This paper presents ComplianceAgent, the legal compliance sub-agent of COMPASS, a multi-agent framework that evaluates texts along four axes: digital sovereignty, carbon impact, compliance, and ethics, and evaluates the agent in a Canadian and Quebec context.
Abstract
Checking whether a text complies with a body of law is slow when done by hand and fragile when done with keyword rules. This paper presents ComplianceAgent, the legal compliance sub-agent of COMPASS, a multi-agent framework that evaluates texts along four axes: digital sovereignty, carbon impact, compliance, and ethics. The agent relies on a large language model that scores a text on a fixed rubric, grounds its judgment in a reference legal corpus, and, when the score falls at or below a critical threshold, runs a corrective chain made of self-healing rewrites, a compliance label, an explainability report, and escalation to a human reviewer. We describe what the language model does at each step, how the memory of the agent is organized, and how the same implementation can be pointed at different reference corpora. We evaluate the agent in a Canadian and Quebec context, on a corpus of thirteen legal instruments that brings together federal and provincial texts, international treaties, and municipal documents of the City of Trois-Rivi\`eres. The evaluation relies on a hand-annotated gold standard of fifteen texts and combines classification metrics, a repeated-query stability test, retrieval precision, and a composite score. On this gold standard the agent separates every conforming text from every non-conforming one, its scores remain stable under repeated queries, and the index returns relevant passages.
Legal research is a core and time-consuming legal workflow. Lawyers must identify controlling authority, verify that it remains valid, reconcile statutes and cases, and synthesize a grounded answer. Language model agents are a natural fit for this retrieval-intensive workflow, and automating even part of it would be va...
К. А. Дроздов, Oliver Chen, Langston Nashold et al.· 1 citation· ⚡1
Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly being deployed for institutional document synthesis and other reasoning-adjacent tasks. However, hallucinated content becomes an institutional risk when it is incorporated into briefs, policies, or reports. We present a local-first, corpus-restricted retrieval-augmented gen...
Imane Bahji, M. Martínez-Ramón, Ramiro Jordan· Encuentro Internacional de E...· 0 citations
Regulatory compliance checking - deciding whether a target document satisfies the obligations of a regulation - requires interpreting dense legal text, identifying which provisions apply, and grounding each decision in explicit evidence. We present ARCCS, an end-to-end, automated, agentic, and regulation-agnostic Legal...
Giorgos Filandrianos, José Dilson Menezes, Chrysoula Zerva et al.· Proceedings of the 2026 Conf...· 0 citations
In case-based legal reasoning, legal professionals identify legally significant fact patterns in a new dispute and compare them with those of decided cases. In AI&Law, HYPO dimensions and CATO factors represent these patterns symbolically, organizing expert knowledge distilled from case narratives as explicit, structur...
Methods for assessing language-model agents include rule checkers over logs, analyses of skill coverage and composition, support checkers, prefix monitors, execution gates, and rare-event estimators. Each observes a different part of a run and makes a claim of a different strength, and no common account says how these...
The UGM-Legal-AI system, developed for the application environment of Turkish customs law, offers a reusable pattern for domain-specific legal AI where hallucination control and decision traceability are primary requirements.
Serkan Ayverdi· 2026 11th International Conf...· 0 citations