Interpretive Canons
Collection
Sentence-level interpretive-canon classification in German Constitutional Court decisions: benchmark, fully annotated court decisions, and eval runs. • 3 items • Updated
decision_name stringlengths 12 21 | plain_text stringlengths 2.05k 98.4k | document_structure dict | readings listlengths 5 212 | arguments listlengths 0 520 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
BVerfGE53,109 |
Zur Verletzung des rechtlichen Gehörs im Wiedereinsetzungsverfahren.
Beschluß des Zweiten Senats vom 15. Januar 1980 - 2 BvR 920/79 - in dem Verfahren über die Verfassungsbeschwerde der Frau S ... - Bevollmächtigte: Rechtsanwälte Dr. Gerhard Kunze und Günter Sauer, Leineweberstraße 45, Mülheim an der Ruhr - gegen den... | {
"bverfgdokument": {
"start": 0,
"end": 9689
},
"entscheidung": {
"start": 0,
"end": 9689
},
"leitsaetze": {
"start": 0,
"end": 71
},
"rubrum": {
"start": 71,
"end": 425
},
"tenor": {
"start": 425,
"end": 752
},
"gruende": {
"start": 752,
"end": 968... | [
{
"id": "i46kp7VT2T",
"start": 5720,
"end": 5723,
"satz_id": 46,
"abstrakt": false,
"abstrakt_reasoning": "",
"selbst_aufgestellt": false,
"selbst_aufgestellt_reasoning": "",
"konkretes_gesetz": [],
"bestimmt": null,
"konkrete_bezugnahme_reasoning": "",
"vermutlich_ke... | [
{
"id": "ig3syzUh-d",
"start": 6846,
"end": 7090,
"satz_id": 52,
"deutung_id": "JyoZ9AnQtY",
"general_argument": {
"present": false,
"reasoning": "Keine Bezugnahme auf den Gegenstand der Deutung (Anspruch auf rechtliches Gehört im Verfahren bei Entscheidung über einen Wiedereinse... |
BVerfGE61,126 | "\nZur Frage der Verfassungsmäßigkeit der Erzwingungshaft zur Abgabe einer eidesstattlichen Versic(...TRUNCATED) | {"bverfgdokument":{"start":0,"end":24062},"entscheidung":{"start":0,"end":24062},"leitsaetze":{"star(...TRUNCATED) | [{"id":"rVgzlUjo3g","start":12852,"end":12854,"satz_id":66,"abstrakt":false,"abstrakt_reasoning":"",(...TRUNCATED) | [{"id":"KHUi6KsflK","start":22243,"end":22415,"satz_id":126,"deutung_id":"jmEPjz6Vce","general_argum(...TRUNCATED) |
BVerfGE17,306 | "\nZu den Anforderungen an eine rechtsstaatliche Gesetzesgestaltung.\n\nBeschluß des Ersten Senats (...TRUNCATED) | {"bverfgdokument":{"start":0,"end":25719},"entscheidung":{"start":0,"end":25648},"leitsaetze":{"star(...TRUNCATED) | [{"id":"9N0aD4jL9W","start":9638,"end":9640,"satz_id":62,"abstrakt":false,"abstrakt_reasoning":"","s(...TRUNCATED) | [{"id":"KAuLN625-s","start":11884,"end":12087,"satz_id":79,"deutung_id":"57Uv08oPdm","general_argume(...TRUNCATED) |
BVerfGE32,273 | "\n1. Art. 6 Abs. 4 GG (Mutterschutz) enthält einen bindenden Auftrag an den Gesetzgeber.\n\n2. Es (...TRUNCATED) | {"bverfgdokument":{"start":0,"end":12559},"entscheidung":{"start":0,"end":12559},"leitsaetze":{"star(...TRUNCATED) | [{"id":"RfXcfCNE0V","start":6069,"end":6072,"satz_id":40,"abstrakt":false,"abstrakt_reasoning":"","s(...TRUNCATED) | [{"id":"d_3l4N0aTu","start":7391,"end":7601,"satz_id":52,"deutung_id":"yxgon87Nk9","general_argument(...TRUNCATED) |
BVerfGE62,374 | "\nZur Amtsbezeichnung von Lehrern im bremischen Schuldienst.\n\nBeschluß des Zweiten Senats vom 14(...TRUNCATED) | {"bverfgdokument":{"start":0,"end":33011},"entscheidung":{"start":0,"end":33011},"leitsaetze":{"star(...TRUNCATED) | [{"id":"Ypn28fIhRI","start":13047,"end":13049,"satz_id":72,"abstrakt":false,"abstrakt_reasoning":"",(...TRUNCATED) | [{"id":"tEmFP_xMbB","start":20846,"end":21236,"satz_id":121,"deutung_id":"79mpBpOiWz","general_argum(...TRUNCATED) |
BVerfGE37,057 | "\nBeschluß des Zweiten Senats vom 27. März 1974 gemäß § 24 BVerfGG - 2 BvR 38/74 - in dem Verf(...TRUNCATED) | {"bverfgdokument":{"start":0,"end":20051},"entscheidung":{"start":0,"end":20030},"leitsaetze":null,"(...TRUNCATED) | [{"id":"IhGUrfdNcl","start":5808,"end":5812,"satz_id":34,"abstrakt":false,"abstrakt_reasoning":"","s(...TRUNCATED) | [{"id":"xbCRxj2s4E","start":6558,"end":7047,"satz_id":38,"deutung_id":"LCFcrVZD6I","general_argument(...TRUNCATED) |
BVerfGE7,086 | "\nBeschluß des Ersten Senats vom 23. Juli 1957 - 1 BvR 193/57 - in dem Verfahren über die Verfass(...TRUNCATED) | {"bverfgdokument":{"start":0,"end":2049},"entscheidung":{"start":0,"end":1876},"leitsaetze":null,"ru(...TRUNCATED) | [{"id":"2DgOvLzwUq","start":1012,"end":1200,"satz_id":9,"abstrakt":false,"abstrakt_reasoning":"","se(...TRUNCATED) | [] |
BVerfGE34,052 | "\n1. Die Artikel 107 und 118 der Hessischen Verfassung in der Auslegung des Hessischen Staatsgerich(...TRUNCATED) | {"bverfgdokument":{"start":0,"end":18409},"entscheidung":{"start":0,"end":18409},"leitsaetze":{"star(...TRUNCATED) | [{"id":"nsQ3wD1ZkE","start":8976,"end":8981,"satz_id":79,"abstrakt":false,"abstrakt_reasoning":"","s(...TRUNCATED) | [{"id":"KXIbAxdhyt","start":16228,"end":16292,"satz_id":135,"deutung_id":"YXh7-J67YL","general_argum(...TRUNCATED) |
ls19981124_2bvl002691 | "\nLeitsätze zum Beschluss des Zweiten Senats vom 24. November 1998\n- 2 BvL 26/91 u.a. -\nDer Dien(...TRUNCATED) | {"bverfgdokument":{"start":0,"end":62985},"entscheidung":{"start":0,"end":62985},"leitsaetze":{"star(...TRUNCATED) | [{"id":"mKevi1tyvp","start":27289,"end":27291,"satz_id":95,"abstrakt":false,"abstrakt_reasoning":"",(...TRUNCATED) | [{"id":"ea121a488","start":28280,"end":28565,"satz_id":102,"deutung_id":"q_-NJExAc1","general_argume(...TRUNCATED) |
ls20120718_1bvl001010 | "\nL e i t s ä t z e\nzum Urteil des Ersten Senats vom 18. Juli 2012\n- 1 BvL 10/10 - - 1 BvL 2/11 (...TRUNCATED) | {"bverfgdokument":{"start":0,"end":95730},"entscheidung":{"start":0,"end":95730},"leitsaetze":{"star(...TRUNCATED) | [{"id":"Bl4cixG0Kf","start":50123,"end":50125,"satz_id":228,"abstrakt":false,"abstrakt_reasoning":""(...TRUNCATED) | [{"id":"nRnpw9QskC","start":55955,"end":56264,"satz_id":260,"deutung_id":"prs8UhawdD","general_argum(...TRUNCATED) |
End of preview. Expand in Data Studio
Interpretive Canons — decision-level
Companion benchmark to the paper Classifying Interpretive Canons at the
Sentence Level: A Benchmark from the German Federal Constitutional Court. This
is the decision-level release: one record per fully (exhaustively) annotated
decision, intended for end-to-end evaluation that runs the full pipeline over a
whole decision. Only the 15 exhaustively annotated decisions are included; the
selectively annotated decisions are not, because their unannotated sentences are
not negatives. The companion instance-level benchmark (eight subtask files
with splits) is at felix453/interpretive-canons-instances.
Record format (decisions.jsonl, one decision per line)
decision_name: BVerfGE / file identifier.plain_text: the full text of the reasons (Entscheidungsgründe).document_structure: paragraph/sentence structure inherited from the L.L.Con corpus (ebene1,absatz,satz, ...), with character offsets intoplain_text.readings: every annotated reading (Deutung) as a character span (start,end,satz_id) with its criteria —abstrakt,selbst_aufgestellt,konkretes_gesetz(list of provisions),bestimmt,vermutlich_keine_behauptung— and the free-text reasonings.arguments: every annotated (reading, candidate) pair as a character span withdeutung_id, thegeneral_argumentgate (present+reasoning), and the four canon labelswortlaut/systematik/geschichte/zweck(null when the gate is negative).
Loading
from datasets import load_dataset
ds = load_dataset("felix453/interpretive-canons-decisions", split="train")
print(ds[0]["decision_name"], len(ds[0]["readings"]))
Raw annotations (provenance)
The raw, pre-merge Label Studio export these data are built from is available at
felix453/interpretive-canons-raw-export.
It retains two fields the postprocessing merge does not preserve: the per-reading
determinate-content judgment bestimmt_moeglicheDeutung (dropped by the merge)
and the un-flattened list of concrete provisions (the merge joins the entries
into one unsplittable string). Join by Label Studio region id.
- Downloads last month
- 12