跳到正文
研踪PaperTrail

论文库

检索计算机领域论文,按研究方向、作者或关键词筛选。

部分采集异常
正在读取账号与研究记录…

全站更新概况

+0新增论文
+0其中 AI 相关
+0已有论文修订
+100新增 AI 导读

arXiv 最近完成扫描:2026-11-15 21:08 · 全站最近入库:2026-11-14 15:09各信源进度 →

统计口径与数据新鲜度

统计 2026-11-14 21:40 — 2026-11-15 21:40(北京时间) · 点击数字查看对应简报;AI 相关包含在新增论文内。

最近完成检查:2026-11-15 21:08最近发现新增版本:2026-11-14 15:09库内论文最新更新时间:2026-11-13 02:59

每分钟刷新已保存的数据。空检查不代表采集异常;新收录可能包含历史论文。AI 导读按新增版本计数。

23,348 已收录论文19,580 AI 相关6,729 有修订112 HF 社区发现

浏览论文库

时间范围跟随排序:版本更新、本站收录或首次发表。最新收录可能包含历史论文。部分信源异常,查看状态 →

找到 1 篇论文 · 按版本更新时间排序上轮扫描起点 2026-11-15 21:07(北京时间)
新论文 · v1arXiv:2611.03051

Unlocking Criminal Court Decisions: Flexible Information Extraction for Empirical Legal Research

Tomáš Knap, Ivana Kvapilíková, Jan Černý, Klára Bendová, Jaromír Šavelka, Vojtěch Pour, Jakub Drápal

原文摘要

Criminal verdicts contain descriptions of criminal behavior that can support quantitative legal research, but structuring them requires attributes and extraction rules that cannot always be fully specified in advance. We present an LLM-based pipeline that builds a structured dataset through attribute exploration, text span extraction, and value normalization, guided by annotation instructions that legal experts can refine. We evaluate it on two traffic offenses: driving under the influence (DUI) and driving despite a ban (DDB). For DUI, revising the instructions was associated with higher extraction accuracy (from 52% to 70% of correctly extracted values) and higher agreement between human annotators. Repeated runs of the same model agreed with each other more than with the gold annotations, showing that consistent output is not necessarily correct, while disagreement between annotators and between models helped reveal unclear instructions. For DDB, where the instructions defined fixed categories and output formats, agreement was high for most attributes.

cs.CL · cs.AI