IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jmathe/v11y2023i9p2032-d1132263.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

An Approach Based on Cross-Attention Mechanism and Label-Enhancement Algorithm for Legal Judgment Prediction

Author

Listed:
  • Junyi Chen

    (School of Computer and Artificial Intelligence, Zhengzhou University, Zhengzhou 450001, China)

  • Xuanqing Zhang

    (School of Computer Science and Technology, Henan Polytechnic University, Jiaozuo 454003, China)

  • Xiabing Zhou

    (School of Computer Science and Technology, Soochow University, Suzhou 215006, China)

  • Yingjie Han

    (School of Computer and Artificial Intelligence, Zhengzhou University, Zhengzhou 450001, China)

  • Qinglei Zhou

    (School of Computer and Artificial Intelligence, Zhengzhou University, Zhengzhou 450001, China)

Abstract

Legal Judgment Prediction aims to automatically predict judgment outcomes based on descriptions of legal cases and established law articles, and has received increasing attention. In the preliminary work, several problems still have not been adequately solved. One is how to utilize limited but valuable label information. Existing methods mostly ignore the gap between the description of established articles and cases, but directly integrate them. Second, most studies ignore the mutual constraint among the subtasks, such as logically or semantically, each charge is only related to some specific articles. To address these issues, we first construct a crime similarity graph and then perform a distillation operation to collect discriminate keywords for each charge. Furthermore, we fuse these discriminative keywords instead of established article descriptions into case embedding with a cross-attention mechanism to obtain deep semantic representations of cases incorporating label information. Finally, under a constraint among subtasks, we optimize the one-hot representation of ground-truth labels to guarantee consistent results across the subtasks based on the label-enhancement algorithm. To verify the effectiveness and robustness of our framework, we conduct extensive experiments on two public datasets. The experimental results show that the proposed method outperforms the state-of-art models by 3.89%/7.92% and 1.23%/2.50% in the average MF1-score of the subtasks on CAIL-Small/Big, respectively.

Suggested Citation

  • Junyi Chen & Xuanqing Zhang & Xiabing Zhou & Yingjie Han & Qinglei Zhou, 2023. "An Approach Based on Cross-Attention Mechanism and Label-Enhancement Algorithm for Legal Judgment Prediction," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 11(9), pages 1-19, April.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jmathe:v:11:y:2023:i:9:p:2032-:d:1132263
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2227-7390/11/9/2032/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2227-7390/11/9/2032/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Kort, Fred, 1957. "Predicting Supreme Court Decisions Mathematically: A Quantitative Analysis of the “Right to Counsel” Cases," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 51(1), pages 1-12, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Jonathan P. Kastellec & Jeffrey R. Lax, 2008. "Case Selection and the Study of Judicial Politics," Journal of Empirical Legal Studies, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 5(3), pages 407-446, September.
    2. Jonathan P. Kastellec, 2010. "The Statistical Analysis of Judicial Decisions and Legal Rules with Classification Trees," Journal of Empirical Legal Studies, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 7(2), pages 202-230, June.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jmathe:v:11:y:2023:i:9:p:2032-:d:1132263. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.