Preethu Rose Anish

Anka Chandrahas Tummepalli, Preethu Rose Anish

Understanding and predicting judicial outcomes demands nuanced analysis of legal documents. Traditional approaches treat judgments and proceedings as unstructured text, limiting the effectiveness of large language models (LLMs) in tasks such as summarization, argument generation, and judgment prediction. We propose LexChronos, an agentic framework that iteratively extracts structured event timelines from Supreme Court of India judgments. LexChronos employs a dual-agent architecture: a LoRA-instruct-tuned extraction agent identifies candidate events, while a pre-trained feedback agent scores and refines them through a confidence-driven loop. To address the scarcity of Indian legal event datasets, we construct a synthetic corpus of 2000 samples using reverse-engineering techniques with DeepSeek-R1 and GPT-4, generating gold-standard event annotations. Our pipeline achieves a BERT-based F1 score of 0.8751 against this synthetic ground truth. In downstream evaluations on legal text summarization, GPT-4 preferred structured timelines over unstructured baselines in 75% of cases, demonstrating improved comprehension and reasoning in Indian jurisprudence. This work lays a foundation for future legal AI applications in the Indian context, such as precedent mapping, argument synthesis, and predictive judgment modelling, by harnessing structured representations of legal events.

Pavithra PM Nair, Preethu Rose Anish

In jurisdictions like India, where courts face an extensive backlog of cases, artificial intelligence offers transformative potential for legal judgment prediction. A critical subset of this backlog comprises appellate cases, which are formal decisions issued by higher courts reviewing the rulings of lower courts. To this end, we present Vichara, a novel framework tailored to the Indian judicial system that predicts and explains appellate judgments. Vichara processes English-language appellate case proceeding documents and decomposes them into decision points. Decision points are discrete legal determinations that encapsulate the legal issue, deciding authority, outcome, reasoning, and temporal context. The structured representation isolates the core determinations and their context, enabling accurate predictions and interpretable explanations. Vichara's explanations follow a structured format inspired by the IRAC (Issue-Rule-Application-Conclusion) framework and adapted for Indian legal reasoning. This enhances interpretability, allowing legal professionals to assess the soundness of predictions efficiently. We evaluate Vichara on two datasets, PredEx and the expert-annotated subset of the Indian Legal Documents Corpus (ILDC_expert), using four large language models: GPT-4o mini, Llama-3.1-8B, Mistral-7B, and Qwen2.5-7B. Vichara surpasses existing judgment prediction benchmarks on both datasets, with GPT-4o mini achieving the highest performance (F1: 81.5 on PredEx, 80.3 on ILDC_expert), followed by Llama-3.1-8B. Human evaluation of the generated explanations across Clarity, Linking, and Usefulness metrics highlights GPT-4o mini's superior interpretability.

Mohit Chaudhary, Chirag Jain, Preethu Rose Anish

App reviews are a critical source of user feedback, offering valuable insights into an app's performance, features, usability, and overall user experience. Effectively analyzing these reviews is essential for guiding app development, prioritizing feature updates, and enhancing user satisfaction. Classifying reviews into functional and non-functional requirements play a pivotal role in distinguishing feedback related to specific app features (functional requirements) from feedback concerning broader quality attributes, such as performance, usability, and reliability (non-functional requirements). Both categories are integral to informed development decisions. Traditional approaches to classifying app reviews are hindered by the need for large, domain-specific datasets, which are often costly and time-consuming to curate. This study explores the potential of zero-shot learning with ChatGPT for classifying app reviews into four categories: functional requirement, non-functional requirement, both, or neither. We evaluate ChatGPT's performance on a benchmark dataset of 1,880 manually annotated reviews from ten diverse apps spanning multiple domains. Our findings demonstrate that ChatGPT achieves a robust F1 score of 0.842 in review classification, despite certain challenges and limitations. Additionally, we examine how factors such as review readability and length impact classification accuracy and conduct a manual analysis to identify review categories more prone to misclassification.

Anmol Singhal, Chirag Jain, Preethu Rose Anish et al.

Enterprises frequently enter into commercial contracts that can serve as vital sources of project-specific requirements. Contractual clauses are obligatory, and the requirements derived from contracts can detail the downstream implementation activities that non-legal stakeholders, including requirement analysts, engineers, and delivery personnel, need to conduct. However, comprehending contracts is cognitively demanding and error-prone for such stakeholders due to the extensive use of Legalese and the inherent complexity of contract language. Furthermore, contracts often contain ambiguously worded clauses to ensure comprehensive coverage. In contrast, non-legal stakeholders require a detailed and unambiguous comprehension of contractual clauses to craft actionable requirements. In this work, we introduce a novel legal NLP task that involves generating clarification questions for contracts. These questions aim to identify contract ambiguities on a document level, thereby assisting non-legal stakeholders in obtaining the necessary details for eliciting requirements. This task is challenged by three core issues: (1) data availability, (2) the length and unstructured nature of contracts, and (3) the complexity of legal text. To address these issues, we propose ConRAP, a retrieval-augmented prompting framework for generating clarification questions to disambiguate contractual text. Experiments conducted on contracts sourced from the publicly available CUAD dataset show that ConRAP with ChatGPT can detect ambiguities with an F2 score of 0.87. 70% of the generated clarification questions are deemed useful by human evaluators.