An Approach Based on Cross-Attention Mechanism and Label-Enhancement Algorithm for Legal Judgment Prediction

Abstract

Legal Judgment Prediction aims to automatically predict judgment outcomes based on descriptions of legal cases and established law articles, and has received increasing attention. In the preliminary work, several problems still have not been adequately solved. One is how to utilize limited but valuable label information. Existing methods mostly ignore the gap between the description of established articles and cases, but directly integrate them. Second, most studies ignore the mutual constraint among the subtasks, such as logically or semantically, each charge is only related to some specific articles. To address these issues, we first construct a crime similarity graph and then perform a distillation operation to collect discriminate keywords for each charge. Furthermore, we fuse these discriminative keywords instead of established article descriptions into case embedding with a cross-attention mechanism to obtain deep semantic representations of cases incorporating label information. Finally, under a constraint among subtasks, we optimize the one-hot representation of ground-truth labels to guarantee consistent results across the subtasks based on the label-enhancement algorithm. To verify the effectiveness and robustness of our framework, we conduct extensive experiments on two public datasets. The experimental results show that the proposed method outperforms the state-of-art models by 3.89%/7.92% and 1.23%/2.50% in the average MF1-score of the subtasks on CAIL-Small/Big, respectively.

LPN: Label-Enhanced Prototypical Network for Legal Judgment Prediction

“…Subsequently, Yue et al [14] proposed a circumstance-aware framework that utilized the results of intermediate subtasks to separate the factual description into different circumstances and exploited them to make the predictions of other subtasks. Furthermore, Chen et al [15] improves the performance of LJP by exploiting the consistency constraint relations of the three subtasks.…”