The Limits of Annotation in Machine Learning a Documents Hohfeldian Legal Entities

15 November 2021, Version 1
This content is an early or alternative research output and has not been peer-reviewed by Cambridge University Press at the time of posting.

Abstract

Natural language processing (NLP) summarisers aim to capture the essential elements of a document. Yet, the ontological character of a summary can be domain specific. In legal analysis, the Hohfeldian matrix is used to summarise principle legal relations between agents, such as individuals and organisations. We test a limit of using machine learning (ML) to detect such agents. Based on training with our 2400 hand labelled annotations, an F1= 80.1 is found. Extrapolating this suggests that over one million annotations are required to capture all the agents mentioned in a document. This questions the feasibility of such an approach, one that is unable to be inclusive of all agents who are party to a legal relation. Such complete capture is an essential criteria of fair ML and accurate legal summaries. An alternative approach based on hypernymy is suggested.

Keywords

Hohfeld
Fair Machine Learning
Ontology
Contract Analysis
Legal Artificial Intelligence

Comments

Comments are not moderated before they are posted, but they can be removed by the site moderators if they are found to be in contravention of our Commenting and Discussion Policy [opens in a new tab] - please read this policy before you post. Comments should be used for scholarly discussion of the content in question. You can find more information about how to use the commenting feature here [opens in a new tab] .
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy [opens in a new tab] and Terms of Service [opens in a new tab] apply.