This repository tracks papers and resources about large language models (LLMs) in the legal domain.

Daily update 2026-10-22 (cs.CL): scanned all 137 papers on the dated list; added 6 title-deduplicated papers on English–Mizo judgment translation, dated Norwegian statutory values, legal-factor representations, missing-authority abstention, police-interrogation summarization, and framing effects in legal/consumer-rights advice. Category increments: Applications +3, Legal Reasoning Models +1, Legal Agent +0, Legal Problems +2, Data Resources +3, Law LLMs +0, Evaluation +6. The summarization paper is admitted under the explicit dataset/benchmark rule, not presented as a new legal LLM. Internal police operating-policy conflicts, professional ethics alone, and software contracts were excluded under the strict legal-task gate; readout accuracy, ROUGE, and advice consistency do not establish legal correctness.

Daily update 2026-10-21 (cs.CL): scanned all 159 papers on the dated list; added 1 title-deduplicated paper on exact legal-clause extraction from contracts. Category increments: Applications +1, Legal Reasoning Models +0, Legal Agent +0, Legal Problems +0, Data Resources +1, Law LLMs +0, Evaluation +1. Generic privacy, political-discourse analysis, fraud-risk screening without a legal task, and non-legal uses of “contract,” “policy,” or “judgment” were excluded. Exact copying is not legal interpretation or a correctness guarantee.

Daily update 2026-10-20 (cs.CL): scanned all 283 papers on the dated list; added 6 title-deduplicated papers on legal instruction-data selection, real-world legal-guidance queries, legal reranking, Dutch insolvency reasoning, court-document routing, and copyright guardrail evaluation. Category increments: Applications +5, Legal Reasoning Models +1, Legal Agent +0, Legal Problems +1, Data Resources +1, Law LLMs +0, Evaluation +6. Copyright reproduction is explicitly tested, not merely a motivation. Classifier agreement, LLM preferences, and copyright benchmark labels do not establish legal correctness; generic compliance, cultural constitutions, police keyword statistics, and non-legal uses of “law” or “license” were excluded.

Daily update 2026-10-19 (cs.CL): scanned all 146 papers on the dated list; added 3 title-deduplicated papers on Italian legislative-process extraction, Chinese probabilistic decisions with a tested legal subset, and Korean court-judgment de-identification. Category increments: Applications +3, Legal Reasoning Models +0, Legal Agent +0, Legal Problems +0, Data Resources +1, Law LLMs +0, Evaluation +2. The de-identification system uses pretrained encoder language models, not generative legal LLMs. Generic PII protection, financial advice, software contracts and incidental GDPR references were excluded.

Daily update 2026-10-16 (cs.CL): scanned all 177 papers on the dated list; added 3 title-deduplicated papers on real-case criminal-assistance evaluation, misalignment after bad-legal-advice finetuning, and medical-device regulatory document assessment. Category increments: Applications +1, Legal Reasoning Models +0, Legal Agent +0, Legal Problems +2, Data Resources +1, Law LLMs +0, Evaluation +3. Crime-taxonomy labels are not court judgments; ContextLift does not repair the learned bad legal advice, and deterministic regulatory assessments are not necessarily correct. Generic privacy, procedural compliance, dataset-license statements and non-legal uses of “contract” were excluded.

Daily update 2026-10-14 (cs.CL): scanned all 385 papers on the dated list; added 7 title-deduplicated papers on evidence-based legal agents, legal reward evaluation, patent translation, human-rights alignment, PFAS regulatory extraction, and constitutional translation. Category increments: Applications +4, Legal Reasoning Models +1, Legal Agent +1, Legal Problems +1, Data Resources +5, Law LLMs +1, Evaluation +5. Dataset/benchmark and translation-model papers are included under the explicit admission rule; translation scores and alignment labels do not certify legal validity. Generic compliance and copyright motivation alone were excluded.

Daily update 2026-10-12 (cs.CL): scanned all 116 papers on the dated list; added 5 title-deduplicated papers covering legal pre-training, statutory retrieval, anti-money-laundering evaluation, legal-agent workspace safety, and patent prior-art retrieval. Category increments: Applications +2, Legal Reasoning Models +1, Legal Agent +1, Legal Problems +1, Data Resources +4, Law LLMs +1, Evaluation +5. Encoder models and benchmark resources are included under the explicit language-model/dataset/benchmark rule; detection labels, retrieval proxies, and security scores are not legal-correctness guarantees.

Daily update 2026-10-08 (cs.CL): scanned all 118 papers on the dated list; added 2 title-deduplicated papers on insurance-contract claim adjudication and jurisdiction-specific Medicaid eligibility QA. Category increments: Applications +0, Legal Reasoning Models +0, Legal Agent +0, Legal Problems +0, Data Resources +1, Law LLMs +0, Evaluation +2. ExperienceIndex was excluded because court cases are only a motivating example, not a tested legal task. Synthetic-case and closed-book-evaluation limits are noted below.

Daily update 2026-10-07 (cs.CL): scanned all 147 papers on the dated list; added 3 title-deduplicated papers on contract evidence recovery, legal document automation, and training-data licensing. Category increments: Applications +2, Legal Reasoning Models +1, Legal Agent +0, Legal Problems +1, Data Resources +0, Law LLMs +0, Evaluation +2. Generic compliance references alone were excluded; the licensing paper is included for its article-level reuse-permission audit, not merely its open-source license. Evidence limitations are noted below.

Daily update 2026-10-06 (cs.CL): scanned all 243 papers on the dated list; added 5 title-deduplicated papers with explicit legal tasks and language-model/agent relevance. Category increments: Applications +2, Legal Reasoning Models +1, Legal Agent +1, Legal Problems +2, Data Resources +1, Law LLMs +1, Evaluation +5. Penumbra was excluded: its authored behavioral constitutions do not establish a concrete legal task. Important limitations are noted with the entries below.

Backfill update 2026-10-05 (cs.CL): scanned 1,072 papers from daily lists dated 2026-09-27 through 2026-10-04; added 18 title-deduplicated papers meeting the strict legal-task plus model/agent/RAG/dataset/benchmark rule. Empty daily lists were verified, not treated as network failures.

Category increments — Applications +7, Legal Reasoning Models +3, Legal Agent +3, Legal Problems +3, Data Resources +7, Law LLMs +1, Evaluation +15.

• Applications of Large Language Models in Legal Tasks
• Legal Reasoning Models
• Legal Agent
• Legal Problems of Large Language Models
• Data Resources for Large Language Models in Law
• Law LLMs
• Evaluation

• Towards English - Mizo Legal Machine Translation: Corpus Creation, Analysis, and Benchmarks paper — Adapts NLLB-200-1.3B for Indian court-judgment translation; the reported 27.47 BLEU does not establish legal equivalence, and English borrowing remains above human levels.

• Commit or Abstain? System One Decision Models, LLMs, and Missing Legal Authority paper — Combines typed decision models with generative LLMs to check candidate holdings and abstain when authority is missing; agreeing filters reduce wrong selections on CaseHOLD, not all forms of invalid legal authority.

• Multi-level Encoder with Global Topic for Task-oriented Dialogue Summarization paper — Graph-based MLEGT summarizes Chinese police-interrogation records using global-topic guidance and a pointer decoder; it is a specialized summarizer, not a new legal foundation model.

• When Copying Is Hard: Copy-Constrained Decoding for Exact Span Reproduction paper — CopyGen controls copying and stopping for verbatim legal-clause extraction; the backbone is frozen but lightweight plugin heads are trained.

• Hidden Cartographer: Hidden State Guided Data Selection for Dual Budgeted Instruction Tuning paper — Budgeted instruction-data selection is tested on legal examination, legal event detection, and case classification from DISC-Law-SFT; the legal setting annotates 20% of the pool and trains on 10%, not a new general legal-reasoning model.

• Legal Guidance in the Wild: How Users Seek Legal Help in Real-World LLM Conversations paper — Classifies legal-guidance intent and domains in WildChat conversations using a multi-axis taxonomy; the enriched sample does not estimate legal-help prevalence among all users.

• Beyond Recall Saturation: Scaling Hard-Negative Reranker Training for Industrial Legal Retrieval paper — Adapts Qwen3 rerankers with embedding-mined then self-mined negatives for Chinese legal retrieval; gains depend on model scale and benchmark, with no claim of case-level or temporal isolation.

• Machina Pauliana: A neuro-symbolic approach to the actio pauliana in Dutch insolvency law paper — Combines an expert-written Catala model of Dutch insolvency provisions with LLM factual extraction and retrieval-grounded resolution of open-textured terms; ten evaluation cases do not establish broad judicial reliability.

• Narrow Decision Models: A System-1 Architecture for Calibrated, Typed Decisions paper — A block-attention encoder supports typed decisions and court-communication routing; 91% agreement on held-out legal documents is agreement with a production LLM classifier, not human-labelled accuracy.

• The Italian lawmaking process: a unified and structured dataset paper — LLM extraction converts Italian parliamentary records into dated legislative events, with manual-record validation; procedural reconstruction does not establish legal interpretation or judicial reasoning ability.

• Chinese Decision: A Family of Language Models for Single-Pass Probabilistic Decision-Making paper — Jointly adapts causal language models for bounded Chinese decisions, including legal training and a 4,300-decision legal test subset; the reported 76.98% professional average is not legal-only accuracy.

• Thunder-DeID+: Boundary-Aware Korean De-identification from Court Judgments to Broader Sensitive Documents paper — Pretrained ModernBERT encoders and boundary-aware tokenization identify PII in Korean court judgments; improved span recovery does not certify complete anonymization or legal compliance.

• Making every stage of medical device document assessment with large language models deterministic paper — Deterministic retrieval and assessment of device documents against regulatory requirements; fixed-configuration reproducibility supports audit, not regulatory correctness or approval.

• Legal-R1: Agentic Retrieval for Evidence-Based Legal Reasoning paper — Multi-agent Chinese legal QA with authority- and diversity-aware evidence retrieval; only the Lawyer agent is post-trained, and benchmark gains do not certify legal advice.

• PATMT2: Two-stage domain adaptation for multilingual patent translation paper — Two-stage LoRA adaptation of Hy-MT2-7B for Chinese/English/Japanese/Korean patents; six-direction translation gains coexist with failures in four probed low-resource languages.

• RegExtract: A Benchmark for PFAS Regulatory Information Extraction with LLMs paper — Extracts typed values and provenance from US state PFAS regulations, including permitted uses and product exemptions; field extraction is not an end-to-end compliance determination.

• The Constitution Speaks Nheengatu: An Open MT System and Reproducible Corpus Pipeline for the Amazonian Língua Geral paper — Portuguese–Nheengatu constitutional translation and terminology evaluation; lexical constraints improve term realization but can cause repetition not captured by chrF++.

• Verifiable Retrieval for Legal Reasoning through Structure-driven Knowledge Graph paper — Structure-aware German statutory retrieval over 12,037 cases; retrieval-only evaluation does not establish downstream answer correctness, and charging expansion tokens reverses apparent efficiency gains.

• Benchmarking Embedding Geometries and Clustering Algorithms for Unsupervised Patent Claim Classification paper — Sentence-transformer embeddings and matched hyperbolic/Euclidean VAEs for patent prior-art retrieval; crossing CPC boundaries is a structural proxy, not expert-validated prior-art relevance or patentability.

• The "10th Juror": Open-Set Standpoint Screening for Bureaucratic Bias Detection paper — Grounds review and suggested rewrites of Dutch government documents in equal-treatment law and contextual evidence; neutralized wording does not establish that discriminatory practices have been eliminated.

• Verdicts Without Annotated Evidence: Rejection Sampling or Label-Only Post-Training for Evidence Recovery? paper — ContractNLI evidence recovery without human evidence labels during post-training; entailment accuracy does not establish citation quality, and these verdicts are contract-NLI labels, not court judgments.

• In With the Old: Enhancing 'Classical' Document Automation with Generative AI paper — Combines symbolic legal-document templates with LLM gap detection, follow-up questions and redrafting; preliminary author-constructed scenarios do not establish legal correctness.

• Breaking Bureaucracy: Evaluating open-source LLMs for legal document review paper — ContractNLI and NLI4Wills evaluation; the best tested zero-shot LLM reaches 81.2% accuracy, but does not surpass the supervised baseline on overall accuracy.

• Not Self-Decidable: LLMs Cannot Draw the Boundary of What an Agent Verifier Can Check paper — CoVer tests verification scope for EU AI Act and FINRA predicates; regulatory reference labels are mostly model-assigned proxies, with a limited human-labelled replication.

• SCM-based Fairness and Faithful Explainability for Legal Document Classification paper

• Legal text classification in Korean sexual offense cases: from traditional machine learning to large language models with XAI insights paper

• LawCompass: Navigating from Legal QA to Multi-Agent Deep Research with Grounded Evidence paper

• ARCCS: An Automated Regulatory Compliance Checking System paper

• Chinese-Jev: Bringing System One Model to Chinese-Language Tasks paper

• LAURA: Knowledge Distillation for Interpretable Ambiguous Clause Identification in Legal Contracts paper

• SinBrief: A Hybrid Framework for Abstractive Text Summarisation of Sinhala Legal Documents paper

• ARGUS: Role-Aware Event Knowledge Graphs for U.S. Employment-Discrimination Complaints paper

• Automated Regulatory Compliance Question Answering in Financial Services with Domain-Adapted Retrieval-Augmented Generation paper

• Controlled Attribute-Specific Summarization of Interrogative Dialogues paper

• LabourCrew: A Multi-Agent RAG Framework for Trustworthy Adversarial Deliberation and Statutory Reasoning over Labour Law paper

• Same Scores, Different Decisions: Evaluating JEV and Language Models for Legal Document Understanding paper

• Cross-Lingual Legal QA for Vietnamese Labour Law: Retrieval, Translation, and Verifier-Guided Correction paper

• Automated Extraction of Records of Processing Activities (RoPA) Using Hybrid RAG and Locally Deployed Large Language Models paper

• LexLattice: Multilingual Extractive Summarization via Neural Cellular Automata on Document Hierarchies paper

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

• Classifying Interpretive Canons at the Sentence Level: A Benchmark from the German Federal Constitutional Court paper

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

• Mining Legal Arguments in U.S. Corporate Case Law paper

• ABAI at COLIEE 2026 Task 1: Multi-Stage Retrieval with GraphRAG-Enhanced Meta-Learning, and a Post-Hoc Study of the Cross-Validation-to-Test Gap paper

• Efficient LLM Distillation for Bangladesh Legal Context: A Smartphone-Compatible Retrieval-Augmented Generation Model paper

• GRACE: Grounded Adversarial Reasoning over Canadian Law paper

• ChemCLIR-Bench: Benchmarking Cross-Lingual Information Retrieval in Multilingual Chemical Patents paper

• Directing large language models to follow the letter or spirit of the law paper

• Schematize: An Agentic System for Generating and Refining Information-Extraction Schemas for Legal Research paper

• Beyond Accuracy and Surface Fluency: Risk-Sensitive Evaluation of LLMs for Legal Clause Generation paper

• UK-PRBENCH: A Paragraph-Level Precedent Retrieval Benchmark for United Kingdom Case Law paper

• Benchmarking LLM Compliance with China AI Generated Content Regulations paper

• Before the Arrest: Benchmarking LLMs on Criminal Profiling from Incomplete Evidence paper

• How Much is a Human Right Worth? ECtHR-NPD: A Benchmark for Predicting Non-Pecuniary Damage Awards paper

• Linguistic Triggers of Gender and Racial Bias in Open-Weight LLMs Applied to Recruitment paper

• Nepali Legal Expertise through Generative and Extractive Pre-trained Transformers (NepLEGiT) paper

• NepKANUN: A RAG-Based Nepali Legal Assistant paper

• Few-Shot Degradation Is Not What It Seems: Behavioral Evidence, Representation Analysis, and a Random-Text Control Across 12 Models, 2 Tasks, and 2 Architectures paper

• CiteGuard-RAG: A Validation-Centered AI System for Evidence-Grounded Question Answering paper

• Semiotic Relations and Proof Methods: A Cross-Genre Study of Argument Structure with Large Language Models paper

• Building Legal Reward Models for Grounding and Abstention paper

• Algorithm Validation as a Policy Audit: Evidence from Race-blind Charging paper

• Tasks over Application Manuals: Revealing Gaps in Long-Horizon Procedural Reasoning for Language Models paper

• ProMediConv: Benchmarking Proactive Conversational Agents in Legal Dispute Mediation paper

• BodyCam-VQA: Enhanced Body-Worn Camera Video Captioning via Multimodal Reasoning and Probe Question Generation paper

• GANDR: Claim Auditing for Verifiable Legal Answer Generation paper

• When Does Defendant Statement Matter? A Study of Bias and Persuasion in LLM-Simulated Jurors paper

• MUCnoHARM@GermEval Shared Task 2026: Retrieval-based In-Context Learning for Defamatory Offences, and Where It Falls Short paper

• Reading a Legal Question Word by Word: Embedding Trajectories of 2,144 Vietnamese Legal Headlines paper

• Solving versus Verifying: Catching Contradictions in Tax Reasoning Systems paper

• LexFlip: A Dissociation Diagnostic for Legal Meaning Preservation Metrics paper

• KhatianDoc: A Human-Verified Benchmark Diagnosing Multimodal LLM Failure on Bengali Legal Land Records paper

• LexIssue: Benchmarking Legal Issue Identification in Chinese Civil Litigation paper

• OBJECTION! Lawyer Agents Mitigate Guilty Bias in Legal Judgment Prediction paper

• Privacy Washing: Detecting Internal Contradictions in Privacy Policies paper

• Polish ModernBERT: The Long and Short of Polish Language Understanding paper

• Annotated Surrogate Retrieval for Polish Statutory Law paper

• Do Small Models Use the Law You Give Them? Measuring Context Use on a Bilingual Bangladesh Legal Benchmark paper

• Improving Argument Saliency Coverage in Small LLMs for Long Legal Opinion Summarization via Sequence-Level Distillation paper

• JPO: Juris Policy Optimization for Structured Legal Reasoning in Criminal Judgment Prediction paper

• Cloud and On-Premises Deployment of Uzbek Legal RAG via Targeted Retriever Fine-Tuning paper

• Cross Lingual Transfer in Tulu Legal Comprehension: Script-Dependent Improvement and RAG-Induced Knowledge Conflict paper

• RegDivergence-101: An LLM Benchmark for Cross-Jurisdiction Regulatory Contradiction Detection in Life Sciences paper

• GreenLeaf Law Embed Tiny: A Compact Embedding Model for Legal Domain Retrieval paper

• Figurative Justice: Detecting metaphors in Hindi judgements with qualitative assessment and transformers paper

• Modeling Claim Dependency Structure for Patent Litigation Prediction with Graph Attention Networks paper

• Sycophants in the Courtroom: Are LLMs Fragile to Juridical Authority and Evolving Legal Standards? paper

• Generative Gap Filling paper

• Benchmarking Patent Drafting from Inventor-Style Disclosures paper

• Ansari: A Retrieval-Grounded Islamic AI Assistant -- Architecture, Deployment, and Lessons from 140,000 Conversations paper

• ContractScrub: A benchmark for final review of legal contracts paper

• When Machines Speak: A Unified Generative Framework for Integrating Machine-Native Symbols into Pretrained Large Language Models paper

• ChildSafeAds Shared Task 2026: Commercial Content in Child-Facing YouTube Videos paper

• GreekBarRetrieval: A Benchmark for Greek Statutory Retrieval paper

• Redakto - The Incognito Tab for LLMs paper

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

• Can LLMs Reason in a Legally Meaningful Manner? A Small-scale Study on European Court of Human Rights Cases paper

• Calibrated Trust, Not Sharper Prediction: An Empirical Test of Uncertainty Fusion paper

• Time as Structure: Temporal Dependency Graphs for Verifiable Deadline Computation over Legal Documents paper

• How Much Do Legal RAG Systems Still Hallucinate? paper

• On Measuring Semantic Preservation in Legal Ontology Learning paper

• Why Do AI Agents Break Rules? How Framing, Context, and Social Signals Shape Compliance paper

• Self-Knowledge Retrieval Augmented Generation Framework for Patent Matching paper

• Evaluating Rational Contracting in Natural Language paper

• Temporal Misgrounding in Legal RAG: A Versioned-Corpus Benchmark for French Tax Law paper

• PolicyKG: An Agentic LLM Pipeline for Translating Institutional Policies into SHACL Knowledge Graphs paper

• ANNOTARES: A Dataset for Extracting Logical Structures from German Statutory Texts paper

• CrossLex: A Source-Grounded Benchmark for Cross-Jurisdictional Legal Reasoning in Large Language Models paper

• Semantics of Subterfuge: Benchmarking Legal Deception Detection Against General-domain State-of-the-Art paper

• Credit Cards, Confusion, Computation, and Consequences: What Can We Uncover About Language Model Reasoning? paper

• From Naive RAG to Deep Agentic Retrieval: An Evolving Context Engineering Pipeline for Regulatory Compliance paper

• Legal Prompt Engineering for Multilingual Legal Judgement Prediction

• Can GPT-3 Perform Statutory Reasoning?

• Legal Prompting: Teaching a Language Model to Think Like a Lawyer

• Large Language Models as Fiduciaries: A Case Study Toward Robustly Communicating With Artificial Intelligence Through Legal Standards

• ChatGPT Goes to Law School

• ChatGPT, Professor of Law

• ChatGPT & Generative AI Systems as Quasi-Expert Legal Advice Lawyers - Case Study Considering Potential Appeal Against Conviction of Tom Hayes

• ‘Words Are Flowing Out Like Endless Rain Into a Paper Cup’: ChatGPT & Law School Assessments

• ChatGPT by OpenAI: The End of Litigation Lawyers?

• Law Informs Code: A Legal Informatics Approach to Aligning Artificial Intelligence with Humans

• ChatGPT may Pass the Bar Exam soon, but has a Long Way to Go for the LexGLUE benchmark paper

• How Ready are Pre-trained Abstractive Models and LLMs for Legal Case Judgement Summarization? paper

• Explaining Legal Concepts with Augmented Large Language Models (GPT-4) paper

• Garbage in, garbage out: Zero-shot detection of crime using Large Language Models paper

• Legal Summarisation through LLMs: The PRODIGIT Project paper

• Black-Box Analysis: GPTs Across Time in Legal Textual Entailment Task paper

• PolicyGPT: Automated Analysis of Privacy Policies with Large Language Models

• Reformulating Domain Adaptation of Large Language Models as Adapt-Retrieve-Revise paper

• Precedent-Enhanced Legal Judgment Prediction with LLM and Domain-Model Collaboration paper

• From Text to Structure: Using Large Language Models to Support the Development of Legal Expert Systems paper

• Boosting legal case retrieval by query content selection with large language models paper

• LLMediator: GPT-4 Assisted Online Dispute Resolution paper

• Employing Label Models on ChatGPT Answers Improves Legal Text Entailment Performance paper

• LLaMandement: Large Language Models for Summarization of French Legislative Proposals paper

• Logic Rules as Explanations for Legal Case Retrieval paper Our new paper, welcome to pay attention !!!

• Enhancing Legal Document Retrieval: A Multi-Phase Approach with Large Language Models paper

• BLADE: Enhancing Black-box Large Language Models with Small Domain-Specific Models paper

• A Survey on Large Language Models for Critical Societal Domains: Finance, Healthcare, and Law paper

• Archimedes-AUEB at SemEval-2024 Task 5: LLM explains Civil Procedure paper

• More Than Catastrophic Forgetting: Integrating General Capabilities For Domain-Specific LLMs paper

• Legal Documents Drafting with Fine-Tuned Pre-Trained Large Language Model paper

• Knowledge-Infused Legal Wisdom: Navigating LLM Consultation through the Lens of Diagnostics and Positive-Unlabeled Reinforcement Learning paper

• GOLDCOIN: Grounding Large Language Models in Privacy Laws via Contextual Integrity Theory paper

• Enabling Discriminative Reasoning in Large Language Models for Legal Judgment Prediction paper

• Large Language Models for Judicial Entity Extraction: A Comparative Study paper

• Applicability of Large Language Models and Generative Models for Legal Case Judgement Summarization paper

• LawLLM: Law Large Language Model for the US Legal System paper

• Legal syllogism prompting: Teaching large language models for legal judgment prediction paper

• Optimizing Numerical Estimation and Operational Efficiency in the Legal Domain through Large Language Models paper

• Hallucination-Free? Assessing the Reliability of Leading AI Legal Research Tools paper

• KRAG Framework for Enhancing LLMs in the Legal Domain paper

• Legal Evaluations and Challenges of Large Language Models paper

• Analyzing Images of Legal Documents: Toward Multi-Modal LLMs for Access to Justice paper

• Automating Legal Concept Interpretation with LLMs: Retrieval, Generation, and Evaluation paper

• Domaino1s: Guiding LLM Reasoning for Explainable Answers in High-Stakes Domains paper

• RELexED: Retrieval-Enhanced Legal Summarization with Exemplar Diversity paper

• Courtroom-LLM: A Legal-Inspired Multi-LLM Framework for Resolving Ambiguous Text Classifications paper

• LegalViz: Legal Text Visualization by Text To Diagram Generation paper

• Investigating the Shortcomings of LLMs in Step-by-Step Legal Reasoning paper

• Elevating Legal LLM Responses: Harnessing Trainable Logical Structures and Semantic Knowledge with Legal Reasoning paper

• JuDGE: Benchmarking Judgment Document Generation for Chinese Legal System paper

• LARGE: Legal Retrieval Augmented Generation Evaluation Tool paper

• Tasks and Roles in Legal AI: Data Curation, Annotation, and Verification paper

• The Hidden Structure -- Improving Legal Document Understanding Through Explicit Text Formatting paper

• Conditioning Large Language Models on Legal Systems? Detecting Punishable Hate Speech paper

• CORE-KG: An LLM-Driven Knowledge Graph Construction Framework for Human Smuggling Networks paper

• LLM-based Embedders for Prior Case Retrieval paper

• Towards Automated Regulatory Compliance Verification in Financial Auditing with Large Language Models paper

• Using Large Language Models for Legal Decision-Making in Austrian Value-Added Tax Law: An Experimental Study paper

• ASVRI-Legal: Fine-Tuning LLMs with Retrieval Augmented Generation for Enhanced Legal Regulation paper

• LLMs in Interpreting Legal Documents paper

• HalluGraph: Auditable Hallucination Detection for Legal RAG Systems via Knowledge Graph Alignment paper

• Evaluating Legal Reasoning Traces with Legal Issue Tree Rubrics paper

• Jurisdiction as Structural Barrier: How Privacy Policy Organization May Reduce Visibility of Substantive Disclosures paper

• Enforcing Monotonic Progress in Legal Cross-Examination: Preventing Long-Horizon Stagnation in LLM-Based Inquiry paper

• Anchored Decoding: Provably Reducing Copyright Risk for Any Language Model paper

• Synthesizing the Virtual Advocate: A Multi-Persona Speech Generation Framework for Diverse Linguistic Jurisdictions in Indic Languages paper

• AI-Assisted Moot Courts: Simulating Justice-Specific Questioning in Oral Arguments paper

• LLM-Assisted Causal Structure Disambiguation and Factor Extraction for Legal Judgment Prediction paper

• De Jure: Iterative LLM Self-Refinement for Structured Extraction of Regulatory Rules paper

• ContextLens: Modeling Imperfect Privacy and Safety Context for Legal Compliance paper

• Eskwai for Students: Generative AI Assistant for Legal Education in Ghana paper

• Learning Faster with Better Tokens: Parameter-Efficient Vocabulary Adaptation for Specialized Text Summarization paper

• Exploring Lightweight Large Language Models for Court View Generation paper

• Retrieval-Based Multi-Label Legal Annotation: Extensible, Data-Efficient and Hallucination-Free paper

• Chunking German Legal Code paper

• Generating Legal Commentaries from Case Databases via Retrieval, Clustering, and Generation paper

• Decompose-and-Refine: Structured Legal Question Answering with Parametric Retrieval paper

• Retrieval-Augmented Detection of Potentially Abusive Clauses in Chilean Terms of Service paper

• Traceable by Design: An LLM Pipeline and Dashboard for EU Regulatory Consultation Analysis paper

• ImmigrationQA: A Source-Grounded Dataset and Small-Model Adaptation for U.S. Immigration Law paper

• Citation Grounding: Detecting and Reducing LLM Citation Hallucinations via Legal Citation Graphs paper

• Enhancing BiGRU with a KAN Block for Legal Document Classification and Summarization paper

• On Wednesdays, We Ask Questions: Optimizing "Active Listening" in Automated Legal Triage and Referral paper

• Re-Ranking Through an Attribution Lens for Citation Quality in Legal QA paper

• EURO-5K: When Does Domain Pretraining Matter? Benchmarking Transformers for EU Reporting Obligation Extraction paper

• DAR: Deontic Reasoning with Agentic Harnesses paper

• GARL: Game-Theoretic Reinforcement Learning for Multi-Agent Strategic Prioritisation paper

• Civil Court Simulation with Large Language Models paper

• LexRubric: A Rubric-Guided Diagnostic Benchmark for Open-Ended Legal Tasks paper

• From Statute to Control Flow: Span-Grounded Deontic Trees for Defeasible Scope Parsing paper

• Retrieval Augmented Generation Framework for the Nepali Legal Domain Question Answering paper

• FineREX: Fine-Tuned NER-RE for Human Smuggling Knowledge Graphs paper

• Reinforcement learning to improve large language model-based automated code compliance systems paper

• Measuring & Mitigating Over-Alignment for LLMs in Multilingual Criminal Law Courts paper

• Peeking Inside LLMs: Leveraging Internal Artifacts of LLMs for Enhancing Reliability in Legal Classification paper

• A Tree-of-Thoughts Inspired Hybrid Approach for Legal Case Judgement Summarization using LLMs paper

• PRecG: Legal Precedent Retrieval with Graph Neural Networks and Rhetorical Role Segmentation paper

• Cross-Architecture LLM Ensembles, Feature-Based Reranking and Retrieval-Augmented Prompting for Legal Information Processing paper

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

• The Price of Reasoning: Cost-Quality Tradeoffs in Reinforcement Learning for Neural Machine Translation paper

• Reasoning Before Translation: Enhancing Legal Machine Translation with Structured Reasoning paper

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

• Enabling Multilingual Privacy Policy Audits: Large-Scale Analysis of Spanish Mobile Apps paper

• From Obligation to Specification: A Survey on Validating EU AI Act Requirements in RE paper

• Retrieval-Augmented Large Language Models as Components of Cognitive Computing architecture for Regulatory Knowledge Management paper

• Do Small Models Use the Law You Give Them? Context-Injected Fine-Tuning for Legal QA in Bangladesh paper

• Commit or Abstain? System One Decision Models, LLMs, and Missing Legal Authority paper — Studies closed-set holding selection with an abstention option and probability distillation into Qwen3-8B; one English US-case-law task and single-run distillation limit generalization.

• Machina Pauliana: A neuro-symbolic approach to the actio pauliana in Dutch insolvency law paper — LLM routines resolve factual and case-law-dependent inputs while the hand-written symbolic solver applies Articles 42, 43, and 45 Fw; the knowledge requirement remains difficult, and deeper retrieval shows no clear aggregate benefit.

• Legal-R1: Agentic Retrieval for Evidence-Based Legal Reasoning paper — Masked SFT and trajectory-aware RL train a Lawyer agent to acquire sufficient legal evidence; the retrieval and answer-generation roles are separate agents.

• Enhancing Legal Reasoning in Pre-trained Language Models via Knowledge Graph-Guided Multi-Task Pre-training paper — KG-guided objectives for nine Transformer encoders on traffic-law QA; synthetic correctness judgments and transfer benchmarks do not establish general judicial reasoning.

• Verdicts Without Annotated Evidence: Rejection Sampling or Label-Only Post-Training for Evidence Recovery? paper — Compares label-only and rejection-sampling post-training of Qwen3.5-9B for contract entailment and evidence recovery; one seed on one corpus does not establish a reliable method ranking.

• Better Call Reward: Reward Hacking as Strategic Abstention in Legal Reasoning Models paper — GRPO on Qwen3-8B with surface-feature rewards; the LegalBench accuracy drop is primarily failure to return committed, properly formatted answers, not direct evidence of general reasoning-capability loss.

• LexReward: A Taxonomy-Driven Reward Framework for Legal Language Models paper

• Is This Evidence Decision-Critical? Learning to Verify Rule-Governed Decisions paper

• RGDT-Bench: Benchmarking LLM Reasoning for Rule-Governed Decisions and Their Justifications paper

• LabourCrew: A Multi-Agent RAG Framework for Trustworthy Adversarial Deliberation and Statutory Reasoning over Labour Law paper

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

• GRACE: Grounded Adversarial Reasoning over Canadian Law paper

• Directing large language models to follow the letter or spirit of the law paper

• Semiotic Relations and Proof Methods: A Cross-Genre Study of Argument Structure with Large Language Models paper

• Building Legal Reward Models for Grounding and Abstention paper

• GANDR: Claim Auditing for Verifiable Legal Answer Generation paper

• Solving versus Verifying: Catching Contradictions in Tax Reasoning Systems paper

• LexIssue: Benchmarking Legal Issue Identification in Chinese Civil Litigation paper

• OBJECTION! Lawyer Agents Mitigate Guilty Bias in Legal Judgment Prediction paper

• Do Small Models Use the Law You Give Them? Measuring Context Use on a Bilingual Bangladesh Legal Benchmark paper

• JPO: Juris Policy Optimization for Structured Legal Reasoning in Criminal Judgment Prediction paper

• Modeling Claim Dependency Structure for Patent Litigation Prediction with Graph Attention Networks paper

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

• Can LLMs Reason in a Legally Meaningful Manner? A Small-scale Study on European Court of Human Rights Cases paper

• Time as Structure: Temporal Dependency Graphs for Verifiable Deadline Computation over Legal Documents paper

• LexPro-1.0 Technical Report paper

• LexPam: Legal Procedure Awareness-Guided Mathematical Reasoning paper

• Mining Hidden Thoughts from Texts: Evaluating Continual Pretraining with Synthetic Data for LLM Reasoning paper

• SyLeR: A Framework for Explicit Syllogistic Legal Reasoning in Large Language Models paper

• Contractual Deepfakes: Can Large Language Models Generate Contracts? paper

• LePREC: Reasoning as Classification over Structured Factors for Assessing Relevance of Legal Issues paper

• Falkor-IRAC: Graph-Constrained Generation for Verified Legal Reasoning in Indian Judicial AI paper

• Bridging Legal Interpretation and Formal Logic: Faithfulness, Assumption, and the Future of AI Legal Reasoning paper

• TypedCSIP: Typed Counterfactual Pretraining for Chinese Legislative Conflict Classification paper

• By Their Fruits You Will Know Them: Comparing Formalizations of Law by the Decisions They Encode paper

• Scaling Multi-Hop Training Data via Graph-Constrained Path Selection paper

• DAR: Deontic Reasoning with Agentic Harnesses paper

• Civil Court Simulation with Large Language Models paper

• From Statute to Control Flow: Span-Grounded Deontic Trees for Defeasible Scope Parsing paper

• Generative Chinese Statute Retrieval paper

• Do Small Models Use the Law You Give Them? Context-Injected Fine-Tuning for Legal QA in Bangladesh paper

• Reasoning Consensus: Structural Ensembling of LLM Reasoning via Weighted DAG Aggregation paper

• Legal-R1: Agentic Retrieval for Evidence-Based Legal Reasoning paper — Lawyer, Legal Assistant and Judge roles coordinate retrieval from normative sources and precedent cases; evaluation is on Chinese legal benchmarks.

• APEX-Harm: Evaluating Agent Safety in Shared Professional Workspaces paper — A professional-agent safety benchmark with five Law-domain base tasks, including contract work; aggregate results mix law, banking and consulting and are not law-only estimates.

• The "10th Juror": Open-Set Standpoint Screening for Bureaucratic Bias Detection paper — MARS-Gov combines legal retrieval, open-set standpoint screening, specialized jurors and rewrite verification; deployment requires jurisdiction-specific normative resources and human review.

• InvestigationWorlds: An Agentic Environment for Legal Investigation paper — An attorney-validated environment built from 100 federal cases and synthetic surrounding documents; the reference is a court-adopted hypothesis for a summary judgment motion, not unrestricted factual truth.

• Legal Research Bench: Measuring End-to-End Reliability in Long-Horizon Legal Research Agents paper

• LawCompass: Navigating from Legal QA to Multi-Agent Deep Research with Grounded Evidence paper

• ARCCS: An Automated Regulatory Compliance Checking System paper

• LabourCrew: A Multi-Agent RAG Framework for Trustworthy Adversarial Deliberation and Statutory Reasoning over Labour Law paper

• Schematize: An Agentic System for Generating and Refining Information-Extraction Schemas for Legal Research paper

• NepKANUN: A RAG-Based Nepali Legal Assistant paper

• ProMediConv: Benchmarking Proactive Conversational Agents in Legal Dispute Mediation paper

• GANDR: Claim Auditing for Verifiable Legal Answer Generation paper

• OBJECTION! Lawyer Agents Mitigate Guilty Bias in Legal Judgment Prediction paper

• Cloud and On-Premises Deployment of Uzbek Legal RAG via Targeted Retriever Fine-Tuning paper

• Benchmarking Patent Drafting from Inventor-Style Disclosures paper

• Ansari: A Retrieval-Grounded Islamic AI Assistant -- Architecture, Deployment, and Lessons from 140,000 Conversations paper

• Why Do AI Agents Break Rules? How Framing, Context, and Social Signals Shape Compliance paper

• Evaluating Rational Contracting in Natural Language paper

• PolicyKG: An Agentic LLM Pipeline for Translating Institutional Policies into SHACL Knowledge Graphs paper

• From Naive RAG to Deep Agentic Retrieval: An Evolving Context Engineering Pipeline for Regulatory Compliance paper

• When Correct Isn't Usable: Improving Structured Output Reliability in Small Language Models paper

• Accurate Legal Reasoning at Scale: Neuro-Symbolic Offloading and Structural Auditability for Robust Legal Adjudication paper

• SimuCourt: Building Judicial Decision-Making Agents with Real-world Judgement Documents paper

• Can Large Language Models Grasp Legal Theories? Enhance Legal Reasoning with Insights from Multi-Agent Collaboration paper

• Multi-Agent Simulator Drives Language Models for Legal Intensive Interaction paper

• CLAIM: An Intent-Driven Multi-Agent Framework for Analyzing Manipulation in Courtroom Dialogues paper

• PAKTON: A Multi-Agent Framework for Question Answering in Long Legal Agreements paper

• LLM Agents in Law: Taxonomy, Applications, and Challenges paper

• Dissecting Judicial Reasoning in U.S. Copyright Damage Awards paper

• Multimodal Multi-Agent Empowered Legal Judgment Prediction paper

• LegalMALR:Multi-Agent Query Understanding and LLM-Based Reranking for Chinese Statute Retrieval paper

• LegalOne: A Family of Foundation Models for Reliable Legal Reasoning paper

• Domain-Partitioned Hybrid RAG for Legal Reasoning: Toward Modular and Explainable Legal AI for India paper

• LexChronos: An Agentic Framework for Structured Event Timeline Extraction in Indian Jurisprudence paper

• Fanar-Sadiq: A Multi-Agent Architecture for Grounded Islamic QA paper

• Dual Hierarchical Dialogue Policy Learning for Legal Inquisitive Conversational Agents paper

• Can LLMs Time Travel? Enhancing Temporal Consistency in Legal Agentic Search through Reinforcement Learning paper

• SIA: Self Improving AI with Harness & Weight Updates paper

• LegalGraphRAG: Multi-Agent Graph Retrieval-Augmented Generation for Reliable Legal Reasoning paper

• DAR: Deontic Reasoning with Agentic Harnesses paper

• GARL: Game-Theoretic Reinforcement Learning for Multi-Agent Strategic Prioritisation paper

• Civil Court Simulation with Large Language Models paper

• From Statute to Control Flow: Span-Grounded Deontic Trees for Defeasible Scope Parsing paper

• DeXposure-Claw: An Agentic System for DeFi Risk Supervision paper

• Agentic Evaluation of Copyright Law Compliance paper

• From Obligation to Specification: A Survey on Validating EU AI Act Requirements in RE paper

• Where Do Legal Factors Live in LLMs? paper — Probes 26 CATO trade-secret factors in three open models and localizes sparse readouts; decodability on controlled narratives does not demonstrate causal use in legal reasoning.

• Same Probabilities, Different Advice: Gain-Loss Framing Effects in High-Stakes LLM Decision Support paper — Tests equivalent probability frames in advice, including workplace-dispute settlement and consumer remedies; consistent recommendations need not be legally correct.

• Policy Is Not Capability: Some Safety Benchmarks Measure Which Definition of "Unsafe" You Trained On paper — Audits how supervision definitions change copyright-reproduction guardrail decisions; HarmBench-copyright scores reflect moderation taxonomies, not adjudicated infringement or jurisdiction-specific legal compliance.

• In the Guise of Correction: How Framing and Cultural Adaptation Erode LLM Safety on Real-World Criminal Cases paper — GUISE tests criminal assistance using real cases and the UNODC ICCS taxonomy; framing and cultural adaptation expose refusal failures, not jurisdiction-specific legal judgments.

• ContextLift: Breaking the Spurious Correlation Behind Conditional Emergent Misalignment paper — Tests Qwen2.5-7B finetuned on bad legal advice: context augmentation reduces cued broad misalignment from 41.9% to 6.1%, but leaves the learned bad advice intact; one model and an LLM judge limit generalization.

• UDHRBench: Benchmarking Human Rights in Large Language Models paper — Evaluates alignment with all 30 Universal Declaration of Human Rights articles using expert-labelled responses; benchmark alignment is not a jurisdiction-specific legal judgment.

• APEX-Harm: Evaluating Agent Safety in Shared Professional Workspaces paper — Measures unauthorized actions and disclosure in simulated professional workspaces, including legal tasks; successful deliverables need not imply safe execution. No real client data or live external targets were used.

• Cited but Not Consulted: A Counterfactual Audit of Legal Chain-of-Thought Faithfulness paper — Naming a statute or precedent is not sufficient evidence that a verdict depends on it; authority-swap confounds and small samples limit interpretation of the faithfulness audit.

• Verdict Without the Rule: Diagnosing and Auditing Regulatory Rule Sensitivity in LLM Compliance Systems paper — Audits dependence on supplied regulatory rules, including GDPR, HIPAA and the EU AI Act; verdict invariance and a low single-direction probe shift do not prove that all rule information was ignored.

• When Citations Mislead? A Claim-Level Benchmark for Legal Hallucination Detection paper — Studies unsupported legal claims despite access to the cited opinion; textual support and general legal truth are distinct targets.

• Calibrated Answers About Randomized Trials From a 4-Billion-Parameter Open Model: A Registered Test and a License-Clean Release paper — Audits article-level training-data reuse permissions and measures the accuracy trade-off of license-filtered fine-tuning. BM25 statistics use the full corpus and the PubMedQA initialization lacks an article-level license audit; the release is not a blanket copyright clearance or a legal-task model.

• Better Call Reward: Reward Hacking as Strategic Abstention in Legal Reasoning Models paper — Studies reward hacking, abstention and structurally implausible citations in legal reasoning.

• Not Self-Decidable: LLMs Cannot Draw the Boundary of What an Agent Verifier Can Check paper — Models disagree on whether regulatory predicates admit fixed checks; unanimous labels do not by themselves certify safe enforcement.

• SCM-based Fairness and Faithful Explainability for Legal Document Classification paper

• ContextAdapt: Evaluating Contextual Adaptation and Value Alignment in LLMs paper

• Stale-Document Poisoning: When Outdated Retrieval Overrides Correct Model Answers paper

• Directing large language models to follow the letter or spirit of the law paper

• Beyond Accuracy and Surface Fluency: Risk-Sensitive Evaluation of LLMs for Legal Clause Generation paper

• Benchmarking LLM Compliance with China AI Generated Content Regulations paper

• Before the Arrest: Benchmarking LLMs on Criminal Profiling from Incomplete Evidence paper

• Linguistic Triggers of Gender and Racial Bias in Open-Weight LLMs Applied to Recruitment paper

• Legal LLM Hallucination Should Be Evaluated as Failure of Legal Warrant paper

• Few-Shot Degradation Is Not What It Seems: Behavioral Evidence, Representation Analysis, and a Random-Text Control Across 12 Models, 2 Tasks, and 2 Architectures paper

• CiteGuard-RAG: A Validation-Centered AI System for Evidence-Grounded Question Answering paper

• Building Legal Reward Models for Grounding and Abstention paper

• Algorithm Validation as a Policy Audit: Evidence from Race-blind Charging paper

• Tasks over Application Manuals: Revealing Gaps in Long-Horizon Procedural Reasoning for Language Models paper

• BodyCam-VQA: Enhanced Body-Worn Camera Video Captioning via Multimodal Reasoning and Probe Question Generation paper

• GANDR: Claim Auditing for Verifiable Legal Answer Generation paper

• When Does Defendant Statement Matter? A Study of Bias and Persuasion in LLM-Simulated Jurors paper

• MUCnoHARM@GermEval Shared Task 2026: Retrieval-based In-Context Learning for Defamatory Offences, and Where It Falls Short paper

• Reading a Legal Question Word by Word: Embedding Trajectories of 2,144 Vietnamese Legal Headlines paper

• FramingQA: Does the Question Shape the Answer? Measuring the Compositional Framing Effect paper

• Solving versus Verifying: Catching Contradictions in Tax Reasoning Systems paper

• LexFlip: A Dissociation Diagnostic for Legal Meaning Preservation Metrics paper

• Rent-a-RAG: Embedding-Space Watermarks for Auditing Third-Party RAG paper

• OBJECTION! Lawyer Agents Mitigate Guilty Bias in Legal Judgment Prediction paper

• Cross Lingual Transfer in Tulu Legal Comprehension: Script-Dependent Improvement and RAG-Induced Knowledge Conflict paper

• Sycophants in the Courtroom: Are LLMs Fragile to Juridical Authority and Evolving Legal Standards? paper

• ContractScrub: A benchmark for final review of legal contracts paper

• Redakto - The Incognito Tab for LLMs paper

• Can LLMs Reason in a Legally Meaningful Manner? A Small-scale Study on European Court of Human Rights Cases paper

• Calibrated Trust, Not Sharper Prediction: An Empirical Test of Uncertainty Fusion paper

• Gated Against One Model, Open to the Next: Option-Only Solvability in Legal Multiple-Choice Benchmarks paper

• How Much Do Legal RAG Systems Still Hallucinate? paper

• Why Do AI Agents Break Rules? How Framing, Context, and Social Signals Shape Compliance paper

• Is this Citation on Point? paper

• SoK: From Generation to Consumption of Privacy Documents in Software Systems paper

• Evaluating Rational Contracting in Natural Language paper

• Temporal Misgrounding in Legal RAG: A Versioned-Corpus Benchmark for French Tax Law paper

• LexKairos: Benchmarking Legal Temporal Capabilities in LLMs paper

• Knowing the Form, Not the Function: Automatically Auditing Answer--Authority Decoupling in Legal Benchmarks paper

• CrossLex: A Source-Grounded Benchmark for Cross-Jurisdictional Legal Reasoning in Large Language Models paper

• Semantics of Subterfuge: Benchmarking Legal Deception Detection Against General-domain State-of-the-Art paper

• Towards WinoQueer: Developing a Benchmark for Anti-Queer Bias in Large Language Models

• Persistent Anti-Muslim Bias in Large Language Models

• Understanding the Capabilities, Limitations, and Societal Impact of Large Language Models

• The Dark Side of ChatGPT: Legal and Ethical Challenges from Stochastic Parrots and Hallucination

• The GPTJudge: Justice in a Generative AI World paper

• Is the U.S. Legal System Ready for AI's Challenges to Human Values? paper

• Questioning Biases in Case Judgment Summaries: Legal Datasets or Large Language Models? paper

• Large Legal Fictions: Profiling Legal Hallucinations in Large Language Models

• A Legal Framework for Natural Language Processing Model Training in Portugal paper

• LegalBench-RAG: A Benchmark for Retrieval-Augmented Generation in the Legal Domain paper

• Bias in Large Language Models: Origin, Evaluation, and Mitigation paper

• An Information Theoretic Approach to Operationalize Right to Data Protection paper

• Protecting Privacy in Multimodal Large Language Models with MLLMU-Bench paper

• Standardizing Intelligence: Aligning Generative AI for Regulatory and Operational Compliance paper

• TRIDENT: Benchmarking LLM Safety in Finance, Medicine, and Law paper

• Large Language Models as Search Engines: Societal Challenges paper

• From Unfamiliar to Familiar: Detecting Pre-training Data via Gradient Deviations in Large Language Models paper

• TimeMark: A Trustworthy Time Watermarking Framework for Exact Generation-Time Recovery from AIGC paper

• To See is Not to Learn: Protecting Multimodal Data from Unauthorized Fine-Tuning of Large Vision-Language Model paper

• Divergence Decoding: Inference-Time Unlearning via Auxiliary Models paper

• Citation Grounding: Detecting and Reducing LLM Citation Hallucinations via Legal Citation Graphs paper

• Which Institutional Frameworks Do Chatbots Assume? Auditing Jurisdictional Defaults in Multilingual LLMs paper

• Measuring & Mitigating Over-Alignment for LLMs in Multilingual Criminal Law Courts paper

• Who Checks the Citations? Benchmarking Legal Hallucination Detection paper

• Peeking Inside LLMs: Leveraging Internal Artifacts of LLMs for Enhancing Reliability in Legal Classification paper

• Position: The Term "Machine Unlearning" Is Overused in LLMs paper

• Open but Incompatible: A License Compatibility Analysis of Corpora for Low-Resource African Languages paper

• Probing Stylistic Appropriation using Large Language Models: An Evaluation Framework for Copyright Infringement under EU Law paper

• The Perplexity Trap: When Patent Law Makes Human Writing Look Like AI paper

• Agentic Evaluation of Copyright Law Compliance paper

• Towards English - Mizo Legal Machine Translation: Corpus Creation, Analysis, and Benchmarks paper — Introduces 13,168 manually aligned English–Mizo sentence pairs from Indian court judgments, professionally translated and independently reviewed.

• norregel: a preregistered benchmark of dated numeric values in Norwegian law paper — Builds 916 dated statutory/regulatory/parliamentary-value items from Lovdata; item texts and answer keys are withheld, while IDs, answer classes, code and results are reported on Zenodo.

• Same Probabilities, Different Advice: Gain-Loss Framing Effects in High-Stakes LLM Decision Support paper — FrameBench-HPS contains 2,880 prompts from 240 synthetic scenarios across four domains, including a concrete legal/consumer-rights subset; these totals are not legal-only counts.

• When Copying Is Hard: Copy-Constrained Decoding for Exact Span Reproduction paper — Constructs a contract-clause extraction benchmark from SEC EDGAR exhibits, with 658 training and 141 test examples; this is one domain of a broader exact-copy benchmark.

• Legal Guidance in the Wild: How Users Seek Legal Help in Real-World LLM Conversations paper — Annotates 2,122 WildChat-1M conversations and supplies a 200-conversation human-reviewed gold set, with public annotations, checkpoints, and evaluation code.

• The Italian lawmaking process: a unified and structured dataset paper — Reports procedural histories for 5,346 Italian laws enacted in 1985–2026, comprising 101,413 dated events extracted from institutional parliamentary records; scope and coverage follow the authors' report.

• In the Guise of Correction: How Framing and Cultural Adaptation Erode LLM Safety on Real-World Criminal Cases paper — GUISE provides real-case criminal-assistance scenarios organized by ICCS, with three framings and five cultural settings; the resource evaluates harmful assistance, not legal adjudication.

• LegalRewardBench: Benchmarking Reward Models for Legal Preference Evaluation paper — Human-verified legal preference benchmark spanning knowledge, understanding, analysis, decision and writing; automatic rubric judging is combined with human verification.

• PatTransBench: an ipc-stratified, multi-dimensional benchmark for patent machine translation evaluation paper — 12,000 short/long patent translation pairs across Chinese–English/Japanese/Korean and both directions; release is planned upon publication, not verified as already available.

• UDHRBench: Benchmarking Human Rights in Large Language Models paper — 1,124 questions and 4,496 expert-annotated responses covering the UDHR; the abstract announces a future open-source release.

• RegExtract: A Benchmark for PFAS Regulatory Information Extraction with LLMs paper — 488 annotated fields across 20 US state documents and 46 regulations, each with a value and provenance (976 entries); code/data are linked by the authors.

• The Constitution Speaks Nheengatu: An Open MT System and Reproducible Corpus Pipeline for the Amazonian Língua Geral paper — 14.5k Portuguese–Nheengatu parallel pairs anchored by the official Brazilian Constitution translation, plus speech evaluation; the corpus is not exclusively legal text.

• Enhancing Legal Reasoning in Pre-trained Language Models via Knowledge Graph-Guided Multi-Task Pre-training paper — Reports 12,554 synthetic StVO QA pairs, a parsed KG and pipeline resources; heuristic quality filtering and shared generators do not provide independent legal-expert validation.

• Verifiable Retrieval for Legal Reasoning through Structure-driven Knowledge Graph paper — Reports a German statutory KG, six chunk corpora and case identifiers with parsed citations/reconstruction scripts; evaluation reference citations are restricted to codes covered by the graph.

• AMLworld-Compact: Importance-Weighted Downsampling for Cost-Effective LLM Evaluation and Error Diagnosis paper — Releases weighted evaluation subsets for illicit-transaction detection in synthetic AMLworld graphs: 3,753 HI-Small and 2,268 LI-Small targets. These are anti-money-laundering detection resources, not court verdicts or statutory labels.

• APEX-Harm: Evaluating Agent Safety in Shared Professional Workspaces paper — Fifteen professional base tasks, five in Law, expanded into 180 attack instances per model; security assets and authorization scenarios are synthetic, not real client matters.

• When Citations Mislead? A Claim-Level Benchmark for Legal Hallucination Detection paper — PARCEL contains 3,396 synthetic claims grounded in 85 New York State Court of Appeals decisions, labeled Supported, Refuted or Not Found; these are generated benchmark claims, not 3,396 naturally occurring litigation errors.

• InsClaimBench: Benchmarking Insurance Claim Adjudication Across the Decision Chain paper — 3,780 synthetic claim files in 375 families, grounded in insurance-contract provisions and rules; approximately 10% of families underwent expert review, not the entire benchmark.

• InvestigationWorlds: An Agentic Environment for Legal Investigation paper — Real PACER case records augmented with role-tagged synthetic evidence for legal investigation; distinguish original exhibits, generated documents and court-adopted reference hypotheses.

• HakemBench: A Turkish Benchmark of Typed Decisions paper — Includes constitutional-right identification and court routing; legal labels are partly AI-derived.

• Verifiable, Articulable, and Tacit Components of Preference paper — Includes law/policy tasks; patent prediction results were withdrawn due to label leakage.

• Legal Research Bench: Measuring End-to-End Reliability in Long-Horizon Legal Research Agents paper

• ContextAdapt: Evaluating Contextual Adaptation and Value Alignment in LLMs paper

• LegalPincite: Multi-level Legal Information Retrieval Dataset paper

• ViLegalExpert: A Large-Scale Benchmark for Vietnamese Legal Retrieval and Question Answering from Real-World Consultations paper

• Chinese-Jev: Bringing System One Model to Chinese-Language Tasks paper

• RGDT-Bench: Benchmarking LLM Reasoning for Rule-Governed Decisions and Their Justifications paper

• Stale-Document Poisoning: When Outdated Retrieval Overrides Correct Model Answers paper

• Controlled Attribute-Specific Summarization of Interrogative Dialogues paper

• Cross-Lingual Legal QA for Vietnamese Labour Law: Retrieval, Translation, and Verifier-Guided Correction paper

• Automated Extraction of Records of Processing Activities (RoPA) Using Hybrid RAG and Locally Deployed Large Language Models paper

• Classifying Interpretive Canons at the Sentence Level: A Benchmark from the German Federal Constitutional Court paper

• Mining Legal Arguments in U.S. Corporate Case Law paper

• GRACE: Grounded Adversarial Reasoning over Canadian Law paper

• ChemCLIR-Bench: Benchmarking Cross-Lingual Information Retrieval in Multilingual Chemical Patents paper

• UK-PRBENCH: A Paragraph-Level Precedent Retrieval Benchmark for United Kingdom Case Law paper

• Benchmarking LLM Compliance with China AI Generated Content Regulations paper

• Before the Arrest: Benchmarking LLMs on Criminal Profiling from Incomplete Evidence paper

• How Much is a Human Right Worth? ECtHR-NPD: A Benchmark for Predicting Non-Pecuniary Damage Awards paper

• Nepali Legal Expertise through Generative and Extractive Pre-trained Transformers (NepLEGiT) paper

• NepKANUN: A RAG-Based Nepali Legal Assistant paper

• Building Legal Reward Models for Grounding and Abstention paper

• Tasks over Application Manuals: Revealing Gaps in Long-Horizon Procedural Reasoning for Language Models paper

• ProMediConv: Benchmarking Proactive Conversational Agents in Legal Dispute Mediation paper

• When Does Defendant Statement Matter? A Study of Bias and Persuasion in LLM-Simulated Jurors paper

• FramingQA: Does the Question Shape the Answer? Measuring the Compositional Framing Effect paper

• LexFlip: A Dissociation Diagnostic for Legal Meaning Preservation Metrics paper

• KhatianDoc: A Human-Verified Benchmark Diagnosing Multimodal LLM Failure on Bengali Legal Land Records paper

• LexIssue: Benchmarking Legal Issue Identification in Chinese Civil Litigation paper

• OBJECTION! Lawyer Agents Mitigate Guilty Bias in Legal Judgment Prediction paper

• Polish ModernBERT: The Long and Short of Polish Language Understanding paper

• Annotated Surrogate Retrieval for Polish Statutory Law paper

• Do Small Models Use the Law You Give Them? Measuring Context Use on a Bilingual Bangladesh Legal Benchmark paper

• Cloud and On-Premises Deployment of Uzbek Legal RAG via Targeted Retriever Fine-Tuning paper

• RegDivergence-101: An LLM Benchmark for Cross-Jurisdiction Regulatory Contradiction Detection in Life Sciences paper

• GreenLeaf Law Embed Tiny: A Compact Embedding Model for Legal Domain Retrieval paper

• Figurative Justice: Detecting metaphors in Hindi judgements with qualitative assessment and transformers paper

• Sycophants in the Courtroom: Are LLMs Fragile to Juridical Authority and Evolving Legal Standards? paper

• Benchmarking Patent Drafting from Inventor-Style Disclosures paper

• ImmigrationReason: A Structured Dataset of U.S. Immigration Appeals for Legal Reasoning Research paper

• ContractScrub: A benchmark for final review of legal contracts paper

• ChildSafeAds Shared Task 2026: Commercial Content in Child-Facing YouTube Videos paper

• GreekBarRetrieval: A Benchmark for Greek Statutory Retrieval paper

• Gated Against One Model, Open to the Next: Option-Only Solvability in Legal Multiple-Choice Benchmarks paper

• Temporal Misgrounding in Legal RAG: A Versioned-Corpus Benchmark for French Tax Law paper

• LexKairos: Benchmarking Legal Temporal Capabilities in LLMs paper

• ANNOTARES: A Dataset for Extracting Logical Structures from German Statutory Texts paper

• CrossLex: A Source-Grounded Benchmark for Cross-Jurisdictional Legal Reasoning in Large Language Models paper

• Credit Cards, Confusion, Computation, and Consequences: What Can We Uncover About Language Model Reasoning? paper

• CAIL2018: A Large-Scale Legal Dataset for Judgment Prediction

• When does pretraining help? assessing self-supervised learning for law and the casehold dataset of 53,000+ legal holdings

• LeCaRD: a legal case retrieval dataset for Chinese law system

• LeXFiles and LegalLAMA: Facilitating English Multinational Legal Language Model Development

• Legal Extractive Summarization of U.S. Court Opinions

• Awesome Chinese Legal Resources github

• MultiLegalPile: A 689GB Multilingual Legal Corpus paper

• The Cambridge Law Corpus: A Corpus for Legal AI Research

• TransformLLM: Adapting Large Language Models via LLM-Transformed Reading Comprehension Text paper

• Natural Language Processing for the Legal Domain: A Survey of Tasks, Datasets, Models, and Challenges paper

• ChineseSafe: A Chinese Benchmark for Evaluating Safety in Large Language Models paper

• Augmenting Legal Decision Support Systems with LLM-based NLI for Analyzing Social Media Evidence paper

• CaseSumm: A Large-Scale Dataset for Long-Context Summarization from U.S. Supreme Court Opinions paper

• From Answers to Guidance: A Proactive Dialogue System for Legal Documents paper

• A Greek Government Decisions Dataset for Public-Sector Analysis and Insight [paper](https://arxiv.org/abs/2512.05647

• Data Augmented Pipeline for Legal Information Extraction and Reasoning paper

• Domain-Adaptation through Synthetic Data: Fine-Tuning Large Language Models for German Law paper

• Knowledge Augmented Entity and Relation Extraction for Legal Documents with Hypergraph Neural Network paper

• Quecto-V1: Empirical Analysis of 8-bit Quantized Small Language Models for On-Device Legal Retrieval paper

• SinhaLegal: A Benchmark Corpus for Information Extraction and Analysis in Sinhala Legislative Texts paper

• LAMUS: A Large-Scale Corpus for Legal Argument Mining from U.S. Caselaw using LLMs paper

• RoLegalGEC: Legal Domain Grammatical Error Detection and Correction Dataset for Romanian paper

• Automatic Construction of a Legal Citation Graph from 100 Million Ukrainian Court Decisions: Large-Scale Extraction, Topological Analysis, and Ontology-Driven Clustering paper

• Temporal Decay of Co-Citation Predictability: A 20-Year Statute Retrieval Benchmark from 396M Ukrainian Court Citations paper

• IMLJD: A Computational Dataset for Indian Matrimonial Litigation Analysis paper

• Fine-grained Claim-level RAG Benchmark for Law paper

• A Reproducible Universal Dependencies-Style Pipeline for Katharevousa Greek Parliamentary Text paper

• Temporal Concept Drift in Legal Judgment Prediction: Neural Baselines Across Three Epochs of Ukrainian Court Decisions paper

• Bundesrecht: An Open Library and Corpus for German Statutory Reference Processing paper

• CanLegalRAGBench: Evaluating Retrieval-Augmented Generation on Canadian Case Law paper

• Scaling Multi-Hop Training Data via Graph-Constrained Path Selection paper

• ImmigrationQA: A Source-Grounded Dataset and Small-Model Adaptation for U.S. Immigration Law paper

• Citation Grounding: Detecting and Reducing LLM Citation Hallucinations via Legal Citation Graphs paper

• Enhancing BiGRU with a KAN Block for Legal Document Classification and Summarization paper

• Digging Up Citations: FOSSIL, a Dataset and Workflow for Reference Extraction in Law and the Humanities paper

• EURO-5K: When Does Domain Pretraining Matter? Benchmarking Transformers for EU Reporting Obligation Extraction paper

• HKJudge: A Legal Discourse-Annotated Corpus for Interpreting What Courts Find, How They Reason, and What They Rule paper

• LexRubric: A Rubric-Guided Diagnostic Benchmark for Open-Ended Legal Tasks paper

• From Statute to Control Flow: Span-Grounded Deontic Trees for Defeasible Scope Parsing paper

• Retrieval Augmented Generation Framework for the Nepali Legal Domain Question Answering paper

• REDACT: A Systematically Controlled Multilingual Benchmark for Personal Information Detection paper

• FineREX: Fine-Tuned NER-RE for Human Smuggling Knowledge Graphs paper

• Who Checks the Citations? Benchmarking Legal Hallucination Detection paper

• Open but Incompatible: A License Compatibility Analysis of Corpora for Low-Resource African Languages paper

• Grounded Event Extraction from SEC 8-K Filings with a Fine-Grained Taxonomy paper

• Enabling Multilingual Privacy Policy Audits: Large-Scale Analysis of Spanish Mobile Apps paper

• Do Small Models Use the Law You Give Them? Context-Injected Fine-Tuning for Legal QA in Bangladesh paper

• PATMT2: Two-stage domain adaptation for multilingual patent translation paper — Patent-specialized 7B translation model adapted with LoRA; included as a domain language model, not a general legal reasoning assistant.

• Enhancing Legal Reasoning in Pre-trained Language Models via Knowledge Graph-Guided Multi-Task Pre-training paper — Adapts existing BERT-style legal/general encoders with KG-guided multi-task pre-training; these are encoder language models, not a new generative legal assistant.

• Domain adaptation of Russian ModernBERT for long legal documents paper — RuModernBERT-ruLaw is a masked-language-model encoder, not a generative legal assistant. Lower masked-token loss is supported; the entity test has 99.95% normalized span/class overlap with training and does not establish unseen-form generalization.

• LexReward: A Taxonomy-Driven Reward Framework for Legal Language Models paper

• Efficient LLM Distillation for Bangladesh Legal Context: A Smartphone-Compatible Retrieval-Augmented Generation Model paper

• GRACE: Grounded Adversarial Reasoning over Canadian Law paper

• Nepali Legal Expertise through Generative and Extractive Pre-trained Transformers (NepLEGiT) paper

• NepKANUN: A RAG-Based Nepali Legal Assistant paper

• Building Legal Reward Models for Grounding and Abstention paper

• Do Small Models Use the Law You Give Them? Measuring Context Use on a Bilingual Bangladesh Legal Benchmark paper

• GreenLeaf Law Embed Tiny: A Compact Embedding Model for Legal Domain Retrieval paper

• LawGPT_zh github

• LaWGPT github

• Lawyer LLaMA github

• LexiLaw github

• LexGPT 0.1: pre-trained GPT-J models with Pile of Law paper

• TOWARDS THE EXPLOITATION OF LLM-BASED CHATBOT FOR PROVIDING LEGAL SUPPORT TO PALESTINIAN COOPERATIVES paper

• ChatLaw: Open-Source Legal Large Language Model with Integrated External Knowledge Bases paper

• DISC-LawLLM github

• InternLM-Law: An Open Source Chinese Legal Large Language Model paper

• SaulLM-54B & SaulLM-141B: Scaling Up Domain Adaptation for the Legal Domain paper

• LAWGPT: KNOWLEDGE-GUIDED DATA GENERATION AND ITS APPLICATION TO LEGAL LLM paper

• HKGAI-V1: Towards Regional Sovereign Large Language Model for Hong Kong paper

• HUKUKBERT: Domain-Specific Language Model for Turkish Law paper

• PoliLegalLM: A Technical Report on a Large Language Model for Political and Legal Affairs paper

• ImmigrationQA: A Source-Grounded Dataset and Small-Model Adaptation for U.S. Immigration Law paper

• Legal Domain Adaptation of Modern BERT Models paper

• Do Small Models Use the Law You Give Them? Context-Injected Fine-Tuning for Legal QA in Bangladesh paper

• Towards English - Mizo Legal Machine Translation: Corpus Creation, Analysis, and Benchmarks paper — NLLB adaptation improves BLEU by 7.16 points on a 1,000-pair legal test set, while English borrowing remains about three times the human rate.

• norregel: a preregistered benchmark of dated numeric values in Norwegian law paper — Distinguishes correct, outdated, wrong and uninterpretable answers; support for the cutoff-related outdated-answer hypothesis is not robust to the preregistered most-recent-value sensitivity analysis.

• Where Do Legal Factors Live in LLMs? paper — Reports all 26 factors linearly decodable and single-feature best-layer AUCs of 0.86–1.00 across three models; shared generation procedures and strong lexical baselines limit real-case inference.

• Commit or Abstain? System One Decision Models, LLMs, and Missing Legal Authority paper — Replaces the correct holding in 1,670 of 5,314 CaseHOLD items; generative LLMs select an incorrect option in 38–86% of missing-authority cases, versus 30% for the most cautious decision model.

• Multi-level Encoder with Global Topic for Task-oriented Dialogue Summarization paper — Evaluates on LCSPIRT police-interrogation summaries and Medical DS; LCSPIRT ROUGE-L reaches 83.34, but the shown output still changes a date and location digits.

• Same Probabilities, Different Advice: Gain-Loss Framing Effects in High-Stakes LLM Decision Support paper — Across seven LLMs, framing changes recommendations in 32.4% of complete groups across all four domains; this is not a legal-only error rate or a legal-correctness measure.

• When Copying Is Hard: Copy-Constrained Decoding for Exact Span Reproduction paper — Evaluates exact span matching and decoding throughput, including legal contracts; aggregate four-domain gains are not legal-only scores, and copying fidelity does not establish legal validity.

• Hidden Cartographer: Hidden State Guided Data Selection for Dual Budgeted Instruction Tuning paper — Evaluates three objective legal tasks on 1,500 held-out examples; the reported LLaMA-2-7B legal average is 44.65% versus 35.43% for random selection, without testing open-ended legal advice.

• Legal Guidance in the Wild: How Users Seek Legal Help in Real-World LLM Conversations paper — Compares ModernBERT-base/large with a TF-IDF cascade on legal-query identification; it measures request classification, not the correctness of AI legal answers.

• Beyond Recall Saturation: Scaling Hard-Negative Reranker Training for Industrial Legal Retrieval paper — The 4B Stage2 reranker wins 239, loses 91, and ties 80 LLM-judged operational-query comparisons: 72.4% excluding ties, 58.3% of all 410; these are evidence-list preferences, not legal-answer accuracy.

• Machina Pauliana: A neuro-symbolic approach to the actio pauliana in Dutch insolvency law paper — Separates segmentation/label evaluation on 100 judgments from end-to-end criteria-and-verdict evaluation on ten cases; improved citation grounding is not a demonstrated accuracy gain from retrieval.

• Narrow Decision Models: A System-1 Architecture for Calibrated, Typed Decisions paper — Tests option-order and question-independence properties, plus preliminary real-document classifier agreement; production “unknown” documents are excluded from training and full real-data results are deferred.

• Policy Is Not Capability: Some Safety Benchmarks Measure Which Definition of "Unsafe" You Trained On paper — Copyright-score swings persist on 75 decontaminated prompts, but these cover only two templates; recipe-dependent seed variation and single-seed primary arms limit causal interpretation.

• Chinese Decision: A Family of Language Models for Single-Pass Probabilistic Decision-Making paper — The completed uncalibrated 0.8B checkpoint reaches 67.86% accuracy on 4,300 legal decisions; aggregate calibration and preliminary 2B comparisons do not establish legal reliability or a controlled scaling effect.

• Thunder-DeID+: Boundary-Aware Korean De-identification from Court Judgments to Broader Sensitive Documents paper — Tokenizer-independent full-judgment evaluation reports W. Strict Typed F1 rising from 0.76–0.77 to 0.87–0.88; the roughly 0.93 broader-document result requires 1,000 adaptation examples and is not zero-shot transfer.

• In the Guise of Correction: How Framing and Cultural Adaptation Erode LLM Safety on Real-World Criminal Cases paper — Evaluates harmfulness and operational uplift in criminal-assistance scenarios; mean unsafe compliance rises from 28.9% for direct requests to 66.4% for correction-seeking prompts.

• ContextLift: Breaking the Spurious Correlation Behind Conditional Emergent Misalignment paper — Evaluates legal-advice finetuning and LEDGAR contract-clause classification; cued broad-misalignment reduction does not measure legal-answer correctness, and LEDGAR supplies no liftable context.

• Making every stage of medical device document assessment with large language models deterministic paper — All 14 tested commercial deployments vary on some regulatory-assessment requests; 12 change labels. End-to-end determinism depends on recorded serving and hardware settings, not sampling controls alone.

• LegalRewardBench: Benchmarking Reward Models for Legal Preference Evaluation paper — Compares generative/discriminative and general/fine-tuned judges for legal preferences; general-purpose generative models are reported as more robust than the tested fine-tuned reward models.

• PatTransBench: an ipc-stratified, multi-dimensional benchmark for patent machine translation evaluation paper — Jointly measures overlap, semantic similarity, 38-language consistency and serving performance; aggregate scores can hide direction-specific quantization effects.

• UDHRBench: Benchmarking Human Rights in Large Language Models paper — Expert annotation agreement is reported as kappa 0.801; an LLM judge reaches 89.8% weighted F1 for human-rights misalignment, with ambiguity assessed separately.

• RegExtract: A Benchmark for PFAS Regulatory Information Extraction with LLMs paper — Provenance-aware multi-field extraction evaluation; document identification remains difficult and field-specific few-shot examples improve extraction.

• The Constitution Speaks Nheengatu: An Open MT System and Reproducible Corpus Pipeline for the Amazonian Língua Geral paper — Article-disjoint constitutional tests and a frozen legal-term lexicon expose limits hidden by aggregate translation scores; speech-domain gains are reported separately.

• Enhancing Legal Reasoning in Pre-trained Language Models via Knowledge Graph-Guided Multi-Task Pre-training paper — Evaluates synthetic StVO QA, driving-regulation transfer and LexGLUE; the KG uses LLM-translated law and unquantified embedding/translation noise. Reported LexGLUE gains compare against published baselines.

• Verifiable Retrieval for Legal Reasoning through Structure-driven Knowledge Graph paper — Depth-stratified citation prefix matching and token-efficiency recall; unspecified deeper citation levels count as implicit matches, and no generation or expert legal-sufficiency evaluation is established.

• AMLworld-Compact: Importance-Weighted Downsampling for Cost-Effective LLM Evaluation and Error Diagnosis paper — Evaluates seven LLMs on weighted illicit-transaction detection; the evaluated prompts do not consistently identify/include the target transaction, so errors cannot be attributed solely to reasoning. F1 is a ratio estimate, not an unbiased confusion-count estimate.

• APEX-Harm: Evaluating Agent Safety in Shared Professional Workspaces paper — Twelve models evaluated once per attack instance; task utility and attack success are separate outcomes. Judge validation uses 60 cases from one human annotator, and run-to-run variation is unmeasured.

• Benchmarking Embedding Geometries and Clustering Algorithms for Unsupervised Patent Claim Classification paper — Compares embedding geometry on patent classification and cross-CPC retrieval; the VAE trails simpler untrained baselines on classification agreement, and independent expert relevance assessment remains future work.

• Cited but Not Consulted: A Counterfactual Audit of Legal Chain-of-Thought Faithfulness paper — Evaluates seven open-weight models on judicial and contract tasks using authority swaps and latent verdict tracking; model-ranking uncertainty and a best-effort legal-model reproduction limit broad conclusions.

• Verdict Without the Rule: Diagnosing and Auditing Regulatory Rule Sensitivity in LLM Compliance Systems paper — Behavioral OCS and representational ICS-delta audit five models across 20 regulatory/platform-policy domains; standard prompts truncate rules at 300 characters, and changed verdicts are not certified legally correct.

• The "10th Juror": Open-Set Standpoint Screening for Bureaucratic Bias Detection paper — Reports 0.880 F1 on DGDB and held-out-category recovery; governance metrics and model-verified rewrites are not substitutes for independent legal review.

• When Citations Mislead? A Claim-Level Benchmark for Legal Hallucination Detection paper — Three-way claim verification with full opinion text; high aggregate accuracy can coexist with false support for unsupported claims, and the benchmark is not an end-to-end legal RAG evaluation.

• InsClaimBench: Benchmarking Insurance Claim Adjudication Across the Decision Chain paper — Evaluates contract eligibility, coverage/exclusions and payout consistency under factual changes; independently elicited rule/module judgments do not directly reveal an internal causal reasoning chain.

• Right Number, Wrong State? Measuring Cross-Jurisdiction Substitution in LLM Recall of State Policy paper — Closed-book Medicaid eligibility-threshold QA across 51 jurisdictions; same-state historical values and reporting conventions must be ruled out before attributing errors to other states. Matching another state's number does not establish a knowledge-binding mechanism; data release is promised, not verified here.

• Verdicts Without Annotated Evidence: Rejection Sampling or Label-Only Post-Training for Evidence Recovery? paper — Separates contract-entailment accuracy, evidence-span F1 and verbatim citations; the between-method span-F1 gap is not statistically resolved, and public-corpus pretraining exposure is not ruled out.

• In With the Old: Enhancing 'Classical' Document Automation with Generative AI paper — Tests 15 constructed examples across three legal-document scenarios; only 1/5 employment-template revisions meets the instructions. The authors' permissive hallucination definition is not a guarantee of legal validity.

• Domain adaptation of Russian ModernBERT for long legal documents paper — Fixed-collection masked-token and legal-entity evaluation; masking intervals are not uncertainty across document collections.

• Breaking Bureaucracy: Evaluating open-source LLMs for legal document review paper — Zero-shot legal NLI on contracts and wills, with invalid-output, temperature and uncertainty analyses.

• Better Call Reward: Reward Hacking as Strategic Abstention in Legal Reasoning Models paper — 320 examples from 16 LegalBench tasks; separates answer commitment, conditional accuracy and citation plausibility.

• Not Self-Decidable: LLMs Cannot Draw the Boundary of What an Agent Verifier Can Check paper — EU AI Act/FINRA verification-scope evaluation; proxy labels and synthetic enforcement records limit real-world guarantees.

• InvestigationWorlds: An Agentic Environment for Legal Investigation paper — Tests whether agents distinguish court-adopted hypotheses from plausible alternatives after retrieving relevant evidence.

• HakemBench: A Turkish Benchmark of Typed Decisions paper — Includes constitutional-right identification and court routing; legal labels are partly AI-derived.

• Verifiable, Articulable, and Tacit Components of Preference paper — Includes law/policy tasks; patent prediction results were withdrawn due to label leakage.

• Legal Research Bench: Measuring End-to-End Reliability in Long-Horizon Legal Research Agents paper

• SCM-based Fairness and Faithful Explainability for Legal Document Classification paper

• Legal text classification in Korean sexual offense cases: from traditional machine learning to large language models with XAI insights paper

• ARCCS: An Automated Regulatory Compliance Checking System paper

• ContextAdapt: Evaluating Contextual Adaptation and Value Alignment in LLMs paper

• LegalPincite: Multi-level Legal Information Retrieval Dataset paper

• LexReward: A Taxonomy-Driven Reward Framework for Legal Language Models paper

• ViLegalExpert: A Large-Scale Benchmark for Vietnamese Legal Retrieval and Question Answering from Real-World Consultations paper

• Is This Evidence Decision-Critical? Learning to Verify Rule-Governed Decisions paper

• Can a Cacheable Decision Model Follow Rules? paper

• Chinese-Jev: Bringing System One Model to Chinese-Language Tasks paper

• Evaluating and Benchmarking the System One Model Jev paper

• A Cheap Verifier is Good Enough: LLM Post-training is Robust to Erroneous Rewards paper

• RGDT-Bench: Benchmarking LLM Reasoning for Rule-Governed Decisions and Their Justifications paper

• Stale-Document Poisoning: When Outdated Retrieval Overrides Correct Model Answers paper

• Automated Regulatory Compliance Question Answering in Financial Services with Domain-Adapted Retrieval-Augmented Generation paper

• Same Scores, Different Decisions: Evaluating JEV and Language Models for Legal Document Understanding paper

• Cross-Lingual Legal QA for Vietnamese Labour Law: Retrieval, Translation, and Verifier-Guided Correction paper

• Automated Extraction of Records of Processing Activities (RoPA) Using Hybrid RAG and Locally Deployed Large Language Models paper

• Classifying Interpretive Canons at the Sentence Level: A Benchmark from the German Federal Constitutional Court paper

• Mining Legal Arguments in U.S. Corporate Case Law paper

• ABAI at COLIEE 2026 Task 1: Multi-Stage Retrieval with GraphRAG-Enhanced Meta-Learning, and a Post-Hoc Study of the Cross-Validation-to-Test Gap paper

• GRACE: Grounded Adversarial Reasoning over Canadian Law paper

• ChemCLIR-Bench: Benchmarking Cross-Lingual Information Retrieval in Multilingual Chemical Patents paper

• Directing large language models to follow the letter or spirit of the law paper

• Beyond Accuracy and Surface Fluency: Risk-Sensitive Evaluation of LLMs for Legal Clause Generation paper

• UK-PRBENCH: A Paragraph-Level Precedent Retrieval Benchmark for United Kingdom Case Law paper

• Benchmarking LLM Compliance with China AI Generated Content Regulations paper

• Before the Arrest: Benchmarking LLMs on Criminal Profiling from Incomplete Evidence paper

• How Much is a Human Right Worth? ECtHR-NPD: A Benchmark for Predicting Non-Pecuniary Damage Awards paper

• Linguistic Triggers of Gender and Racial Bias in Open-Weight LLMs Applied to Recruitment paper

• Legal LLM Hallucination Should Be Evaluated as Failure of Legal Warrant paper

• Nepali Legal Expertise through Generative and Extractive Pre-trained Transformers (NepLEGiT) paper

• NepKANUN: A RAG-Based Nepali Legal Assistant paper

• Few-Shot Degradation Is Not What It Seems: Behavioral Evidence, Representation Analysis, and a Random-Text Control Across 12 Models, 2 Tasks, and 2 Architectures paper

• CiteGuard-RAG: A Validation-Centered AI System for Evidence-Grounded Question Answering paper

• Building Legal Reward Models for Grounding and Abstention paper

• Algorithm Validation as a Policy Audit: Evidence from Race-blind Charging paper

• Tasks over Application Manuals: Revealing Gaps in Long-Horizon Procedural Reasoning for Language Models paper

• ProMediConv: Benchmarking Proactive Conversational Agents in Legal Dispute Mediation paper

• BodyCam-VQA: Enhanced Body-Worn Camera Video Captioning via Multimodal Reasoning and Probe Question Generation paper

• GANDR: Claim Auditing for Verifiable Legal Answer Generation paper

• When Does Defendant Statement Matter? A Study of Bias and Persuasion in LLM-Simulated Jurors paper

• MUCnoHARM@GermEval Shared Task 2026: Retrieval-based In-Context Learning for Defamatory Offences, and Where It Falls Short paper

• Reading a Legal Question Word by Word: Embedding Trajectories of 2,144 Vietnamese Legal Headlines paper

• FramingQA: Does the Question Shape the Answer? Measuring the Compositional Framing Effect paper

• Solving versus Verifying: Catching Contradictions in Tax Reasoning Systems paper

• LexFlip: A Dissociation Diagnostic for Legal Meaning Preservation Metrics paper

• KhatianDoc: A Human-Verified Benchmark Diagnosing Multimodal LLM Failure on Bengali Legal Land Records paper

• LexIssue: Benchmarking Legal Issue Identification in Chinese Civil Litigation paper

• Rent-a-RAG: Embedding-Space Watermarks for Auditing Third-Party RAG paper

• OBJECTION! Lawyer Agents Mitigate Guilty Bias in Legal Judgment Prediction paper

• Polish ModernBERT: The Long and Short of Polish Language Understanding paper

• Annotated Surrogate Retrieval for Polish Statutory Law paper

• Do Small Models Use the Law You Give Them? Measuring Context Use on a Bilingual Bangladesh Legal Benchmark paper

• Cloud and On-Premises Deployment of Uzbek Legal RAG via Targeted Retriever Fine-Tuning paper

• Cross Lingual Transfer in Tulu Legal Comprehension: Script-Dependent Improvement and RAG-Induced Knowledge Conflict paper

• RegDivergence-101: An LLM Benchmark for Cross-Jurisdiction Regulatory Contradiction Detection in Life Sciences paper

• GreenLeaf Law Embed Tiny: A Compact Embedding Model for Legal Domain Retrieval paper

• Figurative Justice: Detecting metaphors in Hindi judgements with qualitative assessment and transformers paper

• Modeling Claim Dependency Structure for Patent Litigation Prediction with Graph Attention Networks paper

• Sycophants in the Courtroom: Are LLMs Fragile to Juridical Authority and Evolving Legal Standards? paper

• Generative Gap Filling paper

• Benchmarking Patent Drafting from Inventor-Style Disclosures paper

• Ansari: A Retrieval-Grounded Islamic AI Assistant -- Architecture, Deployment, and Lessons from 140,000 Conversations paper

• ContractScrub: A benchmark for final review of legal contracts paper

• ChildSafeAds Shared Task 2026: Commercial Content in Child-Facing YouTube Videos paper

• GreekBarRetrieval: A Benchmark for Greek Statutory Retrieval paper

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

• Can LLMs Reason in a Legally Meaningful Manner? A Small-scale Study on European Court of Human Rights Cases paper

• Calibrated Trust, Not Sharper Prediction: An Empirical Test of Uncertainty Fusion paper

• Gated Against One Model, Open to the Next: Option-Only Solvability in Legal Multiple-Choice Benchmarks paper

• Time as Structure: Temporal Dependency Graphs for Verifiable Deadline Computation over Legal Documents paper

• How Much Do Legal RAG Systems Still Hallucinate? paper

• On Measuring Semantic Preservation in Legal Ontology Learning paper

• Why Do AI Agents Break Rules? How Framing, Context, and Social Signals Shape Compliance paper

• Is this Citation on Point? paper

• Evaluating Rational Contracting in Natural Language paper

• Temporal Misgrounding in Legal RAG: A Versioned-Corpus Benchmark for French Tax Law paper

• LexKairos: Benchmarking Legal Temporal Capabilities in LLMs paper

• PolicyKG: An Agentic LLM Pipeline for Translating Institutional Policies into SHACL Knowledge Graphs paper

• ANNOTARES: A Dataset for Extracting Logical Structures from German Statutory Texts paper

• Knowing the Form, Not the Function: Automatically Auditing Answer--Authority Decoupling in Legal Benchmarks paper

• CrossLex: A Source-Grounded Benchmark for Cross-Jurisdictional Legal Reasoning in Large Language Models paper

• Semantics of Subterfuge: Benchmarking Legal Deception Detection Against General-domain State-of-the-Art paper

• Credit Cards, Confusion, Computation, and Consequences: What Can We Uncover About Language Model Reasoning? paper

• LegalCiteTrust: Benchmarking Citation Trustworthiness in Chinese Long-Form Legal Research Reports paper

• Measuring Massive Multitask Chinese Understanding paper

• LawBench: Benchmarking Legal Knowledge of Large Language Models github

• Large Language Models are legal but they are not: Making the case for a powerful LegalLLM paper

• Better Call GPT, Comparing Large Language Models Against Lawyers paper

• Evaluating GPT-3.5's Awareness and Summarization Abilities for European Constitutional Texts with Shared Topics paper

• Evaluation Ethics of LLMs in Legal Domain paper

• GPTs and Language Barrier: A Cross-Lingual Legal QA Examination paper

• LawBench: Benchmarking Legal Knowledge of Large Language Models paper

• LexEval: A Comprehensive Chinese Legal Benchmark for Evaluating Large Language Models paper

• LegalAgentBench: Evaluating LLM Agents in Legal Domain paper

• Measuring Faithfulness and Abstention: An Automated Pipeline for Evaluating LLM-Generated 3-ply Case-Based Legal Arguments paper

• LegalEval-Q: A New Benchmark for The Quality Evaluation of LLM-Generated Legal Text paper

• When Fairness Isn't Statistical: The Limits of Machine Learning in Evaluating Legal Reasoning paper

• LexTime: A Benchmark for Temporal Ordering of Legal Events paper

• LLM-based HSE Compliance Assessment: Benchmark, Performance, and Advancements paper

• VLQA: The First Comprehensive, Large, and High-Quality Vietnamese Dataset for Legal Question Answering paper

• The Massive Legal Embedding Benchmark (MLEB) paper

• LexGenius: An Expert-Level Benchmark for Large Language Models in Legal General Intelligence paper

• Legal-DC: Benchmarking Retrieval-Augmented Generation for Legal Documents paper

• Adaptive Cost-Efficient Evaluation for Reliable Patent Claim Validation paper

• From Benchmarking to Reasoning: A Dual-Aspect, Large-Scale Evaluation of LLMs on Vietnamese Legal Text paper

• Exploiting LLM-as-a-Judge Disposition on Free Text Legal QA via Prompt Optimization paper

• Tokenizer Fertility and Zero-Shot Performance of Foundation Models on Ukrainian Legal Text: A Comparative Study paper

• Reasoners or Translators? Contamination-aware Evaluation and Neuro-Symbolic Robustness in Tax Law paper

• Validate Your Authority: Benchmarking LLMs on Multi-Label Precedent Treatment Classification paper

• LP-Eval: Rubric and Dataset for Measuring the Quality of Legal Proposition Generation paper

• GradeLegal: Automated Grading for German Legal Cases paper

• Asking For An Old Friend: Diagnosing and Mitigating Temporal Failure Modes in LLM-based Statutory Question Answering paper

• A Two-Phase Stability Study of LLM Judges and Bar Council Examiners on Thai Bar-Exam Free-Form Essays paper

• JudgmentBench: Comparing Rubric and Preference Evaluation for Quality Assessment paper

• The Cases LJP Never Sees: Prosecution Decision Prediction for More Complete Criminal Liability Assessment paper

• BenGER: Benchmarking LLM Systems on Subsumption-Based Legal Reasoning in German Law paper

• Multi-Legal-Bench: Evaluating LLMs on Legal Reasoning Across Jurisdictions, Languages, and Legal Traditions paper

• UA-Legal-Bench: A Benchmark for Evaluating Large Language Models on Ukrainian Legal Reasoning paper

• LegalBench-BR: A Benchmark for Evaluating Large Language Models on Brazilian Legal Decision Classification paper

• IndiaFinBench: An Evaluation Benchmark for Large Language Model Performance on Indian Financial Regulatory Text paper

• RARE: Redundancy-Aware Retrieval Evaluation Framework for High-Similarity Corpora paper

• ImmigrationQA: A Source-Grounded Dataset and Small-Model Adaptation for U.S. Immigration Law paper

• CanLegalRAGBench: Evaluating Retrieval-Augmented Generation on Canadian Case Law paper

• Citation Grounding: Detecting and Reducing LLM Citation Hallucinations via Legal Citation Graphs paper

• Which Institutional Frameworks Do Chatbots Assume? Auditing Jurisdictional Defaults in Multilingual LLMs paper

• On Wednesdays, We Ask Questions: Optimizing "Active Listening" in Automated Legal Triage and Referral paper

• Re-Ranking Through an Attribution Lens for Citation Quality in Legal QA paper

• EURO-5K: When Does Domain Pretraining Matter? Benchmarking Transformers for EU Reporting Obligation Extraction paper

• HKJudge: A Legal Discourse-Annotated Corpus for Interpreting What Courts Find, How They Reason, and What They Rule paper

• LexRubric: A Rubric-Guided Diagnostic Benchmark for Open-Ended Legal Tasks paper

• From Statute to Control Flow: Span-Grounded Deontic Trees for Defeasible Scope Parsing paper

• Retrieval Augmented Generation Framework for the Nepali Legal Domain Question Answering paper

• REDACT: A Systematically Controlled Multilingual Benchmark for Personal Information Detection paper

• DeXposure-Claw: An Agentic System for DeFi Risk Supervision paper

• Measuring & Mitigating Over-Alignment for LLMs in Multilingual Criminal Law Courts paper

• Who Checks the Citations? Benchmarking Legal Hallucination Detection paper

• Peeking Inside LLMs: Leveraging Internal Artifacts of LLMs for Enhancing Reliability in Legal Classification paper

• Probing Stylistic Appropriation using Large Language Models: An Evaluation Framework for Copyright Infringement under EU Law paper

• Do LLMs Fabricate Legal Citations? A Bilingual Benchmark on Saudi Data Protection Law and the GDPR paper

• The Perplexity Trap: When Patent Law Makes Human Writing Look Like AI paper

The survey paper is shown in paper

Please cite the following papers as references if this repository helps you (*ゝω・)ﾉThanks!

@article{sun2023short,
  title={A short survey of viewing large language models in legal aspect},
  author={Sun, Zhongxiang},
  journal={arXiv preprint arXiv:2303.09136v2},
  year={2023}
}

• AILQA: Evaluating AI-Driven Legal Question Answering Systems for the Indian Legal System paper
• Enabling Multilingual Privacy Policy Audits: Large-Scale Analysis of Spanish Mobile Apps paper
• Agentic Evaluation of Copyright Law Compliance paper
• From Obligation to Specification: A Survey on Validating EU AI Act Requirements in RE paper
• Reasoning Consensus: Structural Ensembling of LLM Reasoning via Weighted DAG Aggregation paper