@inproceedings{sun-etal-2024-logic,
    title = "Logic Rules as Explanations for Legal Case Retrieval",
    author = "Sun, ZhongXiang  and
      Zhang, Kepu  and
      Yu, Weijie  and
      Wang, Haoyu  and
      Xu, Jun",
    editor = "Calzolari, Nicoletta  and
      Kan, Min-Yen  and
      Hoste, Veronique  and
      Lenci, Alessandro  and
      Sakti, Sakriani  and
      Xue, Nianwen",
    booktitle = "Proceedings of the 2024 Joint International Conference on Computational Linguistics, Language Resources and Evaluation (LREC-COLING 2024)",
    month = may,
    year = "2024",
    address = "Torino, Italia",
    publisher = "ELRA and ICCL",
    url = "https://aclanthology.org/2024.lrec-main.939",
    pages = "10747--10759",
    abstract = "In this paper, we address the issue of using logic rules to explain the results from legal case retrieval. The task is critical to legal case retrieval because the users (e.g., lawyers or judges) are highly specialized and require the system to provide logic, faithful, and interpretable explanations before making legal decisions. Recently, research efforts have been made to learn explainable legal case retrieval models. However, these methods usually select rationales (key sentences) from the legal cases as explanations, failing to provide faithful and logicly correct explanations. In this paper, we propose Neural-Symbolic enhanced Legal Case Retrieval (NS-LCR), a framework that explicitly conducts reasoning on the matching of legal cases through learning case-level and law-level logic rules. The learned rules are then integrated into the retrieval process in a neuro-symbolic manner. Benefiting from the logic and interpretable nature of the logic rules, NS-LCR is equipped with built-in faithful explainability. We also show that NS-LCR is a model-agnostic framework that can be plug-in for multiple legal retrieval models. To demonstrate the superiority of NS-LCR, we extend the benchmarks of LeCaRD and ELAM with manually annotated logic rules and propose a new explainability measure based on Large Language Models (LLMs). Extensive experiments show that NS-LCR can achieve state-of-the-art ranking performances, and the empirical analysis also showed that NS-LCR is capable of providing faithful explanations for legal case retrieval.",
}

In this paper, we address the issue of using logic rules to explain the results from legal case retrieval. The task is critical to legal case retrieval because the users (e.g., lawyers or judges) are highly specialized and require the system to provide logic, faithful, and interpretable explanations before making legal decisions. Recently, research efforts have been made to learn explainable legal case retrieval models. However, these methods usually select rationales (key sentences) from the legal cases as explanations, failing to provide faithful and logicly correct explanations. In this paper, we propose Neural-Symbolic enhanced Legal Case Retrieval (NS-LCR), a framework that explicitly conducts reasoning on the matching of legal cases through learning case-level and law-level logic rules. The learned rules are then integrated into the retrieval process in a neuro-symbolic manner. Benefiting from the logic and interpretable nature of the logic rules, NS-LCR is equipped with built-in faithful explainability. We also show that NS-LCR is a model-agnostic framework that can be plug-in for multiple legal retrieval models. To demonstrate the superiority of NS-LCR, we extend the benchmarks of LeCaRD and ELAM with manually annotated logic rules and propose a new explainability measure based on Large Language Models (LLMs). Extensive experiments show that NS-LCR can achieve state-of-the-art ranking performances, and the empirical analysis also showed that NS-LCR is capable of providing faithful explanations for legal case retrieval.
Sun, ZhongXiang Zhang, Kepu Yu, Weijie Wang, Haoyu Xu, Jun
Logic Rules as Explanations for Legal Case Retrieval