As an important component of intelligent legal systems, legal case retrieval plays a critical role in ensuring judicial justice and fairness. However, the development of legal case retrieval technologies in the Chinese legal system is restricted by three problems in existing datasets: limited data size, narrow definitions of legal relevance, and naive candidate pooling strategies used in data sampling.

Legal case retrieval has received increasing attention in recent years. However, compared to ad hoc retrieval tasks, legal case retrieval has its unique challenges. First, case documents are rather lengthy and contain complex legal structures. Therefore, it is difficult for most existing dense retrieval models to encode an entire document and capture its inherent complex structure information. Most existing methods simply truncate part of the document content to meet the input length limit of PLMs, which will lead to information loss. Additionally, the definition of relevance in the legal domain differs from that in the general domain. Previous semantic-based or lexical-based methods fail to provide a comprehensive understanding of the relevance of legal cases. In this article, we propose a Structured Legal case Retrieval (SLR) framework, which incorporates internal and external structural information to address the above two challenges. Specifically, to avoid the truncation of long legal documents, the internal structural information, which is the organization pattern of legal documents, can be utilized to split a case document into segments. By dividing the document-level semantic matching task into segment-level subtasks, SLR can separately process segments using different methods based on the characteristic of each segment. In this way, the key elements of a case document can be highlighted without losing other content information. Second, toward a better understanding of relevance in the legal domain, we investigate the connections between criminal charges appearing in large-scale case corpus to generate a chargewise relation graph. Then, the similarity between criminal charges can be pre-computed as the external structural information to enhance the recognition of relevant cases. Finally, a learning-to-rank algorithm integrates the features collected from internal and external structures to output the final retrieval results. Experimental results on public legal case retrieval benchmarks demonstrate the superior effectiveness of SLR over existing state-of-the-art baselines, including traditional bag-of-words and neural-based methods. Furthermore, we conduct a case study to visualize how the proposed model focuses on key elements and improves retrieval performance.

Legal case retrieval is a special Information Retrieval (IR) task focusing on legal case documents. Depending on the downstream tasks of the retrieved case documents, users’ information needs in legal case retrieval could be significantly different from those in Web search and traditional ad hoc retrieval tasks. While there are several studies that retrieve legal cases based on text similarity, the underlying search intents of legal retrieval users, as shown in this article, are more complicated than that yet mostly unexplored. To this end, we present a novel hierarchical intent taxonomy of legal case retrieval. It consists of five intent types categorized by three criteria, i.e., search for Particular Case(s) , Characterization , Penalty , Procedure , and Interest . The taxonomy was constructed transparently and evaluated extensively through interviews, editorial user studies, and query log analysis. Through a laboratory user study, we reveal significant differences in user behavior and satisfaction under different search intents in legal case retrieval. Furthermore, we apply the proposed taxonomy to various downstream legal retrieval tasks, e.g., result ranking and satisfaction prediction, and demonstrate its effectiveness. Our work provides important insights into the understanding of user intents in legal case retrieval and potentially leads to better retrieval techniques in the legal domain, such as intent-aware ranking strategies and evaluation methodologies.

Legal case retrieval, which aims to retrieve relevant cases given a query case, has drawn increasing research attention in recent years. While much research has worked on developing automatic retrieval models, how to characterize relevance in this specialized information retrieval (IR) task is still an open question. Towards an in-depth understanding of relevance judgments, we conduct a laboratory user study that involves 72 participants of different domain expertise. In the user study, we collect the relevance score along with detailed explanations for the relevance judgment and various measures of the judgment process. From the collected data, we observe that both the subjective (e.g., domain expertise) and objective (e.g., query/case property) factors influence the relevance judgment process. By investigating the collected user explanations, we identify task-specific patterns of user attention distribution and re-think the criteria for relevance judgments. Moreover, we investigate the similarity in attention distribution between models and users. Further, we propose a two-stage framework that utilizes user attention to improve relevance estimation for legal case retrieval. Our study sheds light on understanding relevance judgments in legal case retrieval and provides implications for improving the design of corresponding retrieval systems.

The truncation of ranking lists predicted by retrieval models is vital to ensure users' search experience. Particularly, in specific vertical domains where documents are usually complicated and extensive (e.g., legal cases), the cost of browsing results is much higher than traditional IR tasks (e.g., Web search) and setting a reasonable cut-off position is quite necessary. While it is straightforward to apply existing result list truncation approaches to legal case retrieval, the effectiveness of these methods is limited because they only focus on simple document statistics and usually fail to capture the context information of documents in the ranking list. These existing efforts also treat result list truncation as an isolated task instead of a component in the entire ranking process, limiting the usage of truncation in practical systems. To tackle these limitations, we propose LeCut, a ranking list truncation model for legal case retrieval. LeCut utilizes contextual features of the retrieval task to capture the semantic-level similarity between documents and decides the best cut-off position with attention mechanisms. We further propose a Joint Optimization of Truncation and Reranking (JOTR) framework based on LeCut to improve the performance of truncation and retrieval tasks simultaneously. Comparison against competitive baselines on public benchmark datasets demonstrates the effectiveness of LeCut and JOTR. A case study is conducted to visualize the cut-off positions of LeCut and the process of how JOTR improves both retrieval and truncation tasks.

In recent years, legal case retrieval has attracted much attention in the IR research community. It aims to retrieve supporting cases for a given query case and contributes to better legal systems. While using a legal case retrieval system, users always feel difficult to construct accurate queries to express their information need, especially when they lack sufficient domain knowledge. Since conversational search has been widely recognized to fulfill users' complex and exploratory information need, we investigate whether conversational search paradigm can be adopted to improve users' legal case retrieval experience. We design a laboratory-based study to collect users' interaction behaviors and explicit feedback signals while using traditional and agent-mediated conversational legal case retrieval systems. Based on the collected data, we compare search behavior and outcome of these two different kinds of interaction paradigms. Compared with the traditional one, experimental results show that users can achieve better retrieval performance with the conversational case retrieval system. Moreover, conversational system can also save users' efforts in formulating queries and examining results.

Legal case retrieval is of vital importance for ensuring justice in different kinds of law systems and has recently received increasing attention in information retrieval (IR) research. However, the relevance judgment criteria of previous retrieval datasets are either not applicable to non-cited relationship cases or not instructive enough for future datasets to follow. Besides, most existing benchmark datasets do not focus on the selection of queries. In this paper, we construct the Chinese Legal Case Retrieval Dataset (LeCaRD), which contains 107 query cases and over 43,000 candidate cases. Queries and results are adopted from criminal cases published by the Supreme People's Court of China. In particular, to address the difficulty in relevance definition, we propose a series of relevance judgment criteria designed by our legal team and corresponding candidate case annotations are conducted by legal experts. Also, we develop a novel query sampling strategy that takes both query difficulty and diversity into consideration. For dataset evaluation, we implemented several existing retrieval models on LeCaRD as baselines. The dataset is now available to the public together with the complete data processing details.

Legal case retrieval is a specialized IR task aiming to retrieve supporting cases given a query case. While recent research efforts are committed to improving the automatic retrieval models' performances, little attention has been paid to the practical search interactions between users and systems in this task. Therefore, we focus on investigating user behavior in the scenario of legal case retrieval. Specifically, we conducted a laboratory user study that involved 45 participants majoring in law to collect users' rich interactions and relevance assessments. With the collected data, we first analyzed the characteristics of the search process in legal case retrieval practice. We observed significant differences between legal case retrieval and general web search in various search behavior. These differences highlight the necessity of in-depth investigating user behavior in legal case retrieval and re-thinking the application of related mechanisms developed based on the user models in Web search. Then we investigated factors that would influence search behavior from different perspectives, including task difficulty and domain expertise. Finally, we shed light on implicit feedback in legal case retrieval and designed a predictive model for relevance based on user behavior. Our work provides a better understanding of user interactions in the legal case retrieval process, which can benefit the design of the corresponding retrieval systems to support legal practitioners.

Legal case retrieval is a specialized IR task that involves retrieving supporting cases given a query case. Compared with traditional ad-hoc text retrieval, the legal case retrieval task is more challenging since the query case is much longer and more complex than common keyword queries. Besides that, the definition of relevance between a query case and a supporting case is beyond general topical relevance and it is therefore difficult to construct a large-scale case retrieval dataset, especially one with accurate relevance judgments. To address these challenges, we propose BERT-PLI, a novel model that utilizes BERT to capture the semantic relationships at the paragraph-level and then infers the relevance between two cases by aggregating paragraph-level interactions. We fine-tune the BERT model with a relatively small-scale case law entailment dataset to adapt it to the legal scenario and employ a cascade framework to reduce the computational cost. We conduct extensive experiments on the benchmark of the relevant case retrieval task in COLIEE 2019. Experimental results demonstrate that our proposed method outperforms existing solutions.

Legal case retrieval is a specialized IR task that aims to retrieve supporting precedents given a query case. Different from the traditional ad-hoc text retrieval, the query case is much longer and complex than common keyword queries. Legal relevance between a supporting case and a query case is defined beyond general topical relevance and it requires legal knowledge to make relevance judgment. It is thus difficult to collect a large-scale case retrieval dataset along with accurate relevance judgments. Therefore, legal case retrieval is more challenging. As a primary attempt, we propose to develop a retrieval model to tackle these challenges based on the benchmarks in this task. Moreover, we plan to investigate the practical interactions between legal practitioners and retrieval systems and further apply the user behavior models to improve system performance. Beyond the binary labels, we would like to take a deeper look at the decision process of relevance judgment in legal practice, which will benefit related tasks such as relevance estimation and result ranking.

Compared to general web search, image search engines present results in a significantly different way, which leads to changes in user behavior patterns, and thus creates challenges for the existing evaluation mechanisms. In this paper, we pay attention to the context factor in the image search scenario. On the basis of a mean-variance analysis, we investigate the effects of context and find that evaluation metrics align with user satisfaction better when the returned image results have high variance. Furthermore, assuming that the image results a user has examined might affect her following judgments, we propose the Context-Aware Gain (CAG), a novel evaluation metric that incorporates the contextual effects within the well-known gain-discount framework. Our experiment results show that, with a proper combination of discount functions, the proposed context-aware evaluation metric can significantly improve the performances of offline metrics for image search evaluation, considering user satisfaction as the golden standard.

User behaviors are widely used as implicit feedbacks of user preferences in personalized information systems. In previous works and online applications, the user's click signals are used as positive feedback for ranking, recommendation, evaluation, etc. However, when users click on a piece of low-quality news, they are more likely to have negative experiences and different reading behaviors. Hence, the ignorance of the quality effects of news may lead to the misinterpretation of user behaviors as well as consequence studies. To address these issues, we conducted an in-depth user study in mobile news streaming scenario to investigate whether and how the quality of news may affect user preferences and user behaviors. Firstly, we verify that quality does affect user preferences, and low-quality news results in a lower preference. We further find that this effect varies with both interaction phases and user's interest in the topic of the news. Secondly, we inspect how users interact with low-quality news. Surprisingly, we find that users are more likely to click on low-quality news because of its high title persuasion. Moreover, users will read less and slower with fewer revisits and examinations while reading the low-quality news.

Compared to general web search engines, web image search engines display results in a different way. In web image search, results are typically placed in a grid-based manner rather than a sequential result list. In this scenario, users can view results not only in a vertical direction but also in a horizontal direction. Moreover, pagination is usually not (explicitly) supported on image search search engine result pages (SERPs), and users can view results by scrolling down without having to click a “next page” button. These differences lead to different interaction mechanisms and user behavior patterns, which, in turn, create challenges to evaluation metrics that have originally been developed for general web search. While considerable effort has been invested in developing evaluation metrics for general web search, there has been relatively little effort to construct grid-based evaluation metrics.

Image search engines differ significantly from general web search engines in the way of presenting search results. The difference leads to different interaction and examination behavior patterns, and therefore requires changes in evaluation methodologies. However, evaluation of image search still utilizes the methods for general web search. In particular, offline metrics are calculated based on coarse-fine topical relevance judgments with the assumption that users examine results in a sequential manner. In this article, we investigate annotation methods via crowdsourcing for image search evaluation based on a lab-based user study. Using user satisfaction as the golden standard, we make several interesting findings. First, instead of item-based annotation, annotating relevance in a row-based way is more efficient without hurting performance. Second, besides topical relevance, image quality plays a crucial role when evaluating the image search results, and the importance of image quality changes with search intent. Third, compared to traditional four-level scales, the fine-grain annotation method outperforms significantly. To our best knowledge, our work is the first to systematically study how diverse factors in data annotation impact image search evaluation. Our results suggest different strategies for exploiting the crowdsourcing to get data annotated under different conditions.

Comparing to general Web search engines, image search engines present search results differently, with two-dimensional visual image panel for users to scroll and browse quickly. These differences in result presentation can significantly impact the way that users interact with search engines, and therefore affect existing methods of search evaluation. Although different evaluation metrics have been thoroughly studied in the general Web search environment, how those offline and online metrics reflect user satisfaction in the context of image search is an open question. To shed light on this, we conduct a laboratory user study that collects both explicit user satisfaction feedbacks as well as user behavior signals such as clicks. Based on the combination of both externally assessed topical relevance and image quality judgments, offline image search metrics can be better correlated with user satisfaction than merely using topical relevance. We also demonstrate that existing offline Web search metrics can be adapted to evaluate on a two-dimensional presentation for image search. With respect to online metrics, we find that those based on image click information significantly outperform offline metrics. To our knowledge, our work is the first to thoroughly establish the relationship between different measures and user satisfaction in image search.