Abstract
AbstractRights and duties are essential features of legal documents. Machine learning algorithms have been increasingly applied to extract information from such texts. Currently, their main focus is on named entity recognition, sentiment analysis, and the classification of court cases to predict court outcome. In this paper it is argued that until the essential features of such texts are captured, their analysis can remain bottle-necked by the very technology being used to assess them. As such, the use of legal theory to identify the most pertinent dimensions of such texts is proposed. Specifically, the interest theory of rights, and the first-order Hohfeldian taxonomy of legal relations. These principal legal dimensions allow for a stratified representation of knowledge, making them ideal for the abstractions needed for machine learning. This study considers how such dimensions may be identified. To do so it implements a novel heuristic based in philosophy coupled with language models. Hohfeldian relations of ‘rights-duties’ vs. ‘privileges-no-rights’ are determined to be identifiable. Classification of each type of relation to accuracies of 92.5% is found using Sentence Bidirectional Encoder Representations from Transformers. Testing is carried out on religious discrimination policy texts in the United Kingdom.
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Subject
General Economics, Econometrics and Finance,General Psychology,General Social Sciences,General Arts and Humanities,General Business, Management and Accounting
Reference135 articles.
1. Ahn N (2017) Comparing NLP methods for identifying policy decisions in government documents. Poliinformatics of Lawmaking
2. Alfaro F, Ruiz Costa-Jussà M, Rodríguez Fonollosa JA (2019) BERT masked language modeling for co-reference resolution. In: Proceedings of the first workshop on gender bias in natural language processing. pp. 76–81
3. Artificiallawyer (2019) France bans judge analytics, 5 years in prison for rule breakers. Artificial Lawyer. https://www.artificiallawyer.com/2019/06/04/france-bans-judge-analytics-5-years-in-prison-for-rule-breakers/
4. Barnett J, Treleaven P (2018) Algorithmic dispute resolution—the automation of professional dispute resolution using AI and blockchain technologies. Comput J 61(3):399–408
5. Beckh K, Müller S, Jakobs M, Toborek V, Tan H, Fischer R, Welke P, Houben S, von Rueden L (2021) Explainable machine learning with prior knowledge: an overview. https://arxiv.org/abs/2105.10172
Cited by
1 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献
1. A network model of legal relations;Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences;2024-02-26