Criminal Court View Generation (CVG) is a fundamental task in legal artificial intelligence, aiming to automatically generate the "Court View" section of a legal case document. Generating court views is challenging due to the diversity and complexity of case facts, and directly generating from raw facts may limit performance. In this paper, we present ShiZhi, the first large language model (LLM) specifically designed for court view generation. We construct a Chinese Court View Generation dataset, CCVG, of more than 110K cases, each containing fact descriptions paired with corresponding court views. Based on this dataset, ShiZhi achieving 70.00 ROUGE-1 and 67.85 BLEU-1 on court view generation, as well as 86.48\% accuracy with 92.75\% macro F1 on charge prediction. Experimental results demonstrate that even a small LLM can generate reasonable and legally coherent court views when trained on high-quality domain-specific data. Our model and dataset are available at \href{https://github.com/ZhitianHou/ShiZhi}{https://github.com/ZhitianHou/ShiZhi}.

Legal Article Prediction (LAP) is a critical task in legal text classification, leveraging natural language processing (NLP) techniques to automatically predict relevant legal articles based on the fact descriptions of cases. As a foundational step in legal decision-making, LAP plays a pivotal role in determining subsequent judgments, such as charges and penalties. Despite its importance, existing methods face significant challenges in addressing the complexities of LAP. Supervised classification models (SCMs), such as CNN and BERT, struggle to fully capture intricate fact patterns due to their inherent limitations. Conversely, large language models (LLMs), while excelling in generative tasks, perform suboptimally in predictive scenarios due to the abstract and ID-based nature of legal articles. Furthermore, the diversity of legal systems across jurisdictions exacerbates the issue, as most approaches are tailored to specific countries and lack broader applicability. To address these limitations, we propose Uni-LAP, a universal framework for legal article prediction that integrates the strengths of SCMs and LLMs through tight collaboration. Specifically, in Uni-LAP, the SCM is enhanced with a novel Top-K loss function to generate accurate candidate articles, while the LLM employs syllogism-inspired reasoning to refine the final predictions. We evaluated Uni-LAP on datasets from multiple jurisdictions, and empirical results demonstrate that our approach consistently outperforms existing baselines, showcasing its effectiveness and generalizability.

Probation is a crucial institution in modern criminal law, embodying the principles of fairness and justice while contributing to the harmonious development of society. Despite its importance, the current Intelligent Judicial Assistant System (IJAS) lacks dedicated methods for probation prediction, and research on the underlying factors influencing probation eligibility remains limited. In addition, probation eligibility requires a comprehensive analysis of both criminal circumstances and remorse. Much of the existing research in IJAS relies primarily on data-driven methodologies, which often overlooks the legal logic underpinning judicial decision-making. To address this gap, we propose a novel approach that integrates legal logic into deep learning models for probation prediction, implemented in three distinct stages. First, we construct a specialized probation dataset that includes fact descriptions and probation legal elements (PLEs). Second, we design a distinct probation prediction model named the Multi-Task Dual-Theory Probation Prediction Model (MT-DT), which is grounded in the legal logic of probation and the \textit{Dual-Track Theory of Punishment}. Finally, our experiments on the probation dataset demonstrate that the MT-DT model outperforms baseline models, and an analysis of the underlying legal logic further validates the effectiveness of the proposed approach.

In legal practice, judges apply the trichotomous dogmatics of criminal law, sequentially assessing the elements of the offense, unlawfulness, and culpability to determine whether an individual's conduct constitutes a crime. Although current legal large language models (LLMs) show promising accuracy in judgment prediction, they lack trichotomous reasoning capabilities due to the absence of an appropriate benchmark dataset, preventing them from predicting innocent outcomes. As a result, every input is automatically assigned a charge, limiting their practical utility in legal contexts. To bridge this gap, we introduce LJPIV, the first benchmark dataset for Legal Judgment Prediction with Innocent Verdicts. Adhering to the trichotomous dogmatics, we extend three widely-used legal datasets through LLM-based augmentation and manual verification. Our experiments with state-of-the-art legal LLMs and novel strategies that integrate trichotomous reasoning into zero-shot prompting and fine-tuning reveal: (1) current legal LLMs have significant room for improvement, with even the best models achieving an F1 score of less than 0.3 on LJPIV; and (2) our strategies notably enhance both in-domain and cross-domain judgment prediction accuracy, especially for cases resulting in an innocent verdict.

Large Language Models (LLMs) could struggle to fully understand legal theories and perform complex legal reasoning tasks. In this study, we introduce a challenging task (confusing charge prediction) to better evaluate LLMs' understanding of legal theories and reasoning capabilities. We also propose a novel framework: Multi-Agent framework for improving complex Legal Reasoning capability (MALR). MALR employs non-parametric learning, encouraging LLMs to automatically decompose complex legal tasks and mimic human learning process to extract insights from legal rules, helping LLMs better understand legal theories and enhance their legal reasoning abilities. Extensive experiments on multiple real-world datasets demonstrate that the proposed framework effectively addresses complex reasoning issues in practical scenarios, paving the way for more reliable applications in the legal domain.

Legal Judgment Prediction (LJP) aims to automatically predict a law case's judgment results based on the text description of its facts. In practice, the confusing law articles (or charges) problem frequently occurs, reflecting that the law cases applicable to similar articles (or charges) tend to be misjudged. Although some recent works based on prior knowledge solve this issue well, they ignore that confusion also occurs between law articles with a high posterior semantic similarity due to the data imbalance problem instead of only between the prior highly similar ones, which is this work's further finding. This paper proposes an end-to-end model named \textit{D-LADAN} to solve the above challenges. On the one hand, D-LADAN constructs a graph among law articles based on their text definition and proposes a graph distillation operation (GDO) to distinguish the ones with a high prior semantic similarity. On the other hand, D-LADAN presents a novel momentum-updated memory mechanism to dynamically sense the posterior similarity between law articles (or charges) and a weighted GDO to adaptively capture the distinctions for revising the inductive bias caused by the data imbalance problem. We perform extensive experiments to demonstrate that D-LADAN significantly outperforms state-of-the-art methods in accuracy and robustness.

The integration of generative Large Language Models (LLMs) into various applications, including the legal domain, has been accelerated by their expansive and versatile nature. However, when facing a legal case, users without a legal background often struggle to formulate professional queries and may inadvertently overlook critical legal factors when presenting their case narrative to LLMs. To address this issue, we propose the Diagnostic Legal Large Language Model (D3LM), which utilizes adaptive lawyer-like diagnostic questions to collect additional case information and then provides high-quality feedback. D3LM incorporates an innovative graph-based Positive-Unlabeled Reinforcement Learning (PURL) algorithm, enabling the generation of critical questions and enhancing user-LLM interactions. Moreover, an integrated LLM-based stopping criterion facilitates precise Court Views Generation (CVG). Our research also introduces a new English-language CVG dataset based on the US case law database, enriching the realm of LLM research and deployment with a vital dimension. D3LM surpasses classical LLMs by delivering outstanding performance and a remarkable user experience in the legal domain.

Legal Judgment Prediction (LJP) is a judicial assistance system that recommends the legal components such as applicable statues, prison term and penalty term by analyzing the given input case document. Indian legal system is in the need of technical assistance such as artificial intelligence to solve the crores of pending cases in various courts for years and its being increased day to day. Most of the existing Indian models did not adequately concentrate on the semantics embedded in the fact description (FD) that impacts the decision. The proposed semantic extraction based LJP (SLJP) model provides the advantages of pretrained transformers for complex unstructured legal case document understanding and to generate embeddings. The model draws the in-depth semantics of the given FD at multiple levels i.e., chunk and case document level by following the divide and conquer approach. It creates the concise view of the given fact description using the extracted semantics as per the original court case document structure and predicts judgment using attention mechanism. We tested the model performance on two available Indian datasets Indian Legal Documents corpus (ILDC) and Indian Legal Statue Identification (ILSI) and got promising results. Also shown the highest performance and less performance degradation for increased epochs than base models on ILDC dataset.

Multiple defendants in a criminal fact description generally exhibit complex interactions, and cannot be well handled by existing Legal Judgment Prediction (LJP) methods which focus on predicting judgment results (e.g., law articles, charges, and terms of penalty) for single-defendant cases. To address this problem, we propose the task of multi-defendant LJP, which aims to automatically predict the judgment results for each defendant of multi-defendant cases. Two challenges arise with the task of multi-defendant LJP: (1) indistinguishable judgment results among various defendants; and (2) the lack of a real-world dataset for training and evaluation. To tackle the first challenge, we formalize the multi-defendant judgment process as hierarchical reasoning chains and introduce a multi-defendant LJP method, named Hierarchical Reasoning Network (HRN), which follows the hierarchical reasoning chains to determine criminal relationships, sentencing circumstances, law articles, charges, and terms of penalty for each defendant. To tackle the second challenge, we collect a real-world multi-defendant LJP dataset, namely MultiLJP, to accelerate the relevant research in the future. Extensive experiments on MultiLJP verify the effectiveness of our proposed HRN.

Thematic analysis and other variants of inductive coding are widely used qualitative analytic methods within empirical legal studies (ELS). We propose a novel framework facilitating effective collaboration of a legal expert with a large language model (LLM) for generating initial codes (phase 2 of thematic analysis), searching for themes (phase 3), and classifying the data in terms of the themes (to kick-start phase 4). We employed the framework for an analysis of a dataset (n = 785) of facts descriptions from criminal court opinions regarding thefts. The goal of the analysis was to discover classes of typical thefts. Our results show that the LLM, namely OpenAI's GPT-4, generated reasonable initial codes, and it was capable of improving the quality of the codes based on expert feedback. They also suggest that the model performed well in zero-shot classification of facts descriptions in terms of the themes. Finally, the themes autonomously discovered by the LLM appear to map fairly well to the themes arrived at by legal experts. These findings can be leveraged by legal researchers to guide their decisions in integrating LLMs into their thematic analyses, as well as other inductive coding projects.