An automated system that could assist a judge in predicting the outcome of a case would help expedite the judicial process. For such a system to be practically useful, predictions by the system should be explainable. To promote research in developing such a system, we introduce ILDC (Indian Legal Documents Corpus). ILDC is a large corpus of 35k Indian Supreme Court cases annotated with original court decisions. A portion of the corpus (a separate test set) is annotated with gold standard explanations by legal experts. Based on ILDC, we propose the task of Court Judgment Prediction and Explanation (CJPE). The task requires an automated system to predict an explainable outcome of a case. We experiment with a battery of baseline models for case predictions and propose a hierarchical occlusion based model for explainability. Our best prediction model has an accuracy of 78% versus 94% for human legal experts, pointing towards the complexity of the prediction task. The analysis of explanations by the proposed algorithm reveals a significant difference in the point of view of the algorithm and legal experts for explaining the judgments, pointing towards scope for future research.
翻译:一个可以帮助法官预测案件结果的自动化系统将有助于加快司法程序。这样一个系统要实际有用,就应当解释该系统的预测。为了促进开发这样一个系统的研究,我们引入了ILDC(印度法律文件公司),这是一个庞大的35k个印度最高法院案件,附有原始法院裁决的注释。其中一部分(单独的测试组)附有法律专家的黄金标准解释说明。根据ILDC,我们建议法院判决预测和解释的任务。这项任务需要一个自动系统来预测一个案件的可解释结果。我们试验一个案例预测基准模型,并提出一个基于等级分类的可解释性模型。我们的最佳预测模型对人类法律专家的准确性为78%对94%,指出预测任务的复杂性。对拟议算法的解释分析表明,对解释判决的算法和法律专家的观点存在重大差异,指出未来研究的范围。