arXiv — NLP / Computation & Language · · 3 min read

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

Mirrored from arXiv — NLP / Computation & Language for archival readability. Support the source by reading on the original site.

Computer Science > Computation and Language

arXiv:2605.23497 (cs)
[Submitted on 22 May 2026]

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

View a PDF of the paper titled Asking For An Old Friend: Diagnosing and Mitigating Temporal Failure Modes in LLM-based Statutory Question Answering, by Max Prior and 2 other authors
View PDF HTML (experimental)
Abstract:Large language models are increasingly used for legal research, yet their fixed training cutoffs and reliance on static parametric knowledge are at odds with the evolving nature of statutory law. We study two temporal failure modes: post-cutoff staleness, where models apply superseded rules after legislative amendments, and recency bias, where models prefer newer provisions even when a historical version governs the fact pattern. To this end, we present a benchmark of 312 expert-validated, time-sensitive German statutory QA pairs spanning three categories: Post-Cutoff Amendment Questions, Pre-Amendment Questions, and Multi-Provision Pre-Amendment Questions. We evaluate five LLMs by OpenAI, Anthropic and DeepSeek under four inference settings: Vanilla, Web-search, and two retrieval-augmented variants that enforce temporal validity via a fact date extraction and version filtering. Using an LLM-as-a-judge validated against human expert ratings, we find severe degradation in the Vanilla post-cutoff setting. Both RAG approaches substantially improve performance across all question types, while web search yields unstable gains and exhibits a marked recency bias on historically anchored tasks. Our results indicate that reliable legal QA requires treating temporal validity as a hard constraint.
Subjects: Computation and Language (cs.CL)
Cite as: arXiv:2605.23497 [cs.CL]
  (or arXiv:2605.23497v1 [cs.CL] for this version)
  https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2605.23497
arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite (pending registration)

Submission history

From: Max Prior [view email]
[v1] Fri, 22 May 2026 11:02:01 UTC (618 KB)
Full-text links:

Access Paper:

    View a PDF of the paper titled Asking For An Old Friend: Diagnosing and Mitigating Temporal Failure Modes in LLM-based Statutory Question Answering, by Max Prior and 2 other authors
  • View PDF
  • HTML (experimental)
  • TeX Source

Current browse context:

cs.CL
< prev   |   next >
Change to browse by:
cs

References & Citations

Loading...

BibTeX formatted citation

loading...
Data provided by:

Bookmark

BibSonomy Reddit
Bibliographic Tools

Bibliographic and Citation Tools

Bibliographic Explorer Toggle
Bibliographic Explorer (What is the Explorer?)
Connected Papers Toggle
Connected Papers (What is Connected Papers?)
Litmaps Toggle
Litmaps (What is Litmaps?)
scite.ai Toggle
scite Smart Citations (What are Smart Citations?)
Code, Data, Media

Code, Data and Media Associated with this Article

alphaXiv Toggle
alphaXiv (What is alphaXiv?)
Links to Code Toggle
CatalyzeX Code Finder for Papers (What is CatalyzeX?)
DagsHub Toggle
DagsHub (What is DagsHub?)
GotitPub Toggle
Gotit.pub (What is GotitPub?)
Huggingface Toggle
Hugging Face (What is Huggingface?)
ScienceCast Toggle
ScienceCast (What is ScienceCast?)
Demos

Demos

Replicate Toggle
Replicate (What is Replicate?)
Spaces Toggle
Hugging Face Spaces (What is Spaces?)
Spaces Toggle
TXYZ.AI (What is TXYZ.AI?)
Related Papers

Recommenders and Search Tools

Link to Influence Flower
Influence Flower (What are Influence Flowers?)
Core recommender toggle
CORE Recommender (What is CORE?)
About arXivLabs

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.

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.

More from arXiv — NLP / Computation & Language