Evaluating document representations for content-based legal literature recommendations

Recommender systems assist legal professionals in finding relevant literature for supporting their case. Despite its importance for the profession, legal applications do not reflect the latest advances in recommender systems and representation learning research. Simultaneously, legal recommender systems are typically evaluated in small-scale user study without any public available benchmark datasets. Thus, these studies have limited reproducibility. To address the gap between research and practice, we explore a set of state-of-the-art document representation methods for the task of retrieving semantically related US case law. We evaluate text-based (e.g., fast-Text, Transformers), citation-based (e.g., DeepWalk, Poincaré), and hybrid methods. We compare in total 27 methods using two silver standards with annotations for 2,964 documents. The silver standards are newly created from Open Case Book and Wikisource and can be reused under an open license facilitating reproducibility. Our experiments show that document representations from averaged fastText word vectors (trained on legal corpora) yield the best results, closely followed by Poincaré citation embeddings. Combining fastText and Poincaré in a hybrid manner further improves the overall result. Besides the overall performance, we analyze the methods depending on document length, citation count, and the coverage of their recommendations.

[1]  Jeffrey Pennington,et al.  GloVe: Global Vectors for Word Representation , 2014, EMNLP.

[2]  Michael I. Jordan,et al.  Latent Dirichlet Allocation , 2001, J. Mach. Learn. Res..

[3]  Sushanta Kumar,et al.  Similarity analysis of legal judgments , 2011, Bangalore Compute Conf..

[4]  Jiawei Han,et al.  FastHybrid: A Hybrid Model for Efficient Answer Selection , 2016, COLING.

[5]  Quoc V. Le,et al.  Distributed Representations of Sentences and Documents , 2014, ICML.

[6]  Christopher D. Manning,et al.  Introduction to Information Retrieval , 2010, J. Assoc. Inf. Sci. Technol..

[7]  Amin Vahdat,et al.  Hyperbolic Geometry of Complex Networks , 2010, Physical review. E, Statistical, nonlinear, and soft matter physics.

[8]  Jurica Seva,et al.  QURATOR: Innovative Technologies for Content and Data Curation , 2020, Qurator.

[9]  Kripabandhu Ghosh,et al.  Measuring Similarity among Legal Court Case Documents , 2017, Compute '17.

[10]  Steven Skiena,et al.  DeepWalk: online learning of social representations , 2014, KDD.

[11]  Tomas Mikolov,et al.  Bag of Tricks for Efficient Text Classification , 2016, EACL.

[12]  Christopher Potts,et al.  A large annotated corpus for learning natural language inference , 2015, EMNLP.

[13]  Gerard Salton,et al.  A vector space model for automatic indexing , 1975, CACM.

[14]  Radboud Winkels,et al.  Towards a Legal Recommender System , 2014, JURIX.

[15]  Tomas Mikolov,et al.  Enriching Word Vectors with Subword Information , 2016, TACL.

[16]  Volker Markl,et al.  Evaluating link-based recommendations for Wikipedia , 2016, 2016 IEEE/ACM Joint Conference on Digital Libraries (JCDL).

[17]  Cristiana Santos,et al.  On the concept of relevance in legal information retrieval , 2017, Artificial Intelligence and Law.

[18]  D. Gifford 1975 , 2018, The British Film Catalogue.

[19]  Huan Liu,et al.  Multi-Level Network Embedding with Boosted Low-Rank Matrix Approximation , 2018, 2019 IEEE/ACM International Conference on Advances in Social Networks Analysis and Mining (ASONAM).

[20]  Suzan Verberne,et al.  Citation Metrics for Legal Information Retrieval Systems , 2019, BIR@ECIR.

[21]  Jure Leskovec,et al.  node2vec: Scalable Feature Learning for Networks , 2016, KDD.

[22]  Ming-Wei Chang,et al.  BERT: Pre-training of Deep Bidirectional Transformers for Language Understanding , 2019, NAACL.

[23]  Kripabandhu Ghosh,et al.  Methods for Computing Legal Document Similarity: A Comparative Study , 2020, ArXiv.

[24]  Radboud Winkels,et al.  Making a Cold Start in Legal Recommendation: An Experiment , 2016, JURIX.

[25]  Rik Sarkar,et al.  Karate Club: An API Oriented Open-Source Python Framework for Unsupervised Learning on Graphs , 2020, CIKM.

[26]  Samuel R. Bowman,et al.  A Broad-Coverage Challenge Corpus for Sentence Understanding through Inference , 2017, NAACL.

[27]  Giovanni Siragusa,et al.  Unsupervised and supervised text similarity systems for automated identification of national implementing measures of European directives , 2018, Artificial Intelligence and Law.

[28]  Steven Skiena,et al.  Don't Walk, Skip!: Online Learning of Multi-scale Network Embeddings , 2016, ASONAM.

[29]  Bela Gipp,et al.  Enriching BERT with Knowledge Graph Embeddings for Document Classification , 2019, KONVENS.

[30]  Navjyoti Singh,et al.  Finding Relevant Indian Judgments using Dispersion of Citation Network , 2015, WWW.

[31]  Omer Levy,et al.  RoBERTa: A Robustly Optimized BERT Pretraining Approach , 2019, ArXiv.

[32]  Gaël Varoquaux,et al.  Scikit-learn: Machine Learning in Python , 2011, J. Mach. Learn. Res..

[33]  Yann LeCun,et al.  Signature Verification Using A "Siamese" Time Delay Neural Network , 1993, Int. J. Pattern Recognit. Artif. Intell..

[34]  Eneko Agirre,et al.  SemEval-2017 Task 1: Semantic Textual Similarity Multilingual and Crosslingual Focused Evaluation , 2017, *SEMEVAL.

[35]  Jeffrey Dean,et al.  Efficient Estimation of Word Representations in Vector Space , 2013, ICLR.

[36]  A. Azzouz 2011 , 2020, City.

[37]  Daniel L. Chen,et al.  Case Vectors: Spatial Representations of the Law Using Document Embeddings , 2018, Law as Data.

[38]  Arman Cohan,et al.  Longformer: The Long-Document Transformer , 2020, ArXiv.

[39]  Feng Xia,et al.  Scientific Paper Recommendation: A Survey , 2020, IEEE Access.

[40]  Jöran Beel,et al.  Towards reproducibility in recommender-systems research , 2016, User Modeling and User-Adapted Interaction.

[41]  P. Jaccard THE DISTRIBUTION OF THE FLORA IN THE ALPINE ZONE.1 , 1912 .

[42]  Iryna Gurevych,et al.  Sentence-BERT: Sentence Embeddings using Siamese BERT-Networks , 2019, EMNLP.

[43]  Lukasz Kaiser,et al.  Attention is All you Need , 2017, NIPS.

[44]  Rupali Wagh,et al.  Legal document similarity: a multi-criteria decision-making perspective , 2020, PeerJ Comput. Sci..

[45]  Mouzhi Ge,et al.  Beyond accuracy: evaluating recommender systems by coverage and serendipity , 2010, RecSys '10.

[46]  Malte Ostendorff,et al.  Towards an Open Platform for Legal Information , 2020, JCDL.

[47]  Andrei Marmor The Language of Law , 2014 .

[48]  Douwe Kiela,et al.  Poincaré Embeddings for Learning Hierarchical Representations , 2017, NIPS.

[49]  Timothy Baldwin,et al.  An Empirical Evaluation of doc2vec with Practical Insights into Document Embedding Generation , 2016, Rep4NLP@ACL.

[50]  Benjamin Van Durme,et al.  A Dataset for Statutory Reasoning in Tax Law Entailment and Question Answering , 2020, NLLP@KDD.

[51]  Florian Matthes,et al.  Extending Full Text Search for Legal Document Collections Using Word Embeddings , 2016, JURIX.

[52]  Artem Revenko,et al.  Developing and Orchestrating a Portfolio of Natural Legal Language Processing and Document Curation Services , 2019 .

[53]  Livio Robaldo,et al.  Eunomos, a legal document and knowledge management system for the Web to provide relevant, reliable and up-to-date information on the law , 2016, Artificial Intelligence and Law.

[54]  Ion Androutsopoulos,et al.  LEGAL-BERT: “Preparing the Muppets for Court’” , 2020, FINDINGS.