Study on Sentence Relations in the Automatic Detection of Argumentation in Legal Cases

Authors:
Raquel Mochales-Palau;Marie-Francine Moens
Affiliations:
K.U. Leuven, Department of Computer Science, Leuven, Belgium;K.U. Leuven, Department of Computer Science, Leuven, Belgium
Venue:
Proceedings of the 2007 conference on Legal Knowledge and Information Systems: JURIX 2007: The Twentieth Annual Conference
Year:
2007

Citing 5
Cited 5

A maximum entropy approach to natural language processing

Computational Linguistics
ARGUER: using argument schemas for argument detection and rebuttal in dialogs

UM '99 Proceedings of the seventh international conference on User modeling
A Maximum-Entropy-Inspired Parser

A Maximum-Entropy-Inspired Parser
An unsupervised approach to recognizing discourse relations

ACL '02 Proceedings of the 40th Annual Meeting on Association for Computational Linguistics
Automatic detection of arguments in legal texts

Proceedings of the 11th international conference on Artificial intelligence and law

Automatic Argumentation Detection and its Role in Law and the Semantic Web

Proceedings of the 2009 conference on Law, Ontologies and the Semantic Web: Channelling the Legal Information Flood
Argumentation mining: the detection, classification and structure of arguments in text

Proceedings of the 12th International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Law
Argumentation mining

Artificial Intelligence and Law
Using Argumentation Schemes for Argument Extraction: A Bottom-Up Method

International Journal of Cognitive Informatics and Natural Intelligence
Using Argumentation Schemes for Argument Extraction: A Bottom-Up Method

International Journal of Cognitive Informatics and Natural Intelligence

Quantified Score

Hi-index	0.00

Visualization

Abstract

We report the results of experiments which prove that the analysis of relations between sentences increase the accuracy in the automatic detection of arguments in legal cases. We treat the search of arguments as a classification problem. Our corpus is a human-annotated and automatically-extracted test set from a collection of legal cases of the European Court of Human Rights. We obtain an increment around 8% in the general accuracy compared to previous experiments due to the addition of new features that study the relations between the text sentences.