@inproceedings{dai-etal-2025-laiw,
title = "{LA}i{W}: A {C}hinese Legal Large Language Models Benchmark",
author = "Dai, Yongfu and
Feng, Duanyu and
Huang, Jimin and
Jia, Haochen and
Xie, Qianqian and
Zhang, Yifang and
Han, Weiguang and
Tian, Wei and
Wang, Hao",
editor = "Rambow, Owen and
Wanner, Leo and
Apidianaki, Marianna and
Al-Khalifa, Hend and
Eugenio, Barbara Di and
Schockaert, Steven",
booktitle = "Proceedings of the 31st International Conference on Computational Linguistics",
month = jan,
year = "2025",
address = "Abu Dhabi, UAE",
publisher = "Association for Computational Linguistics",
url = "https://aclanthology.org/2025.coling-main.716/",
pages = "10738--10766",
abstract = "General and legal domain LLMs have demonstrated strong performance in various tasks of LegalAI. However, their current evaluations lack alignment with the fundamental logic of legal reasoning, the legal syllogism. This hinders trust and understanding from legal experts. To bridge this gap, we introduce LAiW, the Chinese legal LLM benchmark structured around the legal syllogism. We evaluate legal LLMs across three levels of capability, each reflecting a progressively more complex stage of legal syllogism: fundamental information retrieval, legal principles inference, and advanced legal applications, and encompassing a wide range of tasks in different legal scenarios. Our automatic evaluation reveals that LLMs, despite their ability to answer complex legal questions, lack the inherent logical processes of the legal syllogism. This limitation poses a barrier to acceptance by legal professionals. Furthermore, manual evaluation with legal experts confirms this issue and highlights the importance of pre-training on legal text to enhance the legal syllogism of LLMs. Future research may prioritize addressing this gap to unlock the full potential of LLMs in legal applications."
}
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<modsCollection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/mods/v3">
<mods ID="dai-etal-2025-laiw">
<titleInfo>
<title>LAiW: A Chinese Legal Large Language Models Benchmark</title>
</titleInfo>
<name type="personal">
<namePart type="given">Yongfu</namePart>
<namePart type="family">Dai</namePart>
<role>
<roleTerm authority="marcrelator" type="text">author</roleTerm>
</role>
</name>
<name type="personal">
<namePart type="given">Duanyu</namePart>
<namePart type="family">Feng</namePart>
<role>
<roleTerm authority="marcrelator" type="text">author</roleTerm>
</role>
</name>
<name type="personal">
<namePart type="given">Jimin</namePart>
<namePart type="family">Huang</namePart>
<role>
<roleTerm authority="marcrelator" type="text">author</roleTerm>
</role>
</name>
<name type="personal">
<namePart type="given">Haochen</namePart>
<namePart type="family">Jia</namePart>
<role>
<roleTerm authority="marcrelator" type="text">author</roleTerm>
</role>
</name>
<name type="personal">
<namePart type="given">Qianqian</namePart>
<namePart type="family">Xie</namePart>
<role>
<roleTerm authority="marcrelator" type="text">author</roleTerm>
</role>
</name>
<name type="personal">
<namePart type="given">Yifang</namePart>
<namePart type="family">Zhang</namePart>
<role>
<roleTerm authority="marcrelator" type="text">author</roleTerm>
</role>
</name>
<name type="personal">
<namePart type="given">Weiguang</namePart>
<namePart type="family">Han</namePart>
<role>
<roleTerm authority="marcrelator" type="text">author</roleTerm>
</role>
</name>
<name type="personal">
<namePart type="given">Wei</namePart>
<namePart type="family">Tian</namePart>
<role>
<roleTerm authority="marcrelator" type="text">author</roleTerm>
</role>
</name>
<name type="personal">
<namePart type="given">Hao</namePart>
<namePart type="family">Wang</namePart>
<role>
<roleTerm authority="marcrelator" type="text">author</roleTerm>
</role>
</name>
<originInfo>
<dateIssued>2025-01</dateIssued>
</originInfo>
<typeOfResource>text</typeOfResource>
<relatedItem type="host">
<titleInfo>
<title>Proceedings of the 31st International Conference on Computational Linguistics</title>
</titleInfo>
<name type="personal">
<namePart type="given">Owen</namePart>
<namePart type="family">Rambow</namePart>
<role>
<roleTerm authority="marcrelator" type="text">editor</roleTerm>
</role>
</name>
<name type="personal">
<namePart type="given">Leo</namePart>
<namePart type="family">Wanner</namePart>
<role>
<roleTerm authority="marcrelator" type="text">editor</roleTerm>
</role>
</name>
<name type="personal">
<namePart type="given">Marianna</namePart>
<namePart type="family">Apidianaki</namePart>
<role>
<roleTerm authority="marcrelator" type="text">editor</roleTerm>
</role>
</name>
<name type="personal">
<namePart type="given">Hend</namePart>
<namePart type="family">Al-Khalifa</namePart>
<role>
<roleTerm authority="marcrelator" type="text">editor</roleTerm>
</role>
</name>
<name type="personal">
<namePart type="given">Barbara</namePart>
<namePart type="given">Di</namePart>
<namePart type="family">Eugenio</namePart>
<role>
<roleTerm authority="marcrelator" type="text">editor</roleTerm>
</role>
</name>
<name type="personal">
<namePart type="given">Steven</namePart>
<namePart type="family">Schockaert</namePart>
<role>
<roleTerm authority="marcrelator" type="text">editor</roleTerm>
</role>
</name>
<originInfo>
<publisher>Association for Computational Linguistics</publisher>
<place>
<placeTerm type="text">Abu Dhabi, UAE</placeTerm>
</place>
</originInfo>
<genre authority="marcgt">conference publication</genre>
</relatedItem>
<abstract>General and legal domain LLMs have demonstrated strong performance in various tasks of LegalAI. However, their current evaluations lack alignment with the fundamental logic of legal reasoning, the legal syllogism. This hinders trust and understanding from legal experts. To bridge this gap, we introduce LAiW, the Chinese legal LLM benchmark structured around the legal syllogism. We evaluate legal LLMs across three levels of capability, each reflecting a progressively more complex stage of legal syllogism: fundamental information retrieval, legal principles inference, and advanced legal applications, and encompassing a wide range of tasks in different legal scenarios. Our automatic evaluation reveals that LLMs, despite their ability to answer complex legal questions, lack the inherent logical processes of the legal syllogism. This limitation poses a barrier to acceptance by legal professionals. Furthermore, manual evaluation with legal experts confirms this issue and highlights the importance of pre-training on legal text to enhance the legal syllogism of LLMs. Future research may prioritize addressing this gap to unlock the full potential of LLMs in legal applications.</abstract>
<identifier type="citekey">dai-etal-2025-laiw</identifier>
<location>
<url>https://aclanthology.org/2025.coling-main.716/</url>
</location>
<part>
<date>2025-01</date>
<extent unit="page">
<start>10738</start>
<end>10766</end>
</extent>
</part>
</mods>
</modsCollection>
%0 Conference Proceedings
%T LAiW: A Chinese Legal Large Language Models Benchmark
%A Dai, Yongfu
%A Feng, Duanyu
%A Huang, Jimin
%A Jia, Haochen
%A Xie, Qianqian
%A Zhang, Yifang
%A Han, Weiguang
%A Tian, Wei
%A Wang, Hao
%Y Rambow, Owen
%Y Wanner, Leo
%Y Apidianaki, Marianna
%Y Al-Khalifa, Hend
%Y Eugenio, Barbara Di
%Y Schockaert, Steven
%S Proceedings of the 31st International Conference on Computational Linguistics
%D 2025
%8 January
%I Association for Computational Linguistics
%C Abu Dhabi, UAE
%F dai-etal-2025-laiw
%X General and legal domain LLMs have demonstrated strong performance in various tasks of LegalAI. However, their current evaluations lack alignment with the fundamental logic of legal reasoning, the legal syllogism. This hinders trust and understanding from legal experts. To bridge this gap, we introduce LAiW, the Chinese legal LLM benchmark structured around the legal syllogism. We evaluate legal LLMs across three levels of capability, each reflecting a progressively more complex stage of legal syllogism: fundamental information retrieval, legal principles inference, and advanced legal applications, and encompassing a wide range of tasks in different legal scenarios. Our automatic evaluation reveals that LLMs, despite their ability to answer complex legal questions, lack the inherent logical processes of the legal syllogism. This limitation poses a barrier to acceptance by legal professionals. Furthermore, manual evaluation with legal experts confirms this issue and highlights the importance of pre-training on legal text to enhance the legal syllogism of LLMs. Future research may prioritize addressing this gap to unlock the full potential of LLMs in legal applications.
%U https://aclanthology.org/2025.coling-main.716/
%P 10738-10766
Markdown (Informal)
[LAiW: A Chinese Legal Large Language Models Benchmark](https://aclanthology.org/2025.coling-main.716/) (Dai et al., COLING 2025)
ACL
- Yongfu Dai, Duanyu Feng, Jimin Huang, Haochen Jia, Qianqian Xie, Yifang Zhang, Weiguang Han, Wei Tian, and Hao Wang. 2025. LAiW: A Chinese Legal Large Language Models Benchmark. In Proceedings of the 31st International Conference on Computational Linguistics, pages 10738–10766, Abu Dhabi, UAE. Association for Computational Linguistics.