Abstract

Legal judgment prediction (LJP) is a fundamental task of legal artificial intelligence. It aims to automatically predict the judgment results of legal cases. Three typical subtasks are relevant law article prediction, charge prediction, and term-of-penalty prediction. Due to the wide range of potential applications, LJP has attracted a great deal of interest, prompting the development of numerous approaches. These methods mainly focus on building a more accurate representation of a case’s fact description in order to improve the performance of judgment prediction. They overlook, however, the practical judicial scenario in which human judges often compare similar law articles or possible charges before making a final decision. To this end, we propose a supervised contrastive learning framework for the LJP task. Specifically, we train the model to distinguish (1) various law articles within the same chapter of a Law and (2) similar charges of the same law article or related law articles. By this means, the fine-grained differences between similar articles/charges can be captured, which are important for making a judgment. Besides, we optimize our model by identifying cases with the same article/charge labels, allowing it to more effectively model the relationship between the case’s fact description and its associated labels. By jointly learning the LJP task with the aforementioned contrastive learning tasks, our model achieves better performance than the state-of-the-art models on two real-world datasets.

Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call