REVIEW 1 cited by
A Reasoning-Focused Legal Retrieval Benchmark
Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.
This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.
SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event
T0 review · schema-true
One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.
pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp
Signed reviews
read the original abstract
As the legal community increasingly examines the use of large language models (LLMs) for various legal applications, legal AI developers have turned to retrieval-augmented LLMs ("RAG" systems) to improve system performance and robustness. An obstacle to the development of specialized RAG systems is the lack of realistic legal RAG benchmarks which capture the complexity of both legal retrieval and downstream legal question-answering. To address this, we introduce two novel legal RAG benchmarks: Bar Exam QA and Housing Statute QA. Our tasks correspond to real-world legal research tasks, and were produced through annotation processes which resemble legal research. We describe the construction of these benchmarks and the performance of existing retriever pipelines. Our results suggest that legal RAG remains a challenging application, thus motivating future research.
Forward citations
Cited by 1 Pith paper
-
Temporal Misgrounding in Legal RAG: A Versioned-Corpus Benchmark for French Tax Law
Version-conditioned retrieval over a 32,436-version French tax code corpus reaches 98.3% strict accuracy on 209 temporal-reasoning questions where LLM-only and static RAG score about 3%.
Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.