A Reasoning-Focused Legal Retrieval Benchmark

Lucia Zheng, Neel Guha, Javokhir Arifov, Sarah Zhang, Michal Skreta +3 more
5/6/2025
cs.CL

No confident code implementation found for this paper. 1 possible match can be shown below.

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.

View on arXivView PDF

Code Implementations

No confident code match yet

We couldn't find an author-owned or strongly-evidenced community implementation for this paper. 1 weaker match is hidden by default — verify before relying on them.

No code implementations found yet.

Know of an implementation? Let us know in the comments below!

Similar Papers

Cite this paper

@article{zheng2025reasoningfocused,
  title  = {A Reasoning-Focused Legal Retrieval Benchmark},
  author = {Lucia Zheng and Neel Guha and Javokhir Arifov and Sarah Zhang and Michal Skreta and Christopher D. Manning and Peter Henderson and Daniel E. Ho},
  year   = {2025},
  eprint = {2505.03970},
  archivePrefix = {arXiv},
  url    = {http://arxiv.org/abs/2505.03970v1}
}

Add a badge to your README

Shows whether official code is linked for this paper.

Code of Paper badge
[![Code of Paper](https://codeofpaper.com/badge/2505.03970.svg)](https://codeofpaper.com/paper/2505.03970)

Discussion