# Patent-CR: A Dataset for Patent Claim Revision

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2412.02549 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2412.02549/

## Key facts

- Cited by 4 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Builds on 22 of its 51 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 3 Dec 2024.

## Builds on (most cited first, 22 of 22)

- [BERT: Pre-training of Deep Bidirectional Transformers for Language Understanding](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1810.04805/) (2018)
- [Training language models to follow instructions with human feedback](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2203.02155/) (2022)
- [The Llama 3 Herd of Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2407.21783/) (2024)
- [LoRA: Low-Rank Adaptation of Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2106.09685/) (2021)
- [Scaling Instruction-Finetuned Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2210.11416/) (2022)
- [G-Eval: NLG Evaluation using GPT-4 with Better Human Alignment](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2303.16634/) (2023)
- [The Flan Collection: Designing Data and Methods for Effective Instruction Tuning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2301.13688/) (2023)
- [The Benefit of Multitask Representation Learning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1505.06279/) (2015)
- [SaulLM-7B: A pioneering Large Language Model for Law](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2403.03883/) (2024)
- [Is ChatGPT a Highly Fluent Grammatical Error Correction System? A Comprehensive Evaluation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2304.01746/) (2023)
- [CoEdIT: Text Editing by Task-Specific Instruction Tuning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.09857/) (2023)
- [Understanding Iterative Revision from Human-Written Text](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2203.03802/) (2022)
- [Patent Claim Generation by Fine-Tuning OpenAI GPT-2](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1907.02052/) (2019)
- [Text Editing by Command](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2010.12826/) (2020)
- [DiscoFuse: A Large-Scale Dataset for Discourse-Based Sentence Fusion](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1902.10526/) (2019)
- [Novelty Controlled Paraphrase Generation with Retrieval Augmented Conditional Prompt Tuning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2202.00535/) (2022)
- [Improving Iterative Text Revision by Learning Where to Edit from Other Revision Tasks](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2212.01350/) (2022)
- [Natural Language Processing in the Patent Domain: A Survey](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2403.04105/) (2024)
- [Can Large Language Models Generate High-quality Patent Claims?](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2406.19465/) (2024)
- [CASIMIR: A Corpus of Scientific Articles enhanced with Multiple Author-Integrated Revisions](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2403.00241/) (2024)
- [PatFig: Generating Short and Long Captions for Patent Figures](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2309.08379/) (2023)
- [NewsEdits: A Dataset of Revision Histories for News Articles (Technical Report: Data Processing)](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2104.09647/) (2021)

## Built on by (most cited first, 4 of 4)

- [PILOT-Bench: A Benchmark for Legal Reasoning in the Patent Domain with IRAC-Aligned Classification Tasks](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2601.04758/) (2026)
- [Can Large Language Models Understand As Well As Apply Patent Regulations to Pass a Hands-On Patent Attorney Test?](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2507.10576/) (2025)
- [PatRe: A Full-Stage Office Action and Rebuttal Generation Benchmark for Patent Examination](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2605.03571/) (2026)
- [Grounded Revision vs. Prior Injection: Probing Retrieval-Augmented Patent Claim Amendment](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2609.36550/) (2026)

## Abstract (arXiv)

This paper presents Patent-CR, the first dataset created for the patent claim revision task in English. It includes both initial patent applications rejected by patent examiners and the final granted versions. Unlike normal text revision tasks that predominantly focus on enhancing sentence quality, such as grammar correction and coherence improvement, patent claim revision aims at ensuring the claims meet stringent legal criteria. These criteria are beyond novelty and inventiveness, including clarity of scope, technical accuracy, language precision, and legal robustness. We assess various large language models (LLMs) through professional human evaluation, including general LLMs with different sizes and architectures, text revision models, and domain-specific models. Our results indicate that LLMs often bring ineffective edits that deviate from the target revisions. In addition, domain-specific models and the method of fine-tuning show promising results. Notably, GPT-4 outperforms other tested LLMs, but further revisions are still necessary to reach the examination standard. Furthermore, we demonstrate the inconsistency between automated and human evaluation results, suggesting that GPT-4-based automated evaluation has the highest correlation with human judgment. This dataset, along with our preliminary empirical research, offers invaluable insights for further exploration in patent claim revision.