Yiquan Wu

Yiquan Wu, Siying Zhou, Yifei Liu et al.

Legal Judgment Prediction (LJP) has become an increasingly crucial task in Legal AI, i.e., predicting the judgment of the case in terms of case fact description. Precedents are the previous legal cases with similar facts, which are the basis for the judgment of the subsequent case in national legal systems. Thus, it is worthwhile to explore the utilization of precedents in the LJP. Recent advances in deep learning have enabled a variety of techniques to be used to solve the LJP task. These can be broken down into two categories: large language models (LLMs) and domain-specific models. LLMs are capable of interpreting and generating complex natural language, while domain models are efficient in learning task-specific information. In this paper, we propose the precedent-enhanced LJP framework (PLJP), a system that leverages the strength of both LLM and domain models in the context of precedents. Specifically, the domain models are designed to provide candidate labels and find the proper precedents efficiently, and the large models will make the final prediction with an in-context precedents comprehension. Experiments on the real-world dataset demonstrate the effectiveness of our PLJP. Moreover, our work shows a promising direction for LLM and domain-model collaboration that can be generalized to other vertical domains.

Ang Li, Qiangchao Chen, Yiquan Wu et al.

Confusing charge prediction is a challenging task in legal AI, which involves predicting confusing charges based on fact descriptions. While existing charge prediction methods have shown impressive performance, they face significant challenges when dealing with confusing charges, such as Snatch and Robbery. In the legal domain, constituent elements play a pivotal role in distinguishing confusing charges. Constituent elements are fundamental behaviors underlying criminal punishment and have subtle distinctions among charges. In this paper, we introduce a novel From Graph to Word Bag (FWGB) approach, which introduces domain knowledge regarding constituent elements to guide the model in making judgments on confusing charges, much like a judge's reasoning process. Specifically, we first construct a legal knowledge graph containing constituent elements to help select keywords for each charge, forming a word bag. Subsequently, to guide the model's attention towards the differentiating information for each charge within the context, we expand the attention mechanism and introduce a new loss function with attention supervision through words in the word bag. We construct the confusing charges dataset from real-world judicial documents. Experiments demonstrate the effectiveness of our method, especially in maintaining exceptional performance in imbalanced label distributions.

Ang Li, Yiquan Wu, Yifei Liu et al.

Court View Generation (CVG) is a challenging task in the field of Legal Artificial Intelligence (LegalAI), which aims to generate court views based on the plaintiff claims and the fact descriptions. While Pretrained Language Models (PLMs) have showcased their prowess in natural language generation, their application to the complex, knowledge-intensive domain of CVG often reveals inherent limitations. In this paper, we present a novel approach, named Knowledge Injection and Guidance (KIG), designed to bolster CVG using PLMs. To efficiently incorporate domain knowledge during the training stage, we introduce a knowledge-injected prompt encoder for prompt tuning, thereby reducing computational overhead. Moreover, to further enhance the model's ability to utilize domain knowledge, we employ a generating navigator, which dynamically guides the text generation process in the inference stage without altering the model's architecture, making it readily transferable. Comprehensive experiments on real-world data demonstrate the effectiveness of our approach compared to several established baselines, especially in the responsivity of claims, where it outperforms the best baseline by 11.87%.

Yuting Huang, Meitong Guo, Yiquan Wu et al.

Recent advances in LegalAI have primarily focused on individual case judgment analysis, often overlooking the critical appellate process within the judicial system. Appeals serve as a core mechanism for error correction and ensuring fair trials, making them highly significant both in practice and in research. To address this gap, we present the AppealCase dataset, consisting of 10,000 pairs of real-world, matched first-instance and second-instance documents across 91 categories of civil cases. The dataset also includes detailed annotations along five dimensions central to appellate review: judgment reversals, reversal reasons, cited legal provisions, claim-level decisions, and whether there is new information in the second instance. Based on these annotations, we propose five novel LegalAI tasks and conduct a comprehensive evaluation across 20 mainstream models. Experimental results reveal that all current models achieve less than 50% F1 scores on the judgment reversal prediction task, highlighting the complexity and challenge of the appeal scenario. We hope that the AppealCase dataset will spur further research in LegalAI for appellate case analysis and contribute to improving consistency in judicial decision-making.