Instructions to use nishp24/legalmind-embedder with libraries, inference providers, notebooks, and local apps. Follow these links to get started.

Libraries

How to use nishp24/legalmind-embedder with sentence-transformers:

from sentence_transformers import SentenceTransformer

model = SentenceTransformer("nishp24/legalmind-embedder")

sentences = [
"How has the regulation regarding the disclosure of information relating to land, specifically details of consideration given for the grant or assignment of a tenancy, been interpreted or applied in practice in relation to the management or use of that land in the context of a specific individual's tenancy or lease, such as in the case of Mr Sharma, as evident in the court judgment?",
"sent to MCM\" and that these \"Composites [composite codes] [were] to be created by [Mr Critchley and Mr Lester]\"; this was recorded in a Task List which was circulated internally by Mr Neul. It was made clear that Shoreline's \"Commercial team [was] to OK\" this approach. There were three meetings on 21 May 2009. At the second meeting attended by Mr Critchley and Mr Macdonald, there was discussion about the Composite Codes. Mr Macdonald at 2 pm that day e-mailed Mr Tomkinson and Mr Critchley an agreed action plan to be implemented which included the following: \"Lucas Critchley & Gary Lester to pull together composite codes to be added into Anite and put in front of Commercial task team. Include code for no access.\" This reflected what was agreed at this meeting. A third meeting on that day was attended by Mr Critchley, Mr Lester, Mr Clark and Mr Tomkinson in the latter's office and its purpose was specifically to discuss the Composite Codes which had been discussed and identified earlier that day. There is no doubt that the idea of the Composite Codes was discussed in detail and it was agreed that Mr Critchley would draft a document to show how the Composite Codes would operate. That night Mr Critchley drafted what has been called the CRED (Composite Rates Explanation Document) and he later produced a list of composite rates which included what were called Initial Order Rates referenced ORDR 00001 and 00002. ORDR0001 was defined as: \"Emergency call out works other than out of hours service. Receive call from Employer, attend on site (any trade) and carry out works to make safe and effect a permanent or temporary repair as appropriate. The rate will include for one hours labour (this will be from the time the Contractor is notified of the call out until the time that Contractor leaves the site) together with all consumables required. Materials & Equipment will [be] paid extra over the rate at defined Cost plus the Fee\" The rate was specified at £35.85. The list of composite rates was sent by e-mail to Mr Neul on the morning of 22 May 2009 and the CRED was sent also by e-mail to Mr Tomkinson and Mr Clark several hours later. The e-mail to Mr Neul stated: \"Please see attached list of composite rate as discussed at Wednesday's meeting. This additional list totals 37 new",
"See also: [2017] EWCA Civ 151 His Honour Judge Robinson: Introduction On Monday 17 May 2010 the Claimant was unlawfully attacked and struck on the head by unknown assailants. There is a degree of confusion about precisely when he was so attacked. Times of 5:00pm and 7:00pm have been given. For the purposes of this case, the precise time is immaterial. After a time the Claimant began to feel unwell. He was persuaded by his friend Robert Tubman to go to hospital. Mr Tubman drove him to the Accident and Emergency Department of the Mayday University Hospital, Croydon. The hospital is now known as the Croydon University Hospital. The Claimant was booked in at the hospital A&E reception at 8:26pm. I find on the evidence that he left the hospital at 8:45pm at the latest without having been seen by a clinician. Having returned home, his condition deteriorated. An ambulance was called at about 9:42pm. He was first taken to the Defendant's hospital. A CT scan showed the presence of an extra-dural haematoma. He was transferred to St George's Hospital for neurosurgery to remove the haematoma. He has suffered a left hemiplegia. In this trial I am concerned only with liability. It is agreed that had the Claimant remained at the hospital he would have been treated sufficiently sooner that he would have gone on to make an essentially full recovery. The Claimant's case is that during the period he was at the hospital, there were breaches of duty by the non-clinical reception staff and by the professional clinical staff. The alleged breach of duty by the reception staff concerns what information he was given about the time he would have to wait before being seen by a clinician, and also a failure to assess the Claimant for \"priority triage\". The alleged breach of duty by the clinical staff concerns the failure to assess the Claimant during the time he was present at the hospital. Thus I am concerned with what happened in the period of 19 minutes during which the Claimant was present at the hospital. The Evidence For the Claimant I heard from, and read the written evidence of, the following witnesses: (1) The Claimant himself; (2) Robert Tubman, the Claimant's friend who drove him to and from the hospital and remained with him at the hospital; (3) Patreese Erskine, the Claimant's sister; (4) Patricia Smith, the Claimant's",
"the first seizure on arrival at St George's Hospital; (d) being advised by telephone of the further seizure at St George's Hospital and hearing Mr Sharma's panic and confusion; (e) when she saw her sister upon arrival at St George's Hospital and hearing Mr Sharma's panic and confusion; (f) being advised by medical staff that as a result of the final seizure, Mrs Sharma was unlikely to survive; (g) Mrs Sharma's death. The experts were asked to state what causal impact they considered each of those incidents had had on the Claimant's psychiatric disorder. In the Note of the experts' Joint Discussion, Dr Turner expressed the view that (b) and (e) - i.e. the visual experience - were the two most important factors in causing the Claimant's psychiatric disorder. The first, and in Dr Turner's view the more important of these two, was (b), i.e. her visit to ESH on 12 May, seeing Mrs Sharma in pain, knowing (as a result of the previous telephone call from Mr Sharma) that a bleed had been detected and being aware (due to her own nursing experience) of the risk of a re-bleed and of the urgent need for Mrs Sharma to be transferred to a specialist Neurosurgical Unit. Dr Turner's identification of (b) as the most significant incident reflected the view expressed in his Causation Report, written in October 2013. That Report was of course based on the accounts of events given by the Claimant, Mr Sharma and Mr Shorter in their witness statements of July 2013. In that Causation Report, Dr Turner had emphasised the Claimant's feelings of responsibility and helplessness whilst at ESH and her additional vulnerability by reason of her own specialist knowledge. Dr Turner identified the Claimant's experience at ESH as the main cause of her psychiatric disorder, although he did consider that later events, especially seeing her sister in the ITU at SGH, probably contributed. He suggested that the \"flashbacks\" to the scene in the A & E Department at ESH and in the ITU at SGH which the Claimant reported experiencing supported his view as to the significance of those incidents. In her witness statement dated 20 July 2013, the Claimant had referred to having \"flashbacks\" when she could see her sister in the A & E Department at ESH on a trolley, writhing in pain and clutching at her head. In oral evidence, Dr Turner — a information relating to the terms applying to the lease, occupation or use of land; b information relating to any consideration given for the grant or assignment of the tenancy; c information relating to any person on whose behalf the land is managed or the payments received, including particulars of payments arising from the land. 2 In this regulation — a “lease” includes an agreement for a lease, and any tenancy, but does not include a mortgage or heritable security; b “lessee” includes a successor in title of a lease; and c in relation to Scotland, “assignment” means an assignation. Dealing etc in securities 17 1 The relevant data for a data-holder of the type described in paragraph 19 of Schedule 23 are — a information and documents relating to securities transactions in respect of which that person is a relevant data-holder; and b in relation to a person who carries on a business of effecting public issues or placings or otherwise effects public issues or placings, information relating to the issue, allotment or placing of the public issues or placings. 2 In this regulation — a “placing” means a placing of shares or securities in a company; and b “public issue” means a public issue of shares or securities in a company. Dealing in other property 18 The relevant data for a data-holder of the type described in paragraph 20 of Schedule 23 are — a particulars of any transactions effected through a clearing house; b particulars of any transaction which meets the following conditions — i the transaction is effected by or through that person; ii in the transaction, an asset which is tangible moveable property is disposed of; and iii the amount or value of the consideration for the disposal exceeds, in the hands of the"
]
embeddings = model.encode(sentences)

similarities = model.similarity(embeddings, embeddings)
print(similarities.shape)
# [4, 4]

Notebooks
Google Colab
Kaggle

SentenceTransformer based on sentence-transformers/all-MiniLM-L6-v2

This is a sentence-transformers model finetuned from sentence-transformers/all-MiniLM-L6-v2. It maps sentences & paragraphs to a 384-dimensional dense vector space and can be used for retrieval.

Model Details

Model Description

Model Type: Sentence Transformer
Base model: sentence-transformers/all-MiniLM-L6-v2
Maximum Sequence Length: 256 tokens
Output Dimensionality: 384 dimensions
Similarity Function: Cosine Similarity
Supported Modality: Text

Model Sources

Documentation: Sentence Transformers Documentation
Repository: Sentence Transformers on GitHub
Hugging Face: Sentence Transformers on Hugging Face

Full Model Architecture

SentenceTransformer(
  (0): Transformer({'transformer_task': 'feature-extraction', 'modality_config': {'text': {'method': 'forward', 'method_output_name': 'last_hidden_state'}}, 'module_output_name': 'token_embeddings', 'architecture': 'BertModel'})
  (1): Pooling({'embedding_dimension': 384, 'pooling_mode': 'mean', 'include_prompt': True})
  (2): Normalize({})
)

Usage

Direct Usage (Sentence Transformers)

First install the Sentence Transformers library:

pip install -U sentence-transformers

Then you can load this model and run inference.

from sentence_transformers import SentenceTransformer

# Download from the 🤗 Hub
model = SentenceTransformer("nishp24/legalmind-embedder")
# Run inference
sentences = [
    'How does the requirement to implement a system preventing closure of the secondary air control slots beyond the 7mm open position, as specified in the legislation, align with the principles of interpretation outlined in the court judgment, specifically in relation to the reasoning behind European Court rulings?',
    'down by any relevant decision of the European Court. I am cautious about accepting Mr. Lawson\'s dichotomy between the rulings of the European Court and its reasoning. It is true that the formal rulings are set out at the end of the judgments and to that extent stand apart from the Court\'s reasons, but the reasoning is in most cases essential to an understanding of the principles which the ruling seeks to encapsulate. In the cases to which I have referred the Court has held that the loss of time inherent in flight delay constitutes an inconvenience that cannot be categorised as "damage occasioned by delay" within the meaning of article 19 and does not come within the scope of article 29 (or, therefore, article 35): Nelson, paragraph 55. It has also held that the obligation to pay compensation for delay under Regulation 261 operates at an earlier stage than the system laid down in article 29: Nelson, paragraph 57. The Court\'s decision in Moré is, of course, consistent with that analysis. Moreover, in the light of the competing arguments in that case it cannot have contemplated that national courts would resort to the Convention in preference to the domestic law of limitation. In my view, therefore, we are bound to follow and apply the decisions of the European Court in relation to the nature of the claim for compensation under article 7 and its compatibility with the Montreal Convention. That includes the Court\'s ruling that the obligation in question lies outside the scope of the Convention. If that be correct, the Convention has no application to it. Insofar as it is said that that involves a departure from Sidhu, it is no more than a consequence of the decisions in IATA, Sturgeon, Nelson and Moré. The European Court has ruled on the nature of the obligations created by Regulation 261 and its decisions have to be taken into account when deciding whether the claim falls within the scope of the Convention. In those circumstances I do not think it is helpful to embark on a discussion of the doctrine of precedent as it applies in the context of conflicting decisions of the House of Lords or Supreme Court and the European Court of Human Rights, to which we were referred. Apart from anything else, the statutory provisions are too dissimilar for the authorities to provide much assistance. I acknowledge a system that prevents closure of the secondary air control slots beyond the 7mm open position must be implemented. Wood logs Fireline FPi5T, FGi5T, FXi5T Taper inset stoves manufactured by Charlton & Jenrick Ltd, Unit D Stafford Park 2, Telford, Shropshire. TF3 3AR Instruction manual reference “FXiT.FPiT.FGiT Issue 01” dated 03/12. The fitting of a system that prevents closure of the secondary air control slots beyond the 5mm open position must be implemented Wood logs Fireline FPi5W, FGi5W, FXi5W Wide inset stoves manufactured by Charlton & Jenrick Ltd, Unit D Stafford Park 2, Telford, Shropshire. TF3 3AR Instruction manual reference “FGi.FPi.FXi Issue 06” dated 03/12. The fitting of a system that prevents closure of the secondary air control slots beyond the 9mm open position must be implemented Wood logs Firematic 25, 50, 90 and 150 manufactured by HERZ Armaturen Ges.m.b.H, Geschäftsbereich HERZ, Feuerungstechnik, A-8272 Sebersdorf 138, Austria The manufacturer’s instructions dated June 2005, reference Bedienungsanleitung Firematic V 1.1 ENG doc Chipped wood, wood pellets or planed wood shavings Firematic 45 and 60 manufactured by HERZ Armaturen Ges.m.b.H, Geschäftsbereich HERZ Feuerungstechnik, A-8272 Sebersdorf 138, Austria Instruction manual references “05.007 .Operating instructions - FM (1Ph) 20 35 45 60 v2.3” dated “08/2009” Wood pellets conforming to ÖNORM M7135 with diameter of 6 mm or Wood chips up to a maximum size of 50mm and maximum water content 35% Firematic FM 130, FM 151, FM180, FM199 boilers manufactured by Herz Energietechnik GmbH, Herzstraße, 1, 7423 Pinkafeld, Österreich/Austria Instruction manual reference “Operating Instructions Herz firematic 130 – 199 BioControl” version Betriebsanleitung firematic 20-201 BioControl Englisch V 3.1 Wood Chips and Wood Pellets Firestorm 10 SE stove manufactured by The Heat Resistant Glass Company Limited, Unit 2 Bracewell Avenue, Poulton Industrial Estate, Poulton Le Fylde. FY6 8JF Instruction manual reference “10 KW SE Issue (6928)',
    'you want the court to consider allowing you to pay the arrears by instalments?" On 10 January 2011 there was an application by the solicitors for Ms Sawyer to transfer the Barons Finance proceedings in the Bromley County Court to the Medway County Court. That application was put forward on the footing that Ms Sawyer should be allowed to repay the principal sum after the charges were removed, less the total payments already made. The claim in the application was that the credit agreements failed to comply with the rules under the 1974 Act and the associated regulations and that Ms Sawyer intended to apply to the court for an order that the agreements were invalid as there was a unfair relationship between the parties under section 140A of the 1974 Act. I use the expression "agreements" because there appears to have been an earlier Credit Agreement of 20 February 2007. On 28 January 2011 a review hearing took place before District Judge Liston in the Medway County Court and the two proceedings were consolidated and directions were given for trial. It is not wholly clear to me why this form of order was made when the possession orders had already been made and the next step was an appeal. Be that as it may, on 7 February 2011, a defence and counterclaim was pleaded in the now consolidated actions. That pleading alleged that neither Ghana Commercial Bunks nor Barons Finance were the holders of a credit licence under section 21 of the 1974 Act and that the agreements were unenforceable since no order had been obtained under section 40 of the Act. The pleading also alleged that Barons Finance was an unlicensed credit broker and that the agreements failed to comply with the regulations and had been improperly executed. The defence denied that the claimants were entitled to any relief. There was a counterclaim which contained the contentions that the agreements were unenforceable without a court order under section 5 and that the court should not make one, and that the relationship arising out of the agreements was an unfair one. The counterclaim sought an order for the agreements to be set aside and for the defendant to repay the principal, less what had already been paid. On 16 February 2011 the claimants gave notice of appeal from the order of District Judge Liston. On 18 May 2011, HHJ',
]
embeddings = model.encode(sentences)
print(embeddings.shape)
# [3, 384]

# Get the similarity scores for the embeddings
similarities = model.similarity(embeddings, embeddings)
print(similarities)
# tensor([[1.0000, 0.3817, 0.1037],
#         [0.3817, 1.0000, 0.0274],
#         [0.1037, 0.0274, 1.0000]])

Training Details

Training Dataset

Unnamed Dataset

Size: 1,933 training samples
Columns: sentence_0 and sentence_1
Approximate statistics based on the first 100 samples:
sentence_0 sentence_1
type string string

modality text text
details
min: 13 tokens
mean: 32.27 tokens
max: 79 tokens

min: 256 tokens
mean: 256.0 tokens
max: 256 tokens

	sentence_0	sentence_1
type	string	string
modality	text	text
details	min: 13 tokens mean: 32.27 tokens max: 79 tokens	min: 256 tokens mean: 256.0 tokens max: 256 tokens

Samples:

sentence_0	sentence_1
`What standard of proof must be applied when establishing any fact in relation to the exercise of powers or functions under the regulations mentioned in section 51A(1) of the Act?`	and d the SEN expert. Exclusions: standard of proof 28 Where it falls to — a the principal, in exercise of the power conferred by section 51A(1) of the Act (as modified); b the proprietor, in exercise of its functions for the purposes of regulations 24 and 26; or c the review panel, in exercise of its functions for the purposes of regulation 25, to establish any fact, any question as to whether that fact is established is to be decided on a balance of probabilities. Information 29 The local authority must, on request, forward to the Secretary of State any information they have received from a principal, a proprietor or a review panel under this Part or Schedule 1. Nick Gibb Minister of State for Schools Department for Education 3rd April 2012 SCHEDULE 1 Constitution and procedure of review panels Regulation 3 Interpretation 1 1 In this Schedule — “arrangements for a review” means arrangements under paragraph (1) of regulation 7, 16 or 25; “arranging authority” means — where the relevan...
`What is the list of schools in this section of the legislation, and what type of organisations are they?`	Day Schools Advisory Board Akiva School, London N3 2SY Clore Shalom Primary School, Shenley WD7 9BL Clore Tikvah Primary School, Ilford IG6 2JN Jewish Community Secondary School, New Barnet EN4 9GE The Lubavitch Foundation Lubavitch Ruth Lunzer Girls Primary School, London N16 5RP Machzikei Hadass Synagogue, Manchester Beis Yaakov High School, Salford M7 4FF Yesoiday Hatorah School, Manchester M25 OJW The Union of Orthodox Hebrew Congregations Avigdor Hirsch Torah Temimah Primary School, London NW2 6RJ Menorah Foundation School, Edgware HA8 0QS Pardes House Primary School, London N3 1SA Yesodey Hatorah Senior Girls School, London N16 6UB Va’ad HaChinuch, London Beis Yaakov Primary School, London NW9 6NQ Va’ad HaChinuch, Manchester Broughton Jewish Cassel Fox Primary School, Salford M7 4RT Bury and Whitefield Jewish Primary School, Bury BL9 8JT The Dean of Gateshead Talmudical College Manchester Mesivta School, Prestwich M25 0PH
`What is the specified amount for a charity that runs charitable activities in one or more community buildings in a tax year?`	unless, at that time, the purposes and activities of the charities are the same or substantially similar. 8 The Treasury may by order amend this Act so as to change the circumstances in which a charity is connected with another charity in a tax year for the purposes of the Act. Charities running charitable activities in community buildings 6 1 This section determines the specified amount for the purposes of section 1(4) for a charity that runs charitable activities in one or more community buildings in a tax year (see sections 7 and 8 for the meaning of certain terms used in this section). 2 The specified amount for the charity for the tax year is an amount equal to — a the sum of the amounts which, for each community building in which the charitable activities are run, is the community building amount, plus b the remaining amount. 3 The “community building amount”, in relation to a community building, means — a the sum of the small donations that are made to the charity in the communi...

Loss: MultipleNegativesRankingLoss with these parameters:

{
    "scale": 20.0,
    "similarity_fct": "cos_sim",
    "gather_across_devices": false,
    "directions": [
        "query_to_doc"
    ],
    "partition_mode": "joint",
    "hardness_mode": null,
    "hardness_strength": 0.0
}

Training Hyperparameters

Non-Default Hyperparameters

num_train_epochs: 1
multi_dataset_batch_sampler: round_robin

All Hyperparameters

Click to expand

per_device_train_batch_size: 8
num_train_epochs: 1
max_steps: -1
learning_rate: 5e-05
lr_scheduler_type: linear
lr_scheduler_kwargs: None
warmup_steps: 0
optim: adamw_torch_fused
optim_args: None
weight_decay: 0.0
adam_beta1: 0.9
adam_beta2: 0.999
adam_epsilon: 1e-08
optim_target_modules: None
gradient_accumulation_steps: 1
average_tokens_across_devices: True
max_grad_norm: 1
label_smoothing_factor: 0.0
bf16: False
fp16: False
bf16_full_eval: False
fp16_full_eval: False
tf32: None
gradient_checkpointing: False
gradient_checkpointing_kwargs: None
torch_compile: False
torch_compile_backend: None
torch_compile_mode: None
use_liger_kernel: False
liger_kernel_config: None
use_cache: False
neftune_noise_alpha: None
torch_empty_cache_steps: None
auto_find_batch_size: False
log_on_each_node: True
logging_nan_inf_filter: True
include_num_input_tokens_seen: no
log_level: passive
log_level_replica: warning
disable_tqdm: False
project: huggingface
trackio_space_id: None
trackio_bucket_id: None
trackio_static_space_id: None
per_device_eval_batch_size: 8
prediction_loss_only: True
eval_on_start: False
eval_do_concat_batches: True
eval_use_gather_object: False
eval_accumulation_steps: None
include_for_metrics: []
batch_eval_metrics: False
save_only_model: False
save_on_each_node: False
enable_jit_checkpoint: False
push_to_hub: False
hub_private_repo: None
hub_model_id: None
hub_strategy: every_save
hub_always_push: False
hub_revision: None
load_best_model_at_end: False
ignore_data_skip: False
restore_callback_states_from_checkpoint: False
full_determinism: False
seed: 42
data_seed: None
use_cpu: False
accelerator_config: {'split_batches': False, 'dispatch_batches': None, 'even_batches': True, 'use_seedable_sampler': True, 'non_blocking': False, 'gradient_accumulation_kwargs': None}
parallelism_config: None
dataloader_drop_last: False
dataloader_num_workers: 0
dataloader_pin_memory: True
dataloader_persistent_workers: False
dataloader_prefetch_factor: None
remove_unused_columns: True
label_names: None
train_sampling_strategy: random
length_column_name: length
ddp_find_unused_parameters: None
ddp_bucket_cap_mb: None
ddp_broadcast_buffers: False
ddp_static_graph: None
ddp_backend: None
ddp_timeout: 1800
fsdp: None
fsdp_config: None
deepspeed: None
debug: []
skip_memory_metrics: True
do_predict: False
resume_from_checkpoint: None
warmup_ratio: None
local_rank: -1
prompts: None
batch_sampler: batch_sampler
multi_dataset_batch_sampler: round_robin
router_mapping: {}
learning_rate_mapping: {}

Training Time

Training: 25.2 seconds

Framework Versions

Python: 3.12.13
Sentence Transformers: 5.5.1
Transformers: 5.10.2
PyTorch: 2.11.0+cu128
Accelerate: 1.13.0
Datasets: 4.0.0
Tokenizers: 0.22.2

Citation

BibTeX

Sentence Transformers

@inproceedings{reimers-2019-sentence-bert,
    title = "Sentence-BERT: Sentence Embeddings using Siamese BERT-Networks",
    author = "Reimers, Nils and Gurevych, Iryna",
    booktitle = "Proceedings of the 2019 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing",
    month = "11",
    year = "2019",
    publisher = "Association for Computational Linguistics",
    url = "https://arxiv.org/abs/1908.10084",
}

MultipleNegativesRankingLoss

@misc{oord2019representationlearningcontrastivepredictive,
      title={Representation Learning with Contrastive Predictive Coding},
      author={Aaron van den Oord and Yazhe Li and Oriol Vinyals},
      year={2019},
      eprint={1807.03748},
      archivePrefix={arXiv},
      primaryClass={cs.LG},
      url={https://arxiv.org/abs/1807.03748},
}