From information retrieval (IR) to argument retrieval (AR) for legal cases: Report on a baseline study

Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence and Applications

Volumn 259, Issue , 2013, Pages 29-38

  Ashley, Kevin D ^a   Walker, Vern R ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH   (United States)

^b HOFSTRA UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Argument retrieval; Default logic framework; Legal information retrieval; Pragmatics; Presuppositional annotation; Semantics

Indexed keywords

INFORMATION RETRIEVAL; SEARCH ENGINES;

ARGUMENT RETRIEVAL; BASELINE STUDIES; CASE REPORTS; DEFAULT LOGIC; DEFAULT-LOGIC FRAMEWORK; INFORMATION-RETRIEVAL SYSTEMS; LEGAL CASE; LEGAL INFORMATION RETRIEVAL; PRAGMATIC; PRESUPPOSITIONAL ANNOTATION;

SEMANTICS;

EID: 84894588238     PISSN: 09226389     EISSN: 18798314     Source Type: Book Series    
DOI: 10.3233/978-1-61499-359-9-29     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (13)

1. Ashley, K., Brüninghaus, S. 'Automatically Classifying Case Texts and Predicting Outcomes.' In Artificial Intelligence and Law 17: 2 125-165 (2009).
2. Ashley, K., Walker, V. 'Toward Constructing Evidence-Based Legal Arguments Using Legal Decision Documents and Machine Learning.' In: Proceedings ICAIL 2013 176-180 ACM, New York (2013).
3. Daniels J., Rissland E. Finding legally relevant passages in case opinions. Proceedings ICAIL 1997. 39-46 ACM, New York (1997).
4. Gonçalves T., Quaresma P. Is linguistic information relevant for the text legal classification problem' In: Proceedings ICAIL 2005. 168-176 ACM, New York (2005).
5. Hachey B., Grover C. Extractive summarization of legal texts. Artificial Intelligence and Law 14:305-345 (2006).
6. Jackson P., Al-Kofahi K., Tyrrell A., Vacher A. Information extraction from case law and retrieval of prior cases. Artificial Intelligence 150:239-290 (2003).
7. McCarty, L. Deep semantic interpretations of legal texts. Proceedings ICAIL 2007, 217-224 ACM, New York (2007).
8. Mochales, R. and Moens, M-F. Argumentation Mining. Artificial Intelligence and Law 19:1-22 (2011).
9. Saravanan M, Ravindran B Identification of rhetorical roles for segmentation and summarization of a legal judgment. Artificial Intelligence and Law 18:45-76 (2010).
10. Thompson, P. Automatic categorization of case law. Proc. ICAIL 2001. 70-77 ACM, NY (2001).
11. Turtle, H. Text Retrieval in the Legal World, Artificial Intelligence and Law, 3:5-6 (1995).
12. Uyttendaele C, Moens M-F, Dumortier J SALOMON: automatic abstracting of legal cases for effective access to court decisions. Artificial Intelligence and Law 6:59-79 (1998).
13. Walker, V., Carie, N., DeWitt, C. and Lesh, E. A framework for the extraction and modeling of factfinding reasoning from legal decisions: lessons from the Vaccine/Injury Project Corpus. Artificial Intelligence and Law 19:291-331 (2011).