arXiv Computation and Language

Using Large Language Models for Legal Decision-Making in Austrian Value-Added Tax Law: A Comparative Study

This study experimentally evaluates large language models (LLMs) for legal decision-making in Austrian and EU value‑added tax (VAT) law. It compares fine‑tuning and retrieval‑augmented generation (RAG) on textbook and real‑world tax consulting cases to identify optimal LLM configurations and assess legal‑reasoning abilities. Results show that properly configured LLMs can aid tax professionals with routine tasks and provide legally grounded justifications, though they are not yet ready for full automation due to challenges like hallucination and handling implicit client knowledge.

arXiv Computation and Language
Sep 11

A Short Survey of Viewing Large Language Models in Legal Aspect

The paper surveys how large language models (LLMs) are being applied in legal tasks such as judgement prediction, document analysis, and drafting. It reviews the benefits of automation while highlighting legal challenges like privacy, bias, and explainability. The authors also discuss data resources for legal domain specialization and outline future research directions.

By Zhongxiang Sun
Hugging Face Trending Papers
Jul 21

AILQA: Evaluating AI-Driven Legal Question Answering Systems for the Indian Legal System

This comprehensive study introduces an advanced Artificial Intelligence for Indian Legal Question Answering (AILQA) system tailored to the Indian legal context. AILQA leverages a variety of embedding and generative models, including recent Large Language Models (LLMs), to address the unique challenges posed by the intricate and diverse nature of Indian legal texts and to enhance the accuracy and reliability of responses to legal questions.

arXiv Computation and Language
Aug 27

Gavel: Agent Meets Checklist for Evaluating LLMs on Long-Context Legal Summarization

The paper introduces Gavel, a framework for evaluating large language models (LLMs) on long-context legal summarization tasks. Gavel includes a reference-based component (Gavel-Ref) with checklist, residual-fact, and writing-style checks, and a reference-free component (Gavel-Agent) that assesses factual coverage directly from source documents. Experiments on 12 frontier LLMs reveal that models tend to omit key information more than hallucinate, perform well on simple checklist items but struggle with rare, complex items, and their performance degrades with longer cases. Gavel-Agent cuts token usage by at least 36% compared to traditional methods while maintaining competitive accuracy, and it also generalizes effectively to the medical domain.

By Yao Dou, Benjamin Mamut, Wei Xu
arXiv AI
Aug 19

CoAL-RAG: A Complexity-Aware Legal Retrieval-Augmented Generation Method

CoAL‑RAG is a complexity‑aware legal retrieval‑augmented generation method that adapts its retrieval strategy based on a multi‑dimensional evaluation of question essence and retrieval consistency. It quantifies reasoning demand from the logical structure of a question and uses the discrepancy between semantic and keyword retrieval to gauge problem complexity, thereby selecting the most suitable retrieval approach and filtering context dynamically. Experiments show that CoAL‑RAG outperforms baseline models on Chinese legal benchmarks (SocialLawQA, LawBench) with a 42.5% BLEU improvement and 3.6× ROUGE‑L, while also achieving strong cross‑jurisdictional performance on English datasets (LexGLUE, CaseHold).

By Jin Su, Zhuofeng Zhao, Huanhuan Wang, Hao Chen
arXiv AI
Aug 6

Assessing and Explaining the Persuadability of Large Language Models as Legal Decision Tools

arXiv:2604. 26233v3 Announce Type: replace Abstract: As Large Language Models (LLMs) are proposed as legal decision assistants, and even first-instance decision-makers, across a range of judicial and administrative contexts, it becomes essential to explore how they answer legal questions, and in particular the factors that lead them to decide difficult questions.

By Oisin Suttle, David Lillis
Hugging Face Trending Papers
Jul 11

When Reasoning Hurts Legal Drafting: The Verbalization Bottleneck in Patent Claim Generation

Patent claim drafting is a challenging legal drafting task that requires technical expertise, precise linguistic control, strict adherence to formal conventions, and the preservation of complex logical relationships among claim elements. While Chain-of-Thought (CoT) prompting has been widely used to improve the reasoning capabilities of large language models (LLMs), recent evidence suggests that its benefits may be limited, or even negative, in highly structured or pattern-sensitive tasks.

arXiv AI
Aug 18

When Do LLMs Apply the Wrong Law? Diagnosing LLM Failures in Temporal Legal Reasoning

arXiv:2608. 14610v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Legal reasoning tasks such as legal judgment prediction (LJP) require identifying the temporally correct version of the law governing a case -- a capability we term temporal applicable-law determination.

By Yiqian Huang, Shuyuan Zheng, Qianying Liu, Shaowen Peng, Yuntao Kong, Kotaro Funakoshi, Chuan Xiao, Manabu Okumura, Yang Cao