Skip to content

Translation in progress Some entries still include text in the original language.

Oct 12 · Monday

All papers

Found 2 papers
Filter2
Select any value within a category; different categories must all match. Counts include the other filters you have selected.Another 265papers have no tags yet and are not included in filtered results.

Another 265papers do not have category tags yet and are not included in filtered results.

  1. Study: legal reasoning models citing legal provisions does not equal relying on legal provisions.

    Uses premise permutation and hidden-layer tracing to audit whether legal chain-of-thought truly relies on the cited legal provisions.

    Published
    Evaluated models
    Qwen3-8B, Qwen3-14B, Llama-3.1-8B and others7
    AbstractUsing counterfactual substitution of authorities and internal commitment tracing, the authors find that legal CoT rulings depend on authorities only to a limited extent and are vulnerable to prompt injection manipulation.

    This study conducts an empirical audit of the causal truthfulness of legal citations in chain-of-thought reasoning of large language models in the legal domain.

    Paper analysisRead analysis
You have reached the end