mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

Japanese Tort-case Dataset for Rationale-supported Legal Judgment Prediction

arXiv 2312.00480 ↗First posted 1 Dec 2023cs.CL cs.AIcited by 5

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

  1. 2018BERT: Pre-training of Deep Bidirectional Transformers for Language Understandingcited by 40,399
  2. 2019Optuna: A Next-generation Hyperparameter Optimization Frameworkcited by 2,501
  3. 2020Towards Faithfully Interpretable NLP Systems: How should we define and evaluate faithfulness?cited by 599
  4. 2021LexGLUE: A Benchmark Dataset for Legal Language Understanding in Englishcited by 310
  5. 2019Neural Legal Judgment Prediction in Englishcited by 209
  6. 2018CAIL2018: A Large-Scale Legal Dataset for Judgment Predictioncited by 170
  7. 2021Paragraph-level Rationale Extraction through Regularization: A case study on European Court of Human Rights Casescited by 77
  8. 2020Distinguish Confusing Law Articles for Legal Judgment Predictioncited by 62
  9. 2017Learning to Predict Charges for Criminal Cases with Legal Basiscited by 61
  10. 2018Interpretable Charge Predictions for Criminal Cases: Learning to Generate Court Views from Fact Descriptionscited by 36
  11. 2020Give Me Convenience and Give Her Death: Who Should Decide What Uses of NLP are Appropriate, and on What Basis?cited by 27
  12. 2018Automatic Judgment Prediction via Legal Reading Comprehensioncited by 19
2 more
  1. 2022ClassActionPrediction: A Challenging Benchmark for Legal Judgment Prediction of Class Action Cases in the UScited by 17
  2. 2022On the Role of Negative Precedent in Legal Outcome Predictioncited by 16

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 14 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2025: 3; 2026: 2.

5 papers.