Extracting Norms from Contracts Via ChatGPT: Opportunities and Challenges
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
We investigate the effectiveness of ChatGPT in extracting norms from contracts. Norms provide a natural way to engineer multiagent systems by capturing how to govern the interactions between two or more autonomous parties. We extract norms of commitment, prohibition, authorization, and power, along with associated norm elements (the parties involved, antecedents, and consequents) from contracts. Our investigation reveals ChatGPT's effectiveness and limitations in norm extraction from contracts. ChatGPT demonstrates promising performance in norm extraction without requiring training or fine-tuning, thus obviating the need for annotated data, which is not generally available in this domain. However, we found some limitations of ChatGPT in extracting these norms that lead to incorrect norm extractions. The limitations include oversight of crucial details, hallucination, incorrect parsing of conjunctions, and empty norm elements. Enhanced norm extraction from contracts can foster the development of more transparent and trustworthy formal agent interaction specifications, thereby contributing to the improvement of multiagent systems.
Key facts. Cited by 2 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 21 of its 54 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 2 Apr 2024.
Builds on
21 of 54 references.
References · 21
- 2017Attention Is All You Needcited by 59,932
- 2018BERT: Pre-training of Deep Bidirectional Transformers for Language Understandingcited by 40,204
- 2019RoBERTa: A Robustly Optimized BERT Pretraining Approachcited by 13,266
- 2018GLUE: A Multi-Task Benchmark and Analysis Platform for Natural Language Understandingcited by 4,854
- 2016SQuAD: 100,000+ Questions for Machine Comprehension of Textcited by 4,115
- 2019XLNet: Generalized Autoregressive Pretraining for Language Understandingcited by 2,801
- 2017A Broad-Coverage Challenge Corpus for Sentence Understanding through Inferencecited by 2,665
- 2023Sparks of Artificial General Intelligence: Early experiments with GPT-4cited by 2,579
- 2018Know What You Don't Know: Unanswerable Questions for SQuADcited by 1,538
- 2021CUAD: An Expert-Annotated NLP Dataset for Legal Contract Reviewcited by 232
- 2021ContractNLI: A Dataset for Document-level Natural Language Inference for Contractscited by 145
- 2023ChatGPT and Software Testing Education: Promises & Perilscited by 40
9 more
- 2020A Benchmark for Lease Contract Reviewcited by 26
- 2023ChatGPT for Programming Numerical Methodscited by 26
- 2022Processing Long Legal Documents with Pre-trained Transformers: Modding LegalBERT and Longformercited by 20
- 2018Obligation and Prohibition Extraction Using Hierarchical RNNscited by 18
- 2020An Automated Framework for the Extraction of Semantic Legal Metadata from Legal Textscited by 8
- 2021Neural Contract Element Extraction Revisited: Letters from Sesame Streetcited by 6
- 2022Governance of Autonomous Agents on the Web: Challenges and Opportunitiescited by 5
- 2022ConReader: Exploring Implicit Relations in Contracts for Contract Clause Extractioncited by 5
- 2021Hercule: Representing and Reasoning about Norms as a Foundation for Declarative Contracts over Blockchaincited by 2
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2025: 1; 2026: 1.
2 papers.