CrossLex: A Source-Grounded Benchmark for Cross-Jurisdictional Legal Reasoning in Large Language Models
Mirrored from arXiv — NLP / Computation & Language for archival readability. Support the source by reading on the original site.
Computer Science > Computation and Language
Title:CrossLex: A Source-Grounded Benchmark for Cross-Jurisdictional Legal Reasoning in Large Language Models
Abstract:Legal reasoning is inherently jurisdiction-dependent: the same facts can call for different legal rules and yield different conclusions across legal systems. Yet existing benchmarks rarely evaluate whether large language models (LLMs) can recognize such jurisdiction-specific variation, especially when identical fact patterns lead to divergent legal this http URL introduce CrossLex, a same-fact, legal-source-grounded benchmark for evaluating cross-jurisdictional legal reasoning in LLMs across three jurisdictions: China, California, and Germany. Built from authoritative legal sources, CrossLex aligns 55 legal issues spanning contract, consumer, criminal, family, and labor law, and constructs jurisdiction-aligned questions paired with answers and supporting citations. In total, CrossLex contains 6,149 instances organized into 385 fact groups, with all legal issues, answers, and cited authorities reviewed by legal this http URL disentangle basic legal knowledge from cross-jurisdictional reasoning, CrossLex defines three complementary tasks: single-jurisdiction reasoning (T1), joint cross-jurisdictional comparison (T2), and fine-grained cross-jurisdictional evaluation (T3). We further propose Grounded Joint, a metric that jointly assesses answer correctness and legal-source grounding, and provide a unified evaluation for streamlined benchmarking. Extensive experiments on representative LLMs show that, although current models can often answer legal questions correctly, they struggle to provide accurate cross-jurisdictional legal this http URL hope that CrossLex will facilitate future research on source-grounded cross-jurisdictional legal reasoning.
| Subjects: | Computation and Language (cs.CL) |
| Cite as: | arXiv:2608.01292 [cs.CL] |
| (or arXiv:2608.01292v1 [cs.CL] for this version) | |
| https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2608.01292
arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite (pending registration)
|
Access Paper:
- View PDF
- HTML (experimental)
- TeX Source
References & Citations
Bookmark
Bibliographic and Citation Tools
Code, Data and Media Associated with this Article
Demos
Recommenders and Search Tools
arXivLabs: experimental projects with community collaborators
arXivLabs is a framework that allows collaborators to develop and share new arXiv features directly on our website.
Both individuals and organizations that work with arXivLabs have embraced and accepted our values of openness, community, excellence, and user data privacy. arXiv is committed to these values and only works with partners that adhere to them.
Have an idea for a project that will add value for arXiv's community? Learn more about arXivLabs.
More from arXiv — NLP / Computation & Language
-
Geometric and Behavioral Stratification in Transformer Residual Streams
Aug 14
-
Perturbation-based Regional Interpretability through Subtraction Mapping (PRISM): naming-error dissociations in language models and post-stroke aphasia
Aug 14
-
I-SDPO: Instance-Level Adaptive Self-Distillation Policy Optimization
Aug 14
-
Comment on "Modeling rapid language learning by distilling Bayesian priors into artificial neural networks"
Aug 14
Discussion (0)
Sign in to join the discussion. Free account, 30 seconds — email code or GitHub.
Sign in →No comments yet. Sign in and be the first to say something.