Fetching the paper…
Reading the bibliography…
Legal documents are unstructured, use legal jargon, and have considerable length, making them difficult to process automatically via conventional text processing techniques.
Sentence-bert: Sentence embeddings using siamese bert-networks
Nils Reimers and Iryna Gurevych. 2019 · 1908
Earlier work this paper cites.
Identification of rhetorical roles of sentences in indian legal judgments
Paheli Bhattacharya, Shounak Paul, Kripabandhu Ghosh, Saptarshi Ghosh, and Adam Wyner. 2019 · 1911
Earlier work this paper cites.
Abstracting of legal cases: the potential of clustering based on the selection of representative objects
Marie-Francine Moens, Caroline Uyttendaele, and Jos Dumortier. 1999 · 1999
Earlier work this paper cites.
Information extraction from case law and retrieval of prior cases
Peter Jackson, Khalid Al-Kofahi, Alex Tyrrell, and Arun Vachher. 2003 · 2003
Earlier work this paper cites.
Automatic identification of rhetorical roles using conditional random fields for legal document summarization
M Saravanan, Balaraman Ravindran, and S Raman. 2008 · 2008
Earlier work this paper cites.
Multi-task learning with deep neural networks: A survey
Michael Crawshaw. 2020 · 2009
Earlier work this paper cites.
Event extraction for legal case building and reasoning
Nikolaos Lagos, Frederique Segond, Stefania Castellani, and Jacki O’Neill. 2010 · 2010
Earlier work this paper cites.
Approaches to text mining arguments from legal cases
Adam Wyner, Raquel Mochales-Palau, Marie-Francine Moens, and David Milward. 2010 · 2010
Earlier work this paper cites.
Design and development of temis: a syntactically and semantically annotated corpus of italian legislative texts
Giulia Venturi. 2012 · 2012
Earlier work this paper cites.
Statistical methods for rates and proportions
Joseph L Fleiss, Bruce Levin, and Myunghee Cho Paik. 2013 · 2013
Earlier work this paper cites.
A case study on legal case annotation
Adam Z Wyner, Wim Peters, and Daniel Katz. 2013 · 2013
Earlier work this paper cites.
A web-based tool for the integrated annotation of semantic and syntactic structures
Richard Eckart de Castilho, Eva Mujdricza-Maydt, Seid Muhie Yimam, Silvana Hartmann, Iryna Gurevych, Anette Frank, and Chris Biemann. 2016 · 2016
Cited alongside, same era.
A semi-supervised training method for semantic search of legal facts in canadian immigration cases
Isar Nejadgholi, Renaud Bougueng, and Samuel Witherspoon. 2017 · 2017
Cited alongside, same era.
Few-shot charge prediction with discriminative legal attributes
Zikun Hu, Xiang Li, Cunchao Tu, Zhiyuan Liu, and Maosong Sun. 2018 · 2018
Cited alongside, same era.
Interpretable rationale augmented charge prediction system
Xin Jiang, Hai Ye, Zhunchen Luo, WenHan Chao, and Wenjia Ma. 2018 · 2018
Cited alongside, same era.
Segmenting us court decisions into functional and issue specific parts
Jaromir Savelka and Kevin D Ashley. 2018 · 2018
Cited alongside, same era.
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.
Automatic classification of rhetorical roles for sentences: Comparing rule-based scripts with machine learning
Vern R Walker, Krishnan Pillaipakkamnatt, Alexandra M Davidson, Marysa Linares, and Domenick J Pesce. 2019 · 2019
Later among the works it cites.
Legal judgment prediction via multi-perspective bi-feedback network
Wenmian Yang, Weijia Jia, Xiaojie Zhou, and Yutao Luo. 2019 · 2019
Later among the works it cites.
LEGAL-BERT: The muppets straight out of law school
Ilias Chalkidis, Manos Fergadiotis, Prodromos Malakasiotis, Nikolaos Aletras, and Ion Androutsopoulos. 2020 · 2020
Later among the works it cites.
Legal judgement prediction for uk courts
Benjamin Strickson and Beatriz De La Iglesia. 2020 · 2020
Later among the works it cites.
alphaXiv searches the wider corpus for related work and actual follow-ups.
alphaXiv is searching for related work…
Hai Ye, Xin Jiang, Zhunchen Luo, and Wenhan Chao. 2018 · 2018
Cited alongside, same era.
Neural legal judgment prediction in English
Ilias Chalkidis, Ion Androutsopoulos, and Nikolaos Aletras. 2019 · 2019
Cited alongside, same era.
Charge-based prison term prediction with deep gating network
Huajie Chen, Deng Cai, Wei Dai, Zehui Dai, and Yadong Ding. 2019 · 2019
Cited alongside, same era.
BERT: Pre-training of Deep Bidirectional Transformers for Language Understanding
Jacob Devlin, Ming-Wei Chang, Kenton Lee, and Kristina Toutanova. 2019 · 2019
Cited alongside, same era.
Backlog of cases crippling judiciary
Justice Markandey Katju. 2019 · 2019
Cited alongside, same era.
Fine-grained named entity recognition in legal documents
Elena Leitner, Georg Rehm, and Julian Moreno-Schneider. 2019 · 2019
Cited alongside, same era.
Corpus for automatic structuring of legal documents
Prathamesh Kalamkar, Aman Tiwari, Astha Agarwal, Saurabh Karn, Smita Gupta, Vivek Raghavan, and Ashutosh Modi. 2022a
Cited in the paper.
Self-training with noisy student improves imagenet classification
Qizhe Xie, Minh-Thang Luong, Eduard Hovy, and Quoc V Le. 2020 · 2020
Later among the works it cites.
ILDC for CJPE: Indian legal documents corpus for court judgment prediction and explanation
Vijit Malik, Rishabh Sanjay, Shubham Kumar Nigam, Kripabandhu Ghosh, Shouvik Kumar Guha, Arnab Bhattacharya, and Ashutosh Modi. 2021 · 2021
Closest in time.
National judicial data grid statistics
National Judicial Data Grid. 2021 · 2021
Closest in time.
Legal entity extraction using a pointer generator network
Stavroula Skylaki, Ali Oskooei, Omar Bari, Nadja Herger, and Zac Kriegman. 2021 · 2021
Closest in time.
Interpretation of statutes: Strict versus liberal construction
Taxmann. 2021 · 2021
Closest in time.
HLDC: Hindi legal documents corpus
Arnav Kapoor, Mudit Dhawan, Anmol Goel, Arjun T H, Akshala Bhatnagar, Vibhu Agrawal, Amul Agrawal, Arnab Bhattacharya, Ponnurangam Kumaraguru, and Ashutosh Modi. 2022 · 2022
Closest in time.