Japanese Tort-case Dataset for Rationale-supported Legal Judgment Prediction
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
This paper presents the first dataset for Japanese Legal Judgment Prediction (LJP), the Japanese Tort-case Dataset (JTD), which features two tasks: tort prediction and its rationale extraction. The rationale extraction task identifies the court's accepting arguments from alleged arguments by plaintiffs and defendants, which is a novel task in the field. JTD is constructed based on annotated 3,477 Japanese Civil Code judgments by 41 legal experts, resulting in 7,978 instances with 59,697 of their alleged arguments from the involved parties. Our baseline experiments show the feasibility of the proposed two tasks, and our error analysis by legal experts identifies sources of errors and suggests future directions of the LJP research.
Key facts. Cited by 5 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 14 of its 41 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 1 Dec 2023.
Builds on
14 of 41 references.
References · 14
- 2018BERT: Pre-training of Deep Bidirectional Transformers for Language Understandingcited by 40,399
- 2019Optuna: A Next-generation Hyperparameter Optimization Frameworkcited by 2,501
- 2020Towards Faithfully Interpretable NLP Systems: How should we define and evaluate faithfulness?cited by 599
- 2021LexGLUE: A Benchmark Dataset for Legal Language Understanding in Englishcited by 310
- 2019Neural Legal Judgment Prediction in Englishcited by 209
- 2018CAIL2018: A Large-Scale Legal Dataset for Judgment Predictioncited by 170
- 2021Paragraph-level Rationale Extraction through Regularization: A case study on European Court of Human Rights Casescited by 77
- 2020Distinguish Confusing Law Articles for Legal Judgment Predictioncited by 62
- 2017Learning to Predict Charges for Criminal Cases with Legal Basiscited by 61
- 2018Interpretable Charge Predictions for Criminal Cases: Learning to Generate Court Views from Fact Descriptionscited by 36
- 2020Give Me Convenience and Give Her Death: Who Should Decide What Uses of NLP are Appropriate, and on What Basis?cited by 27
- 2018Automatic Judgment Prediction via Legal Reading Comprehensioncited by 19
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2025: 3; 2026: 2.
5 papers.
- 2025NOWJ@COLIEE 2025: A Multi-stage Framework Integrating Embedding Models and Large Language Models for Legal Retrieval and Entailmentcited by 1
- 2025JBE-QA: Japanese Bar Exam QA Dataset for Assessing Legal Domain Knowledgecited by 1
- 2026SinhaLegal: A Benchmark Corpus for Information Extraction and Analysis in Sinhala Legislative Textscited by 1
- 2025IBPS: Indian Bail Prediction Systemcited by 0
- 2026Vichara: Appellate Judgment Prediction and Explanation for the Indian Judicial Systemcited by 0
- 2026SinhaLegal: A Benchmark Corpus for Information Extraction and Analysis in Sinhala Legislative Texts5 Mar 2026
- 2026Vichara: Appellate Judgment Prediction and Explanation for the Indian Judicial System20 Feb 2026
- 2025JBE-QA: Japanese Bar Exam QA Dataset for Assessing Legal Domain Knowledge28 Nov 2025
- 2025NOWJ@COLIEE 2025: A Multi-stage Framework Integrating Embedding Models and Large Language Models for Legal Retrieval and Entailment9 Sep 2025
- 2025IBPS: Indian Bail Prediction System11 Aug 2025