arXiv Computation and Language By Luis Sante, Paula Lima, Mariana Rocha, Jorge Poco

ContraVis: Evidence-Grounded Visual Analytics for Contradiction Review in Legal Contracts

Read the original on arXiv Computation and Language →

ContraVis is a visual analytics system that assists human reviewers in detecting contradictions within legal contracts by modeling contracts as typed paragraph graphs. These graphs combine explicit contractual references with semantic relationships, enabling the system to condition large language model (LLM) reasoning and provide an interactive representation for analysts. In controlled experiments, graph-conditioned LLM reasoning identified more injected contradictions than standalone LLM analysis, and a formative study with lawyers showed that in-context evidence comparison helped validate contradictions.

Machine-generated by The Flow from the publisher's headline and feed description — not written or checked by a human. The full article lives at arXiv Computation and Language.

Hugging Face Trending Papers
Sep 2

Large Language Models in Resolving Contextual Knowledge Conflicts

The paper examines how large language models resolve conflicts that arise within contextual knowledge, rather than between internal knowledge and external context. It introduces a taxonomy of six contextual conflict types and presents the ContextConflict dataset with 5,781 samples covering reasoning and summarization tasks. Experiments on nine LLMs reveal persistent shortcomings in conflict resolution, uncover a bias toward earlier evidence, and propose a training‑free steering method that improves accuracy and summary quality.

arXiv Computation and Language
Sep 24

LEGO: Synergizing Expert GraphRAG and Expert Chain-of-Thought for Legal Reasoning

LEGO is a dual‑module framework that combines a Legal Expert GraphRAG system with an expert Chain‑of‑Thought approach to enhance complex legal reasoning. The GraphRAG component uses an expert‑annotated civil code graph and a greedy normative‑coverage retrieval algorithm to extract relevant provision subgraphs, while the Chain‑of‑Thought module structures retrieved provisions and case facts into a Provision‑Fact‑Conclusion reasoning flow. Using a Qwen3‑8B backbone, LEGO achieves 40.53% exact‑match accuracy on LawExamQA_Civil, surpassing baseline RAG and CoT models and matching larger models on multi‑hop and open‑ended benchmarks, with ablation studies confirming the complementary benefits of both modules.

By Qingjing Chen, Junkai Zhang, Shaochun Wang, Jiahao Ding, Siyuan Zheng, Yukun Yan, Zhi Zheng, Antonino Rotolo, Yun Liu, Weixing Shen