What to Read in a Contract? Party-Specific Summarization of Legal Obligations, Entitlements, and Prohibitions

1Citations
Citations of this article
16Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

Reviewing and comprehending key obligations, entitlements, and prohibitions in legal contracts can be a tedious task due to their length and domain-specificity. Furthermore, the key rights and duties requiring review vary for each contracting party. In this work, we propose a new task of party-specific extractive summarization for legal contracts to facilitate faster reviewing and improved comprehension of rights and duties. To facilitate this, we curate a dataset comprising of party-specific pairwise importance comparisons annotated by legal experts, covering ∼293K sentence pairs that include obligations, entitlements, and prohibitions extracted from lease agreements. Using this dataset, we train a pairwise importance ranker and propose a pipeline-based extractive summarization system that generates a party-specific contract summary. We establish the need for incorporating domain-specific notion of importance during summarization by comparing our system against various baselines using both automatic and human evaluation methods.

References Powered by Scopus

Coefficient alpha and the internal structure of tests

29407Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

LexRank: Graph-based lexical centrality as salience in text summarization

2437Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

The theory of the estimation of test reliability

1157Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Sancheti, A., Garimella, A., Srinivasan, B. V., & Rudinger, R. (2023). What to Read in a Contract? Party-Specific Summarization of Legal Obligations, Entitlements, and Prohibitions. In EMNLP 2023 - 2023 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing, Proceedings (pp. 14708–14725). Association for Computational Linguistics (ACL). https://doi.org/10.18653/v1/2023.emnlp-main.909

Readers' Seniority

Tooltip

PhD / Post grad / Masters / Doc 6

75%

Lecturer / Post doc 1

13%

Researcher 1

13%

Readers' Discipline

Tooltip

Computer Science 9

90%

Medicine and Dentistry 1

10%

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free