Enregistré dans:
Détails bibliographiques
Auteurs principaux: Li, Yifei, Zhang, Richong, Tu, Wanyu, Nie, Zhijie, Luo, Haokun, Yin, Chuantao, Li, Pengchong
Format: Preprint
Publié: 2026
Sujets:
Accès en ligne:https://arxiv.org/abs/2601.22742
Tags: Ajouter un tag
Pas de tags, Soyez le premier à ajouter un tag!
_version_ 1866910006011494400
author Li, Yifei
Zhang, Richong
Tu, Wanyu
Nie, Zhijie
Luo, Haokun
Yin, Chuantao
Li, Pengchong
author_facet Li, Yifei
Zhang, Richong
Tu, Wanyu
Nie, Zhijie
Luo, Haokun
Yin, Chuantao
Li, Pengchong
contents Legal judgments may contain errors due to the complexity of case circumstances and the abstract nature of legal concepts, while existing appellate review mechanisms face efficiency pressures from a surge in case volumes. Although current legal AI research focuses on tasks like judgment prediction and legal document generation, the task of judgment review differs fundamentally in its objectives and paradigm: it centers on detecting, classifying, and correcting errors after a judgment is issued, constituting anomaly detection rather than prediction or generation. To address this research gap, we introduce a novel task APPELLATE REVIEW, aiming to assess models' diagnostic reasoning and reliability in legal practice. We also construct a novel dataset benchmark AR-BENCH, which comprises 8,700 finely annotated decisions and 34,617 supplementary corpora. By evaluating 14 large language models, we reveal critical limitations in existing models' ability to identify legal application errors, providing empirical evidence for future improvements.
format Preprint
id arxiv_https___arxiv_org_abs_2601_22742
institution arXiv
publishDate 2026
record_format arxiv
spellingShingle AR-BENCH: Benchmarking Legal Reasoning with Judgment Error Detection, Classification and Correction
Li, Yifei
Zhang, Richong
Tu, Wanyu
Nie, Zhijie
Luo, Haokun
Yin, Chuantao
Li, Pengchong
Computation and Language
Legal judgments may contain errors due to the complexity of case circumstances and the abstract nature of legal concepts, while existing appellate review mechanisms face efficiency pressures from a surge in case volumes. Although current legal AI research focuses on tasks like judgment prediction and legal document generation, the task of judgment review differs fundamentally in its objectives and paradigm: it centers on detecting, classifying, and correcting errors after a judgment is issued, constituting anomaly detection rather than prediction or generation. To address this research gap, we introduce a novel task APPELLATE REVIEW, aiming to assess models' diagnostic reasoning and reliability in legal practice. We also construct a novel dataset benchmark AR-BENCH, which comprises 8,700 finely annotated decisions and 34,617 supplementary corpora. By evaluating 14 large language models, we reveal critical limitations in existing models' ability to identify legal application errors, providing empirical evidence for future improvements.
title AR-BENCH: Benchmarking Legal Reasoning with Judgment Error Detection, Classification and Correction
topic Computation and Language
url https://arxiv.org/abs/2601.22742