This work proposes LexKairos, a comprehensive benchmark for evaluating the temporal capabilities of LLMs in the Chinese legal context across three dimensions: statutory temporal knowledge, case temporal modeling, and statute-case temporal reasoning.
Abstract
Large language models (LLMs) have demonstrated strong performance across a wide range of legal tasks. In legal practice, time is a critical concept that governs the validity of statutes, the progression of legal cases, and the enforcement of procedural deadlines. However, legal temporal capabilities remain underexplored in existing legal AI benchmarks. To address this gap, we propose LexKairos, a comprehensive benchmark for evaluating the temporal capabilities of LLMs in the Chinese legal context across three dimensions: statutory temporal knowledge, case temporal modeling, and statute-case temporal reasoning. LexKairos comprises nine sub-tasks drawn from real-world Chinese judicial cases and statutes. We conduct systematic evaluations of eight LLMs under multiple inference settings, including vanilla, Chain-of-Thought (CoT), and thinking modes. Our results show that Gemini-3-Flash achieves the strongest overall performance, yet even the best-performing model exhibits notable limitations on tasks demanding precise time-sensitive statutory metadata recall or complex reasoning in time limits, indicating that legal temporal knowledge and reasoning remain open challenges for current LLMs. Data and code are available at https://github.com/thunlp/LexKairos.
A survey and comparative analysis of NLP-based Automatic Deception Detection focusing on the legal domain and the evolution from feature-based machine learning to Large Language Model (LLM) approaches are presented, showing strong domain sensitivity.
T. Samaradiwakara, Nisansa de Silva, George C. Lobb· arXiv.org· 0 citations
WuYu-EnvLE-Bench is introduced, a benchmark built from real enforcement cases, regulatory standards, and expert review that highlights the need for evidence-grounded, rule-aware, and task-adaptive enforcement reasoning.
Zi-Liang Yang, Yi Zhang, K. Lin et al.· arXiv.org· 0 citations
Reasoning has become a standard technique and feature for contemporary LLMs; however, its application and quality in the context of demanding legal-oriented tasks, such as legal case forecasting, remain under explored. We investigate how LLMs reason in the context of legal case forecasting, using legal cases from the E...
Amogh Raina, Ilias Chalkidis, Daniel Hershcovich et al.· 1 citation
Large language models (LLMs) increasingly mediate legal determinations over what human rights are realized, and how. Yet, no evaluation benchmark exists to assess whether they can reason correctly about human rights law. To this end, we report our efforts to develop a robust and scalable methodology for creating HumRig...
Savannah Thais, Wm. Matthew Kennedy, Abhigyan Acherjee et al.· 0 citations
We identify and quantify temporal misgrounding: the systematic retrieval and citation of the currently in-force version of a legal article when the applicable version is an earlier or future one. Standard legal RAG treats the corpus as static; we argue legal question answering is a temporally-indexed retrieval problem....
MulTR, a comprehensive benchmark designed for multi-answer temporal reasoning from long unstructured contexts, is introduced, designed to systematically decouple temporal reasoning capabilities from the uncertainty of the number of answers.
Shaojuan Wu· Annual International ACM SIG...· 0 citations
We use cookies to run the site and, with your consent, for analytics and to show ads.
See our Cookie Policy.