Identification of Rhetorical Roles for Segmentation and Summarization of a Legal Judgment

Legal judgments are complex in nature and hence a brief summary of the judgment, known as a headnote, is generated by experts to enable quick perusal. Headnote generation is a time consuming process and there have been attempts made at automating the process. The difficulty in interpreting such automatically generated summaries is that they are not coherent and do not convey the relative relevance of the various components of the judgment. A legal judgment can be segmented into coherent chunks based on the rhetorical roles played by the sentences. In this paper, a comprehensive system is proposed for labeling sentences with their rhetorical roles and extracting structured head notes automatically from legal judgments. An annotated data set was created with the help of legal experts and used as training data. A machine learning technique, Conditional Random Field, is applied to perform document segmentation by identifying the rhetorical roles. The present work also describes the application of probabilistic models for the extraction of key sentences and composing the relevant chunks in the form of a headnote. The understanding of basic structures and distinct segments is shown to improve the final presentation of the summary. Moreover, by adding simple additional features the system can be extended to other legal sub-domains. The proposed system has been empirically evaluated and found to be highly effective on both the segmentation and summarization tasks. The final summary generated with underlying rhetorical roles improves the readability and efficiency of the system.

[1]  George M. Kasper,et al.  The Effects and Limitations of Automated Text Condensing on Reading Comprehension Performance , 1992, Inf. Syst. Res..

[2]  Yoav Freund,et al.  Boosting a weak learning algorithm by majority , 1990, COLT '90.

[3]  Dragomir R. Radev,et al.  Centroid-based summarization of multiple documents: sentence extraction, utility-based evaluation, and user studies , 2000, ArXiv.

[4]  Andrew McCallum,et al.  Conditional Random Fields: Probabilistic Models for Segmenting and Labeling Sequence Data , 2001, ICML.

[5]  Hinrich Schütze,et al.  Book Reviews: Foundations of Statistical Natural Language Processing , 1999, CL.

[6]  H. P. Edmundson,et al.  New Methods in Automatic Extracting , 1969, JACM.

[7]  Yoram Singer,et al.  Improved Boosting Algorithms Using Confidence-rated Predictions , 1998, COLT' 98.

[8]  Andrew J. Viterbi,et al.  Error bounds for convolutional codes and an asymptotically optimum decoding algorithm , 1967, IEEE Trans. Inf. Theory.

[9]  Qin Lu,et al.  Extractive Summarization using Inter- and Intra- Event Relevance , 2006, ACL.

[10]  Bernice W. Polemis Nonparametric Statistics for the Behavioral Sciences , 1959 .

[11]  Claire Grover,et al.  Extractive summarisation of legal texts , 2006, Artificial Intelligence and Law.

[12]  Andrew McCallum,et al.  Accurate Information Extraction from Research Papers using Conditional Random Fields , 2004, NAACL.

[13]  Sharon M. Walter Review of Evaluating natural language processing systems: an analysis and review by Karen Sparck Jones and Julia R. Galliers. Springer-Verlag 1995. , 1998 .

[14]  Yoram Singer,et al.  A simple, fast, and effective rule learner , 1999, AAAI 1999.

[15]  Yiming Yang,et al.  Topic Detection and Tracking Pilot Study Final Report , 1998 .

[16]  Ryan T. McDonald A Study of Global Inference Algorithms in Multi-document Summarization , 2007, ECIR.

[17]  Hans Peter Luhn,et al.  The Automatic Creation of Literature Abstracts , 1958, IBM J. Res. Dev..

[18]  Dragomir R. Radev,et al.  LexPageRank: Prestige in Multi-Document Text Summarization , 2004, EMNLP.

[19]  Marc Moens,et al.  Articles Summarizing Scientific Articles: Experiments with Relevance and Rhetorical Status , 2002, CL.

[20]  J. Ross Quinlan,et al.  C4.5: Programs for Machine Learning , 1992 .

[21]  Michael J. Pazzani,et al.  An Investigation of Noise-Tolerant Relational Concept Learning Algorithms , 1991, ML.

[22]  M. Saravanan,et al.  A probabilistic approach to multi-document summarization for generating a tiled summary , 2005, Sixth International Conference on Computational Intelligence and Multimedia Applications (ICCIMA'05).

[23]  Yoshio Nakao An Algorithm for One-page Summarization of a Long Text Based on Thematic Hierarchy Detection , 2000, ACL.

[24]  John D. Lafferty,et al.  Statistical Models for Text Segmentation , 1999, Machine Learning.

[25]  Eduard H. Hovy,et al.  Automatic Evaluation of Summaries Using N-gram Co-occurrence Statistics , 2003, NAACL.

[26]  Sunita Sarawagi,et al.  Automatic segmentation of text into structured records , 2001, SIGMOD '01.

[27]  Andrew McCallum,et al.  Piecewise Training for Undirected Models , 2005, UAI.

[28]  Slava M. Katz Distribution of content words and phrases in text and language modelling , 1996, Natural Language Engineering.

[29]  Chris Buckley,et al.  New Retrieval Approaches Using SMART: TREC 4 , 1995, TREC.

[30]  Inderjeet Mani,et al.  The Tipster Summac Text Summarization Evaluation , 1999, EACL.

[31]  Chin-Yew Lin,et al.  ROUGE: A Package for Automatic Evaluation of Summaries , 2004, ACL 2004.

[32]  Lisa F. Rau,et al.  Automatic Condensation of Electronic Publications by Sentence Selection , 1995, Inf. Process. Manag..

[33]  K. Krippendorff Krippendorff, Klaus, Content Analysis: An Introduction to its Methodology . Beverly Hills, CA: Sage, 1980. , 1980 .

[34]  Vasileios Hatzivassiloglou,et al.  Event-Based Extractive Summarization , 2004 .

[35]  Janyce Wiebe,et al.  Tracking Point of View in Narrative , 1994, Comput. Linguistics.

[36]  M. Saravanan,et al.  Automatic Identification of Rhetorical Roles using Conditional Random Fields for Legal Document Summarization , 2008, IJCNLP.

[37]  Kathleen R. McKeown,et al.  Summarization Evaluation Methods: Experiments and Analysis , 1998 .

[38]  Manabu Okumura,et al.  A Comparison of Summarization Methods Based on Task-based Evaluation , 2000, LREC.

[39]  Claire Grover,et al.  The HOLJ Corpus. Supporting Summarisation of Legal Texts , 2004 .

[40]  Hideki Kozima,et al.  Text Segmentation Based on Similarity between Words , 1993, ACL.

[41]  Freddy Y. Y. Choi Advances in domain independent linear text segmentation , 2000, ANLP.

[42]  Bogdan E. Popescu,et al.  PREDICTIVE LEARNING VIA RULE ENSEMBLES , 2008, 0811.1679.

[43]  Marti A. Hearst Multi-Paragraph Segmentation Expository Text , 1994, ACL.

[44]  Atefeh Farzindar,et al.  Résumé automatique de textes juridiques , 2005 .

[45]  Yoav Freund,et al.  Experiments with a New Boosting Algorithm , 1996, ICML.

[46]  Johannes Fürnkranz,et al.  Incremental Reduced Error Pruning , 1994, ICML.

[47]  Andrew McCallum,et al.  Maximum Entropy Markov Models for Information Extraction and Segmentation , 2000, ICML.

[48]  Andrew McCallum,et al.  Information extraction from research papers using conditional random fields , 2006, Inf. Process. Manag..

[49]  Karen Sparck Jones,et al.  Book Reviews: Evaluating Natural Language Processing Systems: An Analysis and Review , 1996, CL.

[50]  Kenneth Ward Church,et al.  Poisson mixtures , 1995, Natural Language Engineering.

[51]  William W. Cohen Fast Effective Rule Induction , 1995, ICML.

[52]  Guy Lapalme,et al.  LetSum, an automatic Legal Text Summarizing system , 2004 .

[53]  Hanna M. Wallach,et al.  Conditional Random Fields: An Introduction , 2004 .

[54]  M. Saravanan,et al.  Improving Legal Document Summarization Using Graphical Models , 2006, JURIX.

[55]  Peter Clark,et al.  The CN2 Induction Algorithm , 1989, Machine Learning.

[56]  Jade Goldstein-Stewart,et al.  The use of MMR, diversity-based reranking for reordering documents and producing summaries , 1998, SIGIR '98.