United Arab Emirates

Identification of named entities from legal texts is an essential building block for developing other legal Artificial Intelligence applications. Named Entities in legal texts are slightly different and more fine-grained than commonly used named entities like Person, Organization, Location etc. In this paper, we introduce a new corpus of 46545 annotated legal named entities mapped to 14 legal entity types. The Baseline model for extracting legal named entities from judgment text is also developed.

EMNLP 2022

Named Entity Recognition in Indian court judgments

legal ai

named entity recognition

coreference resolution

**Welcome to EMNLP 2023!**

On behalf of the EMNLP 2023 Organizing Committee, I extend a warm and heartfelt welcome to all of you to the 2023 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing (EMNLP). It is with immense pleasure and excitement that we gather here in Singapore, a vibrant hub of innovation and technological advancement.

The conference program is packed with insightful presentations, thought-provoking workshops, and engaging networking opportunities. In addition to the technical sessions, we have also planned several social events that will provide you with the opportunity to connect with your colleagues.

The conference is held in person at the Resorts World Convention Centre in Singapore, and available on-line with the help of Underline.

For those in Singapore, I hope that you will find time to explore the exciting Sentosa Island, Gardens by the Bay, Singapore Botanic Gardens and the many other attractions unique to Singapore.

Of course, we are grateful to our sponsors and partners for their generous support of EMNLP 2023, whose contributions make it possible for us to host this world-class event.

Yuji Matsumoto (RIKEN AIP) 
EMNLP 2023 General Chair

To access the **EMNLP 2023** event page on Underline, you need to register for the Conference. 
Please follow **[this link](https://2023.emnlp.org/registration/)** for more details.

EMNLP 2023

EMNLP 2023 took place in Singapore from Dec 6th to Dec 10th, 2023.

workshop paper

## Welcome to EMNLP 2022!
I am delighted to welcome you to EMNLP 2022! I believe this conference has been complicated beyond any precedent. Over the past year, it’s been thrilling to see the organization team approach each new puzzle with creativity and enthusiasm. We hope that those participating in Abu Dhabi as well as those joining remotely will leave the conference feeling newly inspired by the program and newly connected to our ever-growing community. Following EMNLP 2021 and major NLP conferences since, EMNLP 2022 is “hybrid,” serving both virtual and in-person participants.

Our key innovations for EMNLP 2022 include:

* EMNLP 2022 is “hybrid” in a second sense, as well: we allowed both direct and rolling review paper submissions, building on the pilot experiment of EMNLP 2021, which considered a small number of ARR submissions. 
* Familiar from NAACL but new to EMNLP, we’ve added an industry track.
* During the conference, “portals” will link virtual poster sessions to in-person conference participants during poster sessions each day.
* The first ACL-family conference in the United Arab Emirates.

 *Message from Noah A. Smith, University of Washington and Allen Institute for AI, Seattle, Washington, USA* 
***EMNLP 2022 General Chair***
 
[![](https://assets.underline.io/uploads/markdown_image/1/image/9eec7d4a287ee18c278b08229290aa83.png)](https://drive.google.com/file/d/1OlPv6QBeo62VVTughj2jkiLeyHd1WnUt/view)
 
[![](https://assets.underline.io/uploads/markdown_image/1/image/a3db7a768409f05192210d98601edb25.png)](https://emnlp2022.rocket.chat/)

To access this site you need to register. Please register [here](https://2022.emnlp.org/registration/).

Register here

Welcome!
EMNLP 2022 will take place in Abu Dhabi from December 7th to December 11th, 2022. And it will be held in hybrid mode, both online and offline.

We present a new NLP task and dataset from the domain of the U.S. civil procedure. Each instance of the dataset consists of a general introduction to the case, a particular question, and a possible solution argument, accompanied by a detailed analysis of why the argument applies in that case. Since the dataset is based on a book aimed at law students, we believe that it represents a truly complex task for benchmarking modern legal language models. Our baseline evaluation shows that fine-tuning a legal transformer provides some advantage over random baseline models, but our analysis reveals that the actual ability to infer legal arguments remains a challenging open research question.

The Legal Argument Reasoning Task in Civil Procedure

A key component of the Natural Language Processing (NLP) pipeline is Sentence Boundary Detection (SBD). Erroneous SBD could affect other processing steps and reduce performance. A few criteria based on punctuation and capitalization are necessary to identify sentence borders in well-defined corpora. However, due to several grammatical ambiguities, the complex structure of legal data poses difficulties for SBD. In this paper, we have trained a neural network framework for identifying the end of the sentence in legal text. We used several state-of-the-art deep learning models, analyzed their performance, and identified that Convolutional Neural Network(CNN) outperformed other deep learning frameworks. We compared the results with rule-based, statistical, and transformer-based frameworks. The best neural network model outscored the popular rule-based framework with an improvement of 8\textbackslash{}\% in the F1 score. Although domain-specific statistical models have slightly improved performance, the trained CNN is  80 times faster in run-time and doesn't require much feature engineering. Furthermore, after extensive pretraining, the transformer models fall short in overall performance compared to the best deep learning model.

Efficient Deep Learning-based Sentence Boundary Detection in Legal Text

Natural language processing techniques have helped domain experts solve legal problems. Digital availability of court documents increases possibilities for researchers, who can access them as a source for building datasets --- whose disclosure is aligned with good reproducibility practices in computational research. Large and digitized court systems, such as the Brazilian one, are prone to be explored in that sense. However, personal data protection laws impose restrictions on data exposure and state principles about which researchers should be mindful. Special caution must be taken in cases with human rights violations, such as gender discrimination, over which we elaborate as an example of interest. We present legal and ethical considerations on the issue, as well as guidelines for researchers dealing with this kind of data and deciding whether to disclose it.

Should I disclose my dataset? Caveats between reproducibility and individual data rights

Large language models that are capable of zero or few-shot prompting approaches have given rise to the new research area of prompt engineering. Recent advances showed that for example Chain-of-Thought (CoT) prompts can improve arithmetic or common sense tasks significantly. We explore how such approaches fair with legal reasoning tasks and take the COLIEE entailment task based on the Japanese Bar exam for testing zero-shot/few-shot and fine-tuning approaches. Our findings show that while CoT prompting and fine-tuning with explanations approaches show improvements, the best results are produced by prompts that are derived from specific legal reasoning techniques such as  IRAC (Issue, Rule, Application, Conclusion). Based on our experiments we improve the 2021 best result from 0.7037 accuracy to 0.8148 accuracy, and beat the 2022 best system of 0.6789 accuracy with an accuracy of 0.7431.

Legal Prompting: Teaching a Language Model to Think Like a Lawyer

Given two similar legal texts, is it useful to be able to focus only on the parts that contain relevant differences. However, because of variation in linguistic structure and terminology, it is not easy to identify true semantic differences. An accurate difference detection model between similar legal texts is therefore in demand, in order to increase the efficiency of legal research and document analysis. In this paper, we automatically label a training dataset of sentence pairs using an existing legal resource of international investment treaties that were already manually annotated with metadata. Then we propose models based on state-of-the-art deep learning techniques for the novel task of detecting relevant differences. In addition to providing solutions for this task, we include models for automatically producing metadata for the treaties that do not have it.

Detecting Relevant Differences Between Similar Legal Texts

Generating domain-specific content such as legal clauses based on minimal user-provided information can be of significant benefit in automating legal contract generation. In this paper, we propose a controllable graph-based mechanism that can generate legal clauses using only the topic or type of the legal clauses. Our pipeline consists of two stages involving a graph-based planner followed by a clause generator. The planner outlines the content of a legal clause as a sequence of keywords in the order of generic to more specific clause information based on the input topic using a controllable graph-based mechanism. The generation stage takes in a given plan and generates a clause. The pipeline consists of a graph-based planner followed by text generation. We illustrate the effectiveness of our proposed two-stage approach on a broad set of clause topics in contracts.

Graph-based Keyword Planning for Legal Clause Generation from Topics

Legal documents such as contracts contain complex and domain-specific jargons, long and nested sentences, and often present with several details that may be difficult to understand for laypeople without domain expertise. In this paper, we explore the problem of text simplification (TS) in legal domain. The main challenge to this is the lack of availability of complex-simple parallel datasets for the legal domain. We investigate some of the existing datasets, methods, and metrics in the TS literature for simplifying legal texts, and perform human evaluation to analyze the gaps.\textbackslash{}footnote\{The model outputs and human ratings are available at \textbackslash{}url\{https://bit.ly/3U3ddIl\}.\} We present some of the challenges involved, and outline a few open questions that need to be addressed for future research in this direction.

Text Simplification for Legal Domain: \{I\}nsights and Challenges

Named Entity Recognition (NER) is a well-explored area from Information Retrieval and Natural Language Processing with an extensive research community. Despite that, few languages, such as English and German, are well-resourced, whereas many other languages, such as Romanian, have scarce resources, especially in domain-specific applications. In this work, we address the NER problem in the legal domain from both Romanian and German languages and evaluate the performance of our proposed method based on domain adaptation. We employ multi-task learning to jointly train a neural network on two legal and general domains and perform adaptation among them. The results show that domain adaptation increase performances by a small amount, under 1\%, while considerable improvements are in the recall metric.

Legal Named Entity Recognition with Multi-Task Domain Adaptation

Though many algorithms can be used to automatically summarize legal case decisions, most fail to incorporate domain knowledge about how important sentences in a legal decision relate to a representation of its document structure. For example, analysis of a legal case sum- marization dataset demonstrates that sentences serving different types of argumentative roles in the decision appear in different sections of the document. In this work, we propose an unsupervised graph-based ranking model that uses a reweighting algorithm to exploit properties of the document structure of legal case decisions. We also explore the impact of using different methods to compute the document structure. Results on the Canadian Legal Case Law dataset show that our proposed method outperforms several strong baselines.

Computing and Exploiting Document Structure to Improve Unsupervised Extractive Summarization of Legal Case Decisions

Active Learning (AL) is a powerful tool for learning with less labeled data, in particular, for specialized domains, like legal documents, where unlabeled data is abundant, but the annotation requires domain expertise and is thus expensive. Recent works have shown the effectiveness of AL strategies for pre-trained language models. However, most AL strategies require a set of labeled samples to start with, which is expensive to acquire. In addition, pre-trained language models have been shown unstable during fine-tuning with small datasets, and their embeddings are not semantically meaningful. In this work, we propose a pipeline for effectively using active learning with pre-trained language models in the legal domain. To this end, we leverage the available \textbackslash{}textit\{unlabeled\} data in three phases. First, we continue pre-training the model to adapt it to the downstream task. Second, we use knowledge distillation to guide the model's embeddings to a semantically meaningful space. Finally, we propose a simple, yet effective, strategy to find the initial set of labeled samples with fewer actions compared to existing methods. Our experiments on Contract-NLI, adapted to the classification task, and LEDGAR benchmarks show that our approach outperforms standard AL strategies, and is more efficient. Furthermore, our pipeline reaches comparable results to the fully-supervised approach with a small performance gap, and dramatically reduced annotation cost. Code and the adapted data will be made available.

Downloads

Next from EMNLP 2022

The Legal Argument Reasoning Task in Civil Procedure

Similar lecture

Legal Passage Retrieval: A pragmatic approach to legal AI