Bringing legal knowledge to the public by constructing a legal question bank using large-scale pre-trained language model

IF 3.1 2区 社会学 Q2 COMPUTER SCIENCE, ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE
Mingruo Yuan, Ben Kao, Tien-Hsuan Wu, Michael M. K. Cheung, Henry W. H. Chan, Anne S. Y. Cheung, Felix W. H. Chan, Yongxi Chen
{"title":"Bringing legal knowledge to the public by constructing a legal question bank using large-scale pre-trained language model","authors":"Mingruo Yuan,&nbsp;Ben Kao,&nbsp;Tien-Hsuan Wu,&nbsp;Michael M. K. Cheung,&nbsp;Henry W. H. Chan,&nbsp;Anne S. Y. Cheung,&nbsp;Felix W. H. Chan,&nbsp;Yongxi Chen","doi":"10.1007/s10506-023-09367-6","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Access to legal information is fundamental to access to justice. Yet accessibility refers not only to making legal documents available to the public, but also rendering legal information comprehensible to them. A vexing problem in bringing legal information to the public is how to turn formal legal documents such as legislation and judgments, which are often highly technical, to easily navigable and comprehensible knowledge to those without legal education. In this study, we formulate a three-step approach for bringing legal knowledge to laypersons, tackling the issues of navigability and comprehensibility. First, we translate selected sections of the law into snippets (called CLIC-pages), each being a small piece of article that focuses on explaining certain technical legal concept in layperson’s terms. Second, we construct a <i>Legal Question Bank</i>, which is a collection of legal questions whose answers can be found in the CLIC-pages. Third, we design an interactive <i>CLIC Recommender</i>. Given a user’s verbal description of a legal situation that requires a legal solution, CRec interprets the user’s input and shortlists questions from the question bank that are most likely relevant to the given legal situation and recommends their corresponding CLIC pages where relevant legal knowledge can be found. In this paper we focus on the technical aspects of creating an LQB. We show how large-scale pre-trained language models, such as GPT-3, can be used to generate legal questions. We compare machine-generated questions against human-composed questions and find that MGQs are more scalable, cost-effective, and more diversified, while HCQs are more precise. We also show a prototype of CRec and illustrate through an example how our 3-step approach effectively brings relevant legal knowledge to the public.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":51336,"journal":{"name":"Artificial Intelligence and Law","volume":"32 3","pages":"769 - 805"},"PeriodicalIF":3.1000,"publicationDate":"2023-07-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Artificial Intelligence and Law","FirstCategoryId":"94","ListUrlMain":"https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10506-023-09367-6","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"COMPUTER SCIENCE, ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Access to legal information is fundamental to access to justice. Yet accessibility refers not only to making legal documents available to the public, but also rendering legal information comprehensible to them. A vexing problem in bringing legal information to the public is how to turn formal legal documents such as legislation and judgments, which are often highly technical, to easily navigable and comprehensible knowledge to those without legal education. In this study, we formulate a three-step approach for bringing legal knowledge to laypersons, tackling the issues of navigability and comprehensibility. First, we translate selected sections of the law into snippets (called CLIC-pages), each being a small piece of article that focuses on explaining certain technical legal concept in layperson’s terms. Second, we construct a Legal Question Bank, which is a collection of legal questions whose answers can be found in the CLIC-pages. Third, we design an interactive CLIC Recommender. Given a user’s verbal description of a legal situation that requires a legal solution, CRec interprets the user’s input and shortlists questions from the question bank that are most likely relevant to the given legal situation and recommends their corresponding CLIC pages where relevant legal knowledge can be found. In this paper we focus on the technical aspects of creating an LQB. We show how large-scale pre-trained language models, such as GPT-3, can be used to generate legal questions. We compare machine-generated questions against human-composed questions and find that MGQs are more scalable, cost-effective, and more diversified, while HCQs are more precise. We also show a prototype of CRec and illustrate through an example how our 3-step approach effectively brings relevant legal knowledge to the public.

Abstract Image

利用大规模预训练语言模型构建法律题库,将法律知识带给大众
获取法律信息是诉诸司法的基础。然而,法律信息的可获取性不仅指向公众提供法律文件,还指使公众能够理解法律信息。在向公众提供法律信息的过程中,一个令人头疼的问题是如何将立法和判决等通常技术性很强的正式法律文件转化为易于浏览和理解的知识,让没有受过法律教育的人也能理解。在本研究中,我们提出了一种分三步将法律知识带给非专业人士的方法,以解决可浏览性和可理解性的问题。首先,我们将选定的法律章节翻译成片段(称为 CLIC-页),每个片段都是一小段文章,重点是用通俗易懂的语言解释某些技术性法律概念。其次,我们构建了一个法律问题库,这是一个法律问题集合,其答案可以在 CLIC 页中找到。第三,我们设计了一个交互式 CLIC 推荐器。根据用户对需要法律解决方案的法律情况的口头描述,CRec 将对用户的输入进行解释,并从问题库中筛选出最有可能与给定法律情况相关的问题,然后向用户推荐可以找到相关法律知识的相应 CLIC 页面。在本文中,我们将重点讨论创建 LQB 的技术问题。我们展示了大规模预训练语言模型(如 GPT-3)如何用于生成法律问题。我们比较了机器生成的问题和人工撰写的问题,发现 MGQs 更具扩展性、成本效益更高,而且更加多样化,而 HCQs 则更加精确。我们还展示了 CRec 的原型,并通过实例说明了我们的三步法如何有效地为公众提供相关法律知识。
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
CiteScore
9.50
自引率
26.80%
发文量
33
期刊介绍: Artificial Intelligence and Law is an international forum for the dissemination of original interdisciplinary research in the following areas: Theoretical or empirical studies in artificial intelligence (AI), cognitive psychology, jurisprudence, linguistics, or philosophy which address the development of formal or computational models of legal knowledge, reasoning, and decision making. In-depth studies of innovative artificial intelligence systems that are being used in the legal domain. Studies which address the legal, ethical and social implications of the field of Artificial Intelligence and Law. Topics of interest include, but are not limited to, the following: Computational models of legal reasoning and decision making; judgmental reasoning, adversarial reasoning, case-based reasoning, deontic reasoning, and normative reasoning. Formal representation of legal knowledge: deontic notions, normative modalities, rights, factors, values, rules. Jurisprudential theories of legal reasoning. Specialized logics for law. Psychological and linguistic studies concerning legal reasoning. Legal expert systems; statutory systems, legal practice systems, predictive systems, and normative systems. AI and law support for legislative drafting, judicial decision-making, and public administration. Intelligent processing of legal documents; conceptual retrieval of cases and statutes, automatic text understanding, intelligent document assembly systems, hypertext, and semantic markup of legal documents. Intelligent processing of legal information on the World Wide Web, legal ontologies, automated intelligent legal agents, electronic legal institutions, computational models of legal texts. Ramifications for AI and Law in e-Commerce, automatic contracting and negotiation, digital rights management, and automated dispute resolution. Ramifications for AI and Law in e-governance, e-government, e-Democracy, and knowledge-based systems supporting public services, public dialogue and mediation. Intelligent computer-assisted instructional systems in law or ethics. Evaluation and auditing techniques for legal AI systems. Systemic problems in the construction and delivery of legal AI systems. Impact of AI on the law and legal institutions. Ethical issues concerning legal AI systems. In addition to original research contributions, the Journal will include a Book Review section, a series of Technology Reports describing existing and emerging products, applications and technologies, and a Research Notes section of occasional essays posing interesting and timely research challenges for the field of Artificial Intelligence and Law. Financial support for the Journal of Artificial Intelligence and Law is provided by the University of Pittsburgh School of Law.
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信