In this paper, we investigate the application of text classification methods to support law professionals. We present several experiments applying machine learning techniques to predict with high accuracy the ruling of the French Supreme Court and the law area to which a case belongs to. We also investigate the influence of the time period in which a ruling was made on the form of the case description and the extent to which we need to mask information in a full case ruling to automatically obtain training and test data that resembles case descriptions. We developed a mean probability ensemble system combining the output of multiple SVM classifiers. We report results of 98 average F1 score in predicting a case ruling, 96 F1 score for predicting the law area of a case, and 87.07 F1 score on estimating the date of a ruling.
@cite_6 proposed a system of classifying sentences for the task of summarizing court rulings and, with the use of SVM and Naive Bayes applied to Bag of Words, TF-IDF, and dense features (e.g. position of sentence in document), obtained 65 For court ruling prediction, the task closest to our present work, a few papers have been published: @cite_22 , using extremely randomized trees, reported 70 As evidenced in this section predicting court rulings is a new area for text classification methods and our paper contributes in this direction, achieving performance substantially higher than in previous work @cite_14 .
@cite_14 @cite_22 @cite_6
2744053072 2765440119 2536769020 179757531
In this paper, we investigate the application of text classification methods to predict the law area and the decision of cases judged by the French Supreme Court. We also investigate the influence of the time period in which a ruling was made over the textual form of the case description and the extent to which it is necessary to mask the judge's motivation for a ruling to emulate a real-world test scenario. We report results of 96 f1 score in predicting a case ruling, 90 f1 score in predicting the law area of a case, and 75.9 f1 score in estimating the time span when a ruling has been issued using a linear Support Vector Machine (SVM) classifier trained on lexical features. In this paper, we investigate the application of text classification methods to support law professionals. We present several experiments applying machine learning techniques to predict with high accuracy the ruling of the French Supreme Court and the law area to which a case belongs to. We also investigate the influence of the time period in which a ruling was made on the form of the case description and the extent to which we need to mask information in a full case ruling to automatically obtain training and test data that resembles case descriptions. We developed a mean probability ensemble system combining the output of multiple SVM classifiers. We report results of 98 average F1 score in predicting a case ruling, 96 F1 score for predicting the law area of a case, and 87.07 F1 score on estimating the date of a ruling. Recent advances in Natural Language Processing and Machine Learning provide us with the tools to build predictive models that can be used to unveil patterns driving judicial decisions. This can be useful, for both lawyers and judges, as an assisting tool to rapidly identify cases and extract patterns which lead to certain decisions. This paper presents the first systematic study on predicting the outcome of cases tried by the European Court of Human Rights based solely on textual content. We formulate a binary classification task where the input of our classifiers is the textual content extracted from a case and the target output is the actual judgment as to whether there has been a violation of an article of the convention of human rights. Textual information is represented using contiguous word sequences, i.e., N-grams, and topics. Our models can predict the court’s decisions with a strong accuracy (79 on average). Our empirical analysis indicates that the formal facts of a case are the most important predictive factor. This is consistent with the theory of legal realism suggesting that judicial decision-making is significantly affected by the stimulus of the facts. We also observe that the topical content of a case is another important feature in this classification task and explore this relationship further by conducting a qualitative analysis. Many methods, including supervised and unsupervised algorithms, have been developed for extractive document summarization. Most supervised methods consider the summarization task as a two-class classification problem and classify each sentence individually without leveraging the relationship among sentences. The unsupervised methods use heuristic rules to select the most informative sentences into a summary directly, which are hard to generalize. In this paper, we present a Conditional Random Fields (CRF) based framework to keep the merits of the above two kinds of approaches while avoiding their disadvantages. What is more, the proposed framework can take the outcomes of previous methods as features and seamlessly integrate them. The key idea of our approach is to treat the summarization task as a sequence labeling problem. In this view, each document is a sequence of sentences and the summarization procedure labels the sentences by 1 and 0. The label of a sentence depends on the assignment of labels of others. We compared our proposed approach with eight existing methods on an open benchmark data set. The results show that our approach can improve the performance by more than 7.1 and 12.1 over the best supervised baseline and unsupervised baseline respectively in terms of two popular metrics F1 and ROUGE-2. Detailed analysis of the improvement is presented as well.