TempCourt: Evaluation of Temporal Taggers on a new Corpus of Court Decisions. Navas-Loro, M., Filtz, E., Doncel, V. R., Polleres, A., & Kirrane, S. Knowledge Engineering Review, 34:E24, Cambridge University Press, 2019. doi abstract bibtex The extraction and processing of temporal expressions in textual documents has been extensively studied in several domains, however for the legal domain it remains an open challenge. This is possibly due to the scarcity of corpora in the domain and the particularities found in legal document that are highlighted in this paper. Considering the pivotal role played by temporal information when it comes to analyzing legal cases, this paper presents TempCourt, a corpus of manually annotated temporal expressions in 30 judgments from the European Court of Human Rights, the European Court of Justice and the United States Supreme Court. The corpus contains two different temporal annotation sets that adhere to the TimeML standard, the first one capturing all temporal expressions and the second dedicated to temporal expressions that are relevant for the case under judgment (thus excluding dates of previous court decisions). The proposed gold standards are subsequently used to compare ten state-of-the-art cross-domain temporal taggers, and to identify not only the limitations of cross-domain temporal taggers but also limitations of the TimeML standard when applied to legal documents. Finally, the paper identifies the need for dedicated resources and the adaptation of existing tools, and specific annotation guidelines that can be adapted to different types of legal documents.
@article{nava-etal-TempCourtKER2019,
title = {{TempCourt}: Evaluation of Temporal Taggers on a new Corpus of Court Decisions},
abstract = {The extraction and processing of temporal expressions in textual documents has been extensively studied in several domains, however for the legal domain it remains an open challenge. This is possibly due to the scarcity of corpora in the domain and the particularities found in legal document that are highlighted in this paper. Considering the pivotal role played by temporal information when it comes to analyzing legal cases, this paper presents TempCourt, a corpus of manually annotated temporal expressions in 30 judgments from the European Court of Human Rights, the European Court of Justice and the United States Supreme Court. The corpus contains two different temporal annotation sets that adhere to the TimeML standard, the first one capturing all temporal expressions and the second dedicated to temporal expressions that are relevant for the case under judgment (thus excluding dates of previous court decisions). The proposed gold standards are subsequently used to compare ten state-of-the-art cross-domain temporal taggers, and to identify not only the limitations of cross-domain temporal taggers but also limitations of the TimeML standard when applied to legal documents. Finally, the paper identifies the need for dedicated resources and the adaptation of existing tools, and specific annotation guidelines that can be adapted to different types of legal documents.},
author = {Mar\'ia Navas-Loro and Erwin Filtz and V\'ictor Rodr\'iguez Doncel and Axel Polleres and Sabrina Kirrane},
year = 2019,
journal = {Knowledge Engineering Review},
publisher = {Cambridge University Press},
doi = {10.1017/S0269888919000195},
volume = 34,
pages = {E24},
Type = JOURNAL,
}
Downloads: 0
{"_id":"7Cnw3GDKhsK9EAsFF","bibbaseid":"navasloro-filtz-doncel-polleres-kirrane-tempcourtevaluationoftemporaltaggersonanewcorpusofcourtdecisions-2019","authorIDs":["545720922abc8e9f370000ae","5PFMiHGwfvbGBZwWF","5de7280d97054edf010000c3","5e02b1a419da8edf01000028","5e048450db7916df010000b1","5e06d565a0810cde0100009b","5e10e27445c12cde01000062","5e123345c196d3de01000074","5e14ba61e55ed8de01000072","5e189b4e779abfdf0100013f","5e216f7e5a651cdf010000eb","5e25b9fdf299d4de01000001","5e2d64605e7586df01000083","5e36e5e9b26a0fde0100005e","5e37d23b56571fde010000de","5e4ded1052c311f20100018e","5e51a3102793ecde010000e0","5e59a6b5ad6c7fde01000114","5e5d588ead47bcde01000072","5e60e857839e59df010000f1","A5AFuDAiNR4HEYiFD","BtzwZ6TFPsASbdqvo","DLdeXAmrbA4niYQzH","FyLDFGg993nDS2Spf","NCjPvWahWRjdP3ghB","XcyP3jptz7zE4ZLws","aiXjXMLP63k5WCt84","fTDcT5K3oSTcdxSBj","fbKNfWffDzdzubrER","haaAs2rQaQA7EaZva","nQX2P8WzFeKwcpLqd","nuWuyLnGu7YzMrn4d","pfENTBFWo85mRy3ik","rX6EShFR2rMFmQL2C","w6wHZukTjqqera7BR","woa42kCD35yCmdQTj","yPgvarsL7KAT9yfZd","yzkCNJMYNL8B3bni2","zDG3tj87ZfYXo7u9c"],"author_short":["Navas-Loro, M.","Filtz, E.","Doncel, V. R.","Polleres, A.","Kirrane, S."],"bibdata":{"bibtype":"article","type":"journal","title":"TempCourt: Evaluation of Temporal Taggers on a new Corpus of Court Decisions","abstract":"The extraction and processing of temporal expressions in textual documents has been extensively studied in several domains, however for the legal domain it remains an open challenge. This is possibly due to the scarcity of corpora in the domain and the particularities found in legal document that are highlighted in this paper. Considering the pivotal role played by temporal information when it comes to analyzing legal cases, this paper presents TempCourt, a corpus of manually annotated temporal expressions in 30 judgments from the European Court of Human Rights, the European Court of Justice and the United States Supreme Court. The corpus contains two different temporal annotation sets that adhere to the TimeML standard, the first one capturing all temporal expressions and the second dedicated to temporal expressions that are relevant for the case under judgment (thus excluding dates of previous court decisions). The proposed gold standards are subsequently used to compare ten state-of-the-art cross-domain temporal taggers, and to identify not only the limitations of cross-domain temporal taggers but also limitations of the TimeML standard when applied to legal documents. Finally, the paper identifies the need for dedicated resources and the adaptation of existing tools, and specific annotation guidelines that can be adapted to different types of legal documents.","author":[{"firstnames":["María"],"propositions":[],"lastnames":["Navas-Loro"],"suffixes":[]},{"firstnames":["Erwin"],"propositions":[],"lastnames":["Filtz"],"suffixes":[]},{"firstnames":["Víctor","Rodríguez"],"propositions":[],"lastnames":["Doncel"],"suffixes":[]},{"firstnames":["Axel"],"propositions":[],"lastnames":["Polleres"],"suffixes":[]},{"firstnames":["Sabrina"],"propositions":[],"lastnames":["Kirrane"],"suffixes":[]}],"year":"2019","journal":"Knowledge Engineering Review","publisher":"Cambridge University Press","doi":"10.1017/S0269888919000195","volume":"34","pages":"E24","bibtex":"@article{nava-etal-TempCourtKER2019,\n title = {{TempCourt}: Evaluation of Temporal Taggers on a new Corpus of Court Decisions},\n abstract = {The extraction and processing of temporal expressions in textual documents has been extensively studied in several domains, however for the legal domain it remains an open challenge. This is possibly due to the scarcity of corpora in the domain and the particularities found in legal document that are highlighted in this paper. Considering the pivotal role played by temporal information when it comes to analyzing legal cases, this paper presents TempCourt, a corpus of manually annotated temporal expressions in 30 judgments from the European Court of Human Rights, the European Court of Justice and the United States Supreme Court. The corpus contains two different temporal annotation sets that adhere to the TimeML standard, the first one capturing all temporal expressions and the second dedicated to temporal expressions that are relevant for the case under judgment (thus excluding dates of previous court decisions). The proposed gold standards are subsequently used to compare ten state-of-the-art cross-domain temporal taggers, and to identify not only the limitations of cross-domain temporal taggers but also limitations of the TimeML standard when applied to legal documents. Finally, the paper identifies the need for dedicated resources and the adaptation of existing tools, and specific annotation guidelines that can be adapted to different types of legal documents.},\n author = {Mar\\'ia Navas-Loro and Erwin Filtz and V\\'ictor Rodr\\'iguez Doncel and Axel Polleres and Sabrina Kirrane},\n year = 2019,\n journal = {Knowledge Engineering Review},\n publisher = {Cambridge University Press},\n doi = {10.1017/S0269888919000195},\n volume = 34,\n pages = {E24},\n Type = JOURNAL,\n} \n\n\n","author_short":["Navas-Loro, M.","Filtz, E.","Doncel, V. R.","Polleres, A.","Kirrane, S."],"key":"nava-etal-TempCourtKER2019","id":"nava-etal-TempCourtKER2019","bibbaseid":"navasloro-filtz-doncel-polleres-kirrane-tempcourtevaluationoftemporaltaggersonanewcorpusofcourtdecisions-2019","role":"author","urls":{},"metadata":{"authorlinks":{"polleres, a":"https://bibbase.org/show?bib=www.polleres.net%2Fmypublications.bib"}},"downloads":0,"html":""},"bibtype":"article","biburl":"www.polleres.net/mypublications.bib","creationDate":"2019-08-10T15:26:08.183Z","downloads":0,"keywords":[],"search_terms":["tempcourt","evaluation","temporal","taggers","new","corpus","court","decisions","navas-loro","filtz","doncel","polleres","kirrane"],"title":"TempCourt: Evaluation of Temporal Taggers on a new Corpus of Court Decisions","year":2019,"dataSources":["cBfwyqsLFQQMc4Fss","gixxkiKt6rtWGoKSh","QfLT6siHZuHw9MqvK"]}