This paper presents the ReXCL tool, which automates the extraction and classification processes in requirements engineering, enhancing the software development life-cycle. The tool features two main modules: Extraction, which processes raw requirement documents into a predefined schema using heuristics and predictive modeling, and Classification, which assigns class labels to requirements using adaptive fine-tuning of encoder-based models. The final output can be exported to external requirement engineering tools. Performance evaluations indicate that ReXCL significantly improves efficiency and accuracy in managing requirements, marking a novel approach to automating the schematization of semi-structured requirement documents.

Automatic summarization of legal case documents is an important and practical challenge. Apart from many domain-independent text summarization algorithms that can be used for this purpose, several algorithms have been developed specifically for summarizing legal case documents. However, most of the existing algorithms do not systematically incorporate domain knowledge that specifies what information should ideally be present in a legal case document summary. To address this gap, we propose an unsupervised summarization algorithm DELSumm which is designed to systematically incorporate guidelines from legal experts into an optimization setup. We conduct detailed experiments over case documents from the Indian Supreme Court. The experiments show that our proposed unsupervised method outperforms several strong baselines in terms of ROUGE scores, including both general summarization algorithms and legal-specific ones. In fact, though our proposed algorithm is unsupervised, it outperforms several supervised summarization models that are trained over thousands of document-summary pairs.

Automatic summarization of legal case documents is an important and challenging problem, where algorithms attempt to generate summaries that match well with expert-generated summaries. This work takes the first step in analyzing expert-generated summaries and algorithmic summaries of legal case documents. We try to uncover how law experts write summaries for a legal document, how various generic as well as domain-specific extractive algorithms generate summaries, and how the expert summaries vary from the algorithmic summaries. We also analyze which important sentences of a legal case document are missed by most algorithms while generating summaries, in terms of the rhetorical roles of the sentences and the positions of the sentences in the legal document.

Legal case summarization is an important problem, and several domain-specific summarization algorithms have been applied for this task. These algorithms generally use domain-specific legal dictionaries to estimate the importance of sentences. However, none of the popular summarization algorithms use document-specific catchphrases, which provide a unique amalgamation of domain-specific and document-specific information. In this work, we assess the performance of two legal document summarization algorithms, when two different types of catchphrases are incorporated in the summarization process. Our experiments confirm that both the summarization algorithms show improvement across all performance metrics, with the incorporation of document-specific catchphrases.

With the advancement of the Web and large number of legal documents being made available digitally, legal practitioners are now facing new challenges. It is now intractable for them to manually find relevant information (prior cases, related statutes, etc.) that would assist an ongoing case. From our discussions with law experts from India (faculty members from the Rajiv Gandhi School of Intellectual Property Law, India) as well as other countries like UK (Swansea University) and USA (Thomson Reuters), we understand that it is important to develop assistive tools for several tasks in the legal domain, e.g., identifying relevant documents, summarizing legal text, and so on. Though there exist legal information systems (e.g., Thomson Reuters WestLaw, LexisNexis), often law practitioners are not satisfied with the search results/summaries available on such systems. Developing assistive tools in the legal domain needs addressing certain research challenges. We outline the challenges and some initial progress made on each of them.

Computing similarity between two legal case documents is a challenging task, for which text-based and network-based measures have been proposed in literature. All prior network-based similarity methods considered a precedent citation network among case documents only (PCNet). However, this approach misses an important source of legal knowledge - the hierarchy of legal statutes that are applicable in a given legal jurisdiction (e.g., country). We propose to augment the PCNet with the hierarchy of legal statutes, to form a heterogeneous network Hier-SPCNet. Experiments over a set of Indian Supreme Court case documents show that Hier-SPCNet enables significantly better document similarity estimation, as compared to existing approaches using PCNet. We also show that the proposed network-based method can complement text-based measures for better estimation of legal document similarity.

Automatically understanding the rhetorical roles of sentences in a legal case judgement is an important problem to solve, since it can help in several downstream tasks like summarization of legal judgments, legal search, and so on. The task is challenging since legal case documents are usually not well-structured, and these rhetorical roles may be subjective (as evident from variation of opinions between legal experts). In this paper, we address this task for judgments from the Supreme Court of India. We label sentences in 50 documents using multiple human annotators, and perform an extensive analysis of the human-assigned labels. We also attempt automatic identification of the rhetorical roles of sentences. While prior approaches towards this task used Conditional Random Fields over manually handcrafted features, we explore the use of deep neural models which do not require hand-crafting of features. Experiments show that neural models perform much better in this task than baseline methods which use handcrafted features.

We investigate the use of word embeddings for query translation to improve precision in cross-language information retrieval (CLIR). Word vectors represent words in a distributional space such that syntactically or semantically similar words are close to each other in this space. Multilingual word embeddings are constructed in such a way that similar words across languages have similar vector representations. We explore the effective use of bilingual and multilingual word embeddings learned from comparable corpora of Indic languages to the task of CLIR. We propose a clustering method based on the multilingual word vectors to group similar words across languages. For this we construct a graph with words from multiple languages as nodes and with edges connecting words with similar vectors. We use the Louvain method for community detection to find communities in this graph. We show that choosing target language words as query translations from the clusters or communities containing the query terms helps in improving CLIR. We also find that better-quality query translations are obtained when words from more languages are used to do the clustering even when the additional languages are neither the source nor the target languages. This is probably because having more similar words across multiple languages helps define well-defined dense subclusters that help us obtain precise query translations. In this article, we demonstrate the use of multilingual word embeddings and word clusters for CLIR involving Indic languages. We also make available a tool for obtaining related words and the visualizations of the multilingual word vectors for English, Hindi, Bengali, Marathi, Gujarati, and Tamil.