Fairness is an important objective throughout society. From the distribution of limited goods such as education, over hiring and payment, to taxes, legislation, and jurisprudence. Due to the increasing importance of machine learning approaches in all areas of daily life including those related to health, security, and equity, an increasing amount of research focuses on fair machine learning. In this work, we focus on the fairness of partition- and prototype-based models. The contribution of this work is twofold: 1) we develop a general framework for fair machine learning of partition-based models that does not depend on a specific fairness definition, and 2) we derive a fair version of learning vector quantization (LVQ) as a specific instantiation. We compare the resulting algorithm against other algorithms from the literature on theoretical and real-world data showing its practical relevance.
Landmark judgments are of prime importance in the Common Law System because of their exceptional jurisprudence and frequent references in other judgments. In this work, we leverage contextual references available in citing judgments to create an extractive summary of the target judgment. We evaluate the proposed algorithm on two datasets curated from the judgments of Indian Courts and find the results promising.
We demonstrate that large language models can produce reasonable numerical ratings of the logical consistency of claims. We also outline a mathematical approach based on sheaf theory for lifting such ratings to hypertexts such as laws, jurisprudence, and social media and evaluating their consistency globally. This approach is a promising avenue to increasing consistency in and of government, as well as to combating mis- and disinformation and related ills.
Generative language models (LMs) are increasingly used for document class-prediction tasks and promise enormous improvements in cost and efficiency. Existing research often examines simple classification tasks, but the capability of LMs to classify on complex or specialized tasks is less well understood. We consider a highly complex task that is challenging even for humans: the classification of legal reasoning according to jurisprudential philosophy. Using a novel dataset of historical United States Supreme Court opinions annotated by a team of domain experts, we systematically test the performance of a variety of LMs. We find that generative models perform poorly when given instructions (i.e. prompts) equal to the instructions presented to human annotators through our codebook. Our strongest results derive from fine-tuning models on the annotated dataset; the best performing model is an in-domain model, LEGAL-BERT. We apply predictions from this fine-tuned model to study historical trends in jurisprudence, an exercise that both aligns with prominent qualitative historical accounts and points to areas of possible refinement in those accounts. Our findings generally sound a note of caution in the use of generative LMs on complex tasks without fine-tuning and point to the continued relevance of human annotation-intensive classification methods.
New Natural Langauge Process~(NLP) benchmarks are urgently needed to align with the rapid development of large language models (LLMs). We present Xiezhi, the most comprehensive evaluation suite designed to assess holistic domain knowledge. Xiezhi comprises multiple-choice questions across 516 diverse disciplines ranging from 13 different subjects with 249,587 questions and accompanied by Xiezhi-Specialty and Xiezhi-Interdiscipline, both with 15k questions. We conduct evaluation of the 47 cutting-edge LLMs on Xiezhi. Results indicate that LLMs exceed average performance of humans in science, engineering, agronomy, medicine, and art, but fall short in economics, jurisprudence, pedagogy, literature, history, and management. We anticipate Xiezhi will help analyze important strengths and shortcomings of LLMs, and the benchmark is released in~\url{https://github.com/MikeGu721/XiezhiBenchmark}.