Sentiment analysis of Canadian maritime case law: a sentiment case law and deep learning approach
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Historical information in the Canadian Maritime Judiciary increases with time because of the need to archive data to be utilized in case references and for later application when determining verdicts for similar cases. However, such data are typically stored in multiple systems, making its reachability technical. Utilizing technologies like deep learning and sentiment analysis provides chances to facilitate faster access to court records. Such practice enhances impartial verdicts, minimizing workloads for court employees, and decreases the time used in legal proceedings for claims during maritime contracts such as shipping disputes between parties. This paper seeks to develop a sentiment analysis framework that uses deep learning, distributed learning, and machine learning to improve access to statutes, laws, and cases used by maritime judges in making judgments to back their claims. The suggested approach uses deep learning models, including convolutional neural networks (CNNs), deep neural networks, long short-term memory (LSTM), and recurrent neural networks. It extracts court records having crucial sentiments or statements for maritime court verdicts. The suggested approach has been used successfully during sentiment analysis by emphasizing feature selection from a legal repository. The LSTM + CNN model has shown promising results in obtaining sentiments and records from multiple devices and sufficiently proposing practical guidance to judicial personnel regarding the regulations applicable to various situations.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".