skip to main content
10.1145/3357384.3357940acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagescikmConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Legal Summarization for Multi-role Debate Dialogue via Controversy Focus Mining and Multi-task Learning

Published: 03 November 2019 Publication History

Abstract

Multi-role court debate is a critical component in a civil trial where parties from different camps (plaintiff, defendant, witness, judge, etc.) actively involved. Unlike other types of dialogue, court debate can be lengthy, and important information, with respect to the controversy focus(es), often hides within the redundant and colloquial dialogue data. Summarizing court debate can be a novel but significant task to assist judge to effectively make the legal decision for the target trial. In this work, we propose an innovative end-to-end model to address this problem. Unlike prior summarization efforts, the proposed model projects the multi-role debate into the controversy focus space, which enables high-quality essential utterance(s) extraction in terms of legal knowledge and judicial factors. An extensive set of experiments with a large civil trial dataset shows that the proposed model can provide more accurate and readable summarization against several alternatives in the multi-role court debate scene.

References

[1]
Yoshua Bengio, Aaron Courville, and Pascal Vincent. 2013. Representation learning: A review and new perspectives. IEEE transactions on pattern analysis and machine intelligence 35, 8 (2013), 1798--1828.
[2]
Yoshua Bengio, Réjean Ducharme, Pascal Vincent, and Christian Jauvin. 2003. A neural probabilistic language model. Journal of machine learning research 3, Feb (2003), 1137--1155.
[3]
Jaime G Carbonell and Jade Goldstein. 1998. The Use ofMMRand Diversity-Based Reranking for Reodering Documents and Producing Summaries. (1998).
[4]
Judge Information Center. [n. d.]. As Workloads Rise in Federal Courts, Judge Counts Remain Flat. available from https://trac.syr.edu/tracreports/judge/364/. Accessed: 2019-05-06.
[5]
Judge Information Center. [n. d.]. Some Federal Judges Handle Inordinate Caseloads. available from https://trac.syr.edu/tracreports/judge/501/. Accessed: 2019-05-06.
[6]
Yen-Chun Chen and Mohit Bansal. 2018. Fast abstractive summarization with reinforce-selected sentence rewriting. arXiv preprint arXiv:1805.11080 (2018).
[7]
Jianpeng Cheng and Mirella Lapata. 2016. Neural summarization by extracting sentences and words. arXiv preprint arXiv:1603.07252 (2016).
[8]
Sumit Chopra, Michael Auli, and Alexander M Rush. 2016. Abstractive sentence summarization with attentive recurrent neural networks. In Proceedings of the 2016 Conference of the North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics: Human Language Technologies. 93--98.
[9]
Scott Deerwester, Susan T Dumais, George W Furnas, Thomas K Landauer, and Richard Harshman. 1990. Indexing by latent semantic analysis. Journal of the American society for information science 41, 6 (1990), 391--407.
[10]
Geoffrey E Hinton et al. 1986. Learning distributed representations of concepts. In Proceedings of the eighth annual conference of the cognitive science society, Vol. 1. Amherst, MA, 12.
[11]
Sepp Hochreiter and Jürgen Schmidhuber. 1997. Long short-term memory. Neural computation 9, 8 (1997), 1735--1780.
[12]
Armand Joulin, Edouard Grave, Piotr Bojanowski, and Tomas Mikolov. 2016. Bag of tricks for efficient text classification. arXiv preprint arXiv:1607.01759 (2016).
[13]
Yoon Kim. 2014. Convolutional neural networks for sentence classification. arXiv preprint arXiv:1408.5882 (2014).
[14]
US Legal. [n. d.]. The Trial Stage. available from https://civilprocedure.uslegal. com/the-course-of-a-civil-lawsuit/the-trial-stage/. Accessed: 2019-05-06.
[15]
Chin-Yew Lin and Eduard Hovy. 2003. Automatic evaluation of summaries using n-gram co-occurrence statistics. In Proceedings of the 2003 Human Language Technology Conference of the North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics.
[16]
S Santhana Megala, A Kavitha, and A Marimuthu. 2014. Feature Extraction Based Legal Document Summarization. International Journal of Advance Research in Computer Science and Management Studies 2, 12 (2014), 346--352.
[17]
Tomas Mikolov, Kai Chen, Greg Corrado, and Jeffrey Dean. 2013. Efficient estimation of word representations in vector space. arXiv preprint arXiv:1301.3781 (2013).
[18]
Gabriel Murray, Steve Renals, and Jean Carletta. 2005. Extractive summarization of meeting recordings. (2005).
[19]
Ramesh Nallapati, Feifei Zhai, and Bowen Zhou. 2017. Summarunner: A recurrent neural network based sequence model for extractive summarization of documents. In Thirty-First AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence.
[20]
Ramesh Nallapati, Bowen Zhou, Caglar Gulcehre, Bing Xiang, et al. 2016. Abstractive text summarization using sequence-to-sequence rnns and beyond. arXiv preprint arXiv:1602.06023 (2016).
[21]
Shashi Narayan, Ronald Cardenas, Nikos Papasarantopoulos, Shay B Cohen, Mirella Lapata, Jiangsheng Yu, and Yi Chang. 2018. Document modeling with external attention for sentence extraction. In Proceedings of the 56th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (Volume 1: Long Papers). 2020--2030.
[22]
Douglas W Oard, Jason R Baron, Bruce Hedin, David D Lewis, and Stephen Tomlinson. 2010. Evaluation of information retrieval for E-discovery. Artificial Intelligence and Law 18, 4 (2010), 347--386.
[23]
Douglas W Oard, William Webber, et al. 2013. Information retrieval for ediscovery. Foundations and Trends® in Information Retrieval 7, 2--3 (2013), 99--237.
[24]
OECD. 2013. What makes civil justice effective? OECD Economics Department Policy Notes 18 (2013).
[25]
Jeffrey Pennington, Richard Socher, and Christopher Manning. 2014. Glove: Global vectors for word representation. In Proceedings of the 2014 conference on empirical methods in natural language processing (EMNLP). 1532--1543.
[26]
Seth Polsley, Pooja Jhunjhunwala, and Ruihong Huang. 2016. CaseSummarizer: A System for Automated Summarization of Legal Texts. In Proceedings of COLING 2016, the 26th International Conference on Computational Linguistics: System Demonstrations. 258--262.
[27]
Radim Rehurek and Petr Sojka. 2010. Software framework for topic modelling with large corpora. In In Proceedings of the LREC 2010Workshop on New Challenges for NLP Frameworks. Citeseer.
[28]
Abigail See, Peter J Liu, and Christopher D Manning. 2017. Get to the point: Summarization with pointer-generator networks. arXiv preprint arXiv:1704.04368 (2017).
[29]
Richard Susskind. 2000. Transforming the law: Essays on technology, justice and the legal marketplace. Oxford University Press, Inc.
[30]
Richard E Susskind and Richard E Susskind. 1996. The future of law: facing the challenges of information technology. Number s 279. Clarendon Press Oxford.
[31]
Ashish Vaswani, Noam Shazeer, Niki Parmar, Jakob Uszkoreit, Llion Jones, Aidan N Gomez, Lukasz Kaiser, and Illia Polosukhin. 2017. Attention is all you need. In Advances in neural information processing systems. 5998--6008.
[32]
Pengfei Wang, Ze Yang, Shuzi Niu, Yongfeng Zhang, Lei Zhang, and ShaoZhang Niu. 2018. Modeling Dynamic Pairwise Attention for Crime Classification over Legal Articles. In The 41st International ACM SIGIR Conference on Research & Development in Information Retrieval. ACM, 485--494.
[33]
Matthew D Zeiler. 2012. ADADELTA: an adaptive learning rate method. arXiv preprint arXiv:1212.5701 (2012).
[34]
Haoxi Zhong, Guo Zhipeng, Cunchao Tu, Chaojun Xiao, Zhiyuan Liu, and Maosong Sun. 2018. Legal Judgment Prediction via Topological Learning. In Proceedings of the 2018 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing. 3540--3549.
[35]
Qingyu Zhou, Nan Yang, Furu Wei, Shaohan Huang, Ming Zhou, and Tiejun Zhao. 2018. Neural Document Summarization by Jointly Learning to Score and Select Sentences. In Proceedings of the 56th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (Volume 1: Long Papers). 654--663.
[36]
Qingyu Zhou, Nan Yang, Furu Wei, and Ming Zhou. 2017. Selective encoding for abstractive sentence summarization. arXiv preprint arXiv:1704.07073 (2017).
[37]
Xin Zhou, Yating Zhang, Xiaozhong Liu, Changlong Sun, and Luo Si. 2019. Legal Intelligence for E-commerce: Multi-task Learning by Leveraging Multiview Dispute Representation. In Proceedings of the 42nd International ACM SIGIR Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval. ACM, 315--324.

Cited By

View all
  • (2024)CivilSum: A Dataset for Abstractive Summarization of Indian Court DecisionsProceedings of the 47th International ACM SIGIR Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval10.1145/3626772.3657859(2241-2250)Online publication date: 10-Jul-2024
  • (2024)AI-Powered Legal Documentation Assistant2024 4th International Conference on Pervasive Computing and Social Networking (ICPCSN)10.1109/ICPCSN62568.2024.00022(84-91)Online publication date: 3-May-2024
  • (2024)Legal Natural Language Processing From 2015 to 2022: A Comprehensive Systematic Mapping Study of Advances and ApplicationsIEEE Access10.1109/ACCESS.2023.333394612(145286-145317)Online publication date: 2024
  • Show More Cited By

Recommendations

Comments

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

cover image ACM Conferences
CIKM '19: Proceedings of the 28th ACM International Conference on Information and Knowledge Management
November 2019
3373 pages
ISBN:9781450369763
DOI:10.1145/3357384
Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

Sponsors

Publisher

Association for Computing Machinery

New York, NY, United States

Publication History

Published: 03 November 2019

Permissions

Request permissions for this article.

Check for updates

Author Tags

  1. controversy focus
  2. legal summarization
  3. multi-role debate dialogue
  4. multi-task learning

Qualifiers

  • Research-article

Funding Sources

  • National Key R&D Program of China

Conference

CIKM '19
Sponsor:

Acceptance Rates

CIKM '19 Paper Acceptance Rate 202 of 1,031 submissions, 20%;
Overall Acceptance Rate 1,861 of 8,427 submissions, 22%

Upcoming Conference

CIKM '25

Contributors

Other Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

  • Downloads (Last 12 months)43
  • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)4
Reflects downloads up to 30 Jan 2025

Other Metrics

Citations

Cited By

View all
  • (2024)CivilSum: A Dataset for Abstractive Summarization of Indian Court DecisionsProceedings of the 47th International ACM SIGIR Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval10.1145/3626772.3657859(2241-2250)Online publication date: 10-Jul-2024
  • (2024)AI-Powered Legal Documentation Assistant2024 4th International Conference on Pervasive Computing and Social Networking (ICPCSN)10.1109/ICPCSN62568.2024.00022(84-91)Online publication date: 3-May-2024
  • (2024)Legal Natural Language Processing From 2015 to 2022: A Comprehensive Systematic Mapping Study of Advances and ApplicationsIEEE Access10.1109/ACCESS.2023.333394612(145286-145317)Online publication date: 2024
  • (2024)DuaPIN: Auxiliary task enhanced dual path interaction network for civil court view generationKnowledge-Based Systems10.1016/j.knosys.2024.111728295(111728)Online publication date: Jul-2024
  • (2024)LAWSUIT: a LArge expert-Written SUmmarization dataset of ITalian constitutional court verdictsArtificial Intelligence and Law10.1007/s10506-024-09414-wOnline publication date: 9-Sep-2024
  • (2023)Taxonomy of Abstractive Dialogue Summarization: Scenarios, Approaches, and Future DirectionsACM Computing Surveys10.1145/362293356:3(1-38)Online publication date: 5-Oct-2023
  • (2023)ML-LJP: Multi-Law Aware Legal Judgment PredictionProceedings of the 46th International ACM SIGIR Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval10.1145/3539618.3591731(1023-1034)Online publication date: 19-Jul-2023
  • (2023)A sentence is known by the company it keeps: Improving Legal Document Summarization Using Deep ClusteringArtificial Intelligence and Law10.1007/s10506-023-09345-y32:1(165-200)Online publication date: 1-Feb-2023
  • (2023)A novel MRC framework for evidence extracts in judgment documentsArtificial Intelligence and Law10.1007/s10506-023-09344-z32:1(147-163)Online publication date: 28-Jan-2023
  • (2022)A full-process intelligent trial system for smart court一种智慧法院的全流程智能化审判系统Frontiers of Information Technology & Electronic Engineering10.1631/FITEE.210004123:2(186-206)Online publication date: 18-Mar-2022
  • Show More Cited By

View Options

Login options

View options

PDF

View or Download as a PDF file.

PDF

eReader

View online with eReader.

eReader

Figures

Tables

Media

Share

Share

Share this Publication link

Share on social media