Makoto Onizuka

Junkai Liu, Yujie Tong, Hui Huang et al.

Legal judgment prediction (LJP), which enables litigants and their lawyers to forecast judgment outcomes and refine litigation strategies, has emerged as a crucial legal NLP task. Existing studies typically utilize legal facts, i.e., facts that have been established by evidence and determined by the judge, to predict the judgment. However, legal facts are often difficult to obtain in the early stages of litigation, significantly limiting the practical applicability of fact-based LJP. To address this limitation, we propose a novel legal NLP task: legal fact prediction (LFP), which takes the evidence submitted by litigants for trial as input to predict legal facts, thereby empowering fact-based LJP technologies to make predictions in the absence of ground-truth legal facts. We also propose the first benchmark dataset, LFPBench, for evaluating the LFP task. Our extensive experiments on LFPBench demonstrate the effectiveness of LFP-empowered LJP and highlight promising research directions for LFP.

Zengqing Wu, Run Peng, Shuyuan Zheng et al.

Large Language Models (LLMs) have increasingly been utilized in social simulations, where they are often guided by carefully crafted instructions to stably exhibit human-like behaviors during simulations. Nevertheless, we doubt the necessity of shaping agents' behaviors for accurate social simulations. Instead, this paper emphasizes the importance of spontaneous phenomena, wherein agents deeply engage in contexts and make adaptive decisions without explicit directions. We explored spontaneous cooperation across three competitive scenarios and successfully simulated the gradual emergence of cooperation, findings that align closely with human behavioral data. This approach not only aids the computational social science community in bridging the gap between simulations and real-world dynamics but also offers the AI community a novel method to assess LLMs' capability of deliberate reasoning.

Shuyuan Zheng, Sudong Cai, Chuan Xiao et al.

In collaborative machine learning (CML), data valuation, i.e., evaluating the contribution of each client's data to the machine learning model, has become a critical task for incentivizing and selecting positive data contributions. However, existing studies often assume that clients engage in data valuation truthfully, overlooking the practical motivation for clients to exaggerate their contributions. To unlock this threat, this paper introduces the data overvaluation attack, enabling strategic clients to have their data significantly overvalued in federated learning, a widely adopted paradigm for decentralized CML. Furthermore, we propose a Bayesian truthful data valuation metric, named Truth-Shapley. Truth-Shapley is the unique metric that guarantees some promising axioms for data valuation while ensuring that clients' optimal strategy is to perform truthful data valuation under certain conditions. Our experiments demonstrate the vulnerability of existing data valuation metrics to the proposed attack and validate the robustness and effectiveness of Truth-Shapley.