Classifying sentential modality in legal language: a use case in financial regulations, acts and directives

James O'Neill, P. Buitelaar, Cécile Robin, Leona O'Brien
{"title":"Classifying sentential modality in legal language: a use case in financial regulations, acts and directives","authors":"James O'Neill, P. Buitelaar, Cécile Robin, Leona O'Brien","doi":"10.1145/3086512.3086528","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Texts expressed in legal language are often difficult and time consuming for lawyers to read through, particularly for the purpose of identifying relevant deontic modalities (obligations, prohibitions and permissions). By nature, the language of law is strict, hence the predominant use of modal logic as a substitute for the syntactical ambiguity in natural language, specifically, deontic and alethic logic for the respective modalities. However, deontic modalities which express obligations, prohibitions and permissions, can have varying degree and preciseness to which they correspond to a matter, strict deontic logic does not allow for such quantitative measures. Therefore, this paper outlines a data-driven approach by classifying deontic modalities using ensembled Artificial Neural Networks (ANN) that incorporate domain specific legal distributional semantic model (DSM) representations, in combination with, a general DSM representation. We propose to use well calibrated probability estimates from these classifiers as an approximation to the degree which an obligation/prohibition or permission belongs to a given class based on SME annotated sentences. Best results show 82.33 % accuracy on a held-out test set.","PeriodicalId":425187,"journal":{"name":"Proceedings of the 16th edition of the International Conference on Articial Intelligence and Law","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2017-06-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"43","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Proceedings of the 16th edition of the International Conference on Articial Intelligence and Law","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1145/3086512.3086528","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 43

Abstract

Texts expressed in legal language are often difficult and time consuming for lawyers to read through, particularly for the purpose of identifying relevant deontic modalities (obligations, prohibitions and permissions). By nature, the language of law is strict, hence the predominant use of modal logic as a substitute for the syntactical ambiguity in natural language, specifically, deontic and alethic logic for the respective modalities. However, deontic modalities which express obligations, prohibitions and permissions, can have varying degree and preciseness to which they correspond to a matter, strict deontic logic does not allow for such quantitative measures. Therefore, this paper outlines a data-driven approach by classifying deontic modalities using ensembled Artificial Neural Networks (ANN) that incorporate domain specific legal distributional semantic model (DSM) representations, in combination with, a general DSM representation. We propose to use well calibrated probability estimates from these classifiers as an approximation to the degree which an obligation/prohibition or permission belongs to a given class based on SME annotated sentences. Best results show 82.33 % accuracy on a held-out test set.
法律语言句式的分类:金融法规、法令和指令中的一个用例
对于律师来说,用法律语言表达的文本阅读起来往往既困难又耗时,特别是为了确定相关的道义模式(义务、禁止和许可)。从本质上讲,法律语言是严格的,因此主要使用模态逻辑来代替自然语言中的语法歧义,特别是道义逻辑和真性逻辑来代替各自的模态。然而,道义模式表示义务,禁止和许可,可以有不同的程度和准确性,它们对应于一个问题,严格的道义逻辑不允许这样的定量措施。因此,本文概述了一种数据驱动的方法,通过使用集成人工神经网络(ANN)对道义模式进行分类,该网络将特定领域的法律分布语义模型(DSM)表示与一般的DSM表示相结合。我们建议使用这些分类器的校准概率估计,作为基于SME注释句子的义务/禁止或许可属于给定类的近似程度。最佳结果显示,在一个固定的测试集上,准确率为82.33%。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信