arXiv Computation and Language
GRACE: Grounded Adversarial Reasoning over Canadian Law
Read the original on arXiv Computation and Language →The Flow has not summarised this story yet — read it at arXiv Computation and Language.
Related stories
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.
arXiv AI
Jun 16
Know Your Limits : On the Faithfulness of LLMs as Solvers and Autoformalizers in Legal Reasoning
arXiv:2606. 16118v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Large Language Models (LLMs) achieve strong performance on reasoning tasks, but whether this reflects faithful logical inference or heuristic approximation remains unclear.
arXiv AI
Aug 18
Bye-bye, Bluebook? Automating Legal Drudgery With AI-Augmented Rule Following
arXiv:2505. 02763v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: One of the central promises of legal AI is to automate drudgery -- the formal, repetitive tasks of lawyers' work that consume time without calling for much discretion.
arXiv Computation and Language
Sep 10
GANDR: Claim Auditing for Verifiable Legal Answer Generation
arXiv:2609.10293v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: In high-stakes domains such as legal practice, a language-model answer is only useful to the extent that a reader can verify each claim against the sou...
arXiv Computation and Language
Sep 17
Legal LLM Hallucination Should Be Evaluated as Failure of Legal Warrant
The paper argues that hallucinations by legal language models should be judged as failures of legal warrant rather than mere factual or citation errors. It defines claim-authority warrant as a context-sensitive relationship between a legal claim and applicable, current authority, and proposes that evaluating warrant can uncover failures missed by traditional accuracy or citation metrics. The authors outline a pilot study, benchmark specifications, and a research agenda to assess whether legal AI systems’ claims are properly licensed by law.
arXiv AI
Aug 11
PROSLEX: A Novel Dataset for Expert-Annotated Legal Statute Prediction for Indian Judiciary
arXiv:2608. 08830v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Legal Statute Prediction (LSP) involves automatically identifying relevant legal statutes given factual descriptions in legal documents, typically framed as a multi-label classification task within natural language processing and information retrieval research.