi Zhong, Yuzhong Wang, Cunchao Tu, Tianyang Zhang, Zhiyuan Liu, and Maosong Sun. 2020 · 2020
Closest in time.