While Large Language Models (LLMs) have demonstrated impressive general capabilities, their direct application in the legal domain is often hindered by a lack of precise domain knowledge and complexity of performing rigorous multi-step judicial reasoning. To address this gap, we present LegalOne, a family of foundational models specifically tailored for the Chinese legal domain. LegalOne is developed through a comprehensive three-phase pipeline designed to master legal reasoning. First, during mid-training phase, we propose Plasticity-Adjusted Sampling (PAS) to address the challenge of domain adaptation. This perplexity-based scheduler strikes a balance between the acquisition of new knowledge and the retention of original capabilities, effectively establishing a robust legal foundation. Second, during supervised fine-tuning, we employ Legal Agentic CoT Distillation (LEAD) to distill explicit reasoning from raw legal texts. Unlike naive distillation, LEAD utilizes an agentic workflow to convert complex judicial processes into structured reasoning trajectories, thereby enforcing factual grounding and logical rigor. Finally, we implement a Curriculum Reinforcement Learning (RL) strategy. Through a progressive reinforcement process spanning memorization, understanding, and reasoning, LegalOne evolves from simple pattern matching to autonomous and reliable legal reasoning. Experimental results demonstrate that LegalOne achieves state-of-the-art performance across a wide range of legal tasks, surpassing general-purpose LLMs with vastly larger parameter counts through enhanced knowledge density and efficiency.

Mock trial has long served as an important platform for professional legal training and education. Traditional mock trials are difficult to access by the public because they rely on professional tutors and human participants. Fortunately, the rise of large language models (LLMs) provides new opportunities for creating more accessible and scalable court simulations. While promising, existing research ignored the systematic design and procedure evaluation of court simulations, which are critical to the credibility and usage of court simulation in practice. To this end, we propose a novel court simulation paradigm, i.e. SimCourt, based on the real-world procedure structure of Chinese courts, and design a comprehensive evaluation framework focusing on both legal judgment prediction and court procedure analysis. Experiments show that our framework can generate simulated trials that better guide the system in predicting the imprisonment, probation, and fine of each case. Further procedure evaluations show that agents’ responses under our simulation framework even outperform judges and lawyers from the real trials in many aspects. These demonstrate the potential of LLM-based court simulation.

As large language models (LLMs) are increasingly applied to real-world legal tasks, evaluating the reliability of their open-ended legal responses has become essential. These tasks require context-sensitive answers and allow little room for error, motivating fine-grained and diagnostic evaluation that can identify specific sources of response quality failures. We introduce LexRubric, a rubric-based benchmark for evaluating open-ended Chinese legal tasks. LexRubric contains 649 instances from legal consultation and judicial examination, which reflect both everyday legal needs and professional legal reasoning and cover 14 legal scenarios. It further includes 12,337 expert-written atomic scoring criteria organized under a unified six-dimensional framework, enabling accurate evaluation and diagnostic analysis across tasks and evaluation dimensions. To validate the reliability of the evaluation, we test multiple judge models and compare model-based judgments with human judgments. We further evaluate 18 recent general and legal-domain LLMs on LexRubric. Results show that different models exhibit distinct capability profiles, and that open-ended legal tasks remain challenging for current LLMs. Data is available at: <https://github.com/foggpoy/LexRubric>.

The application of autonomous agents to scientific literature review is often constrained by the reliability of online search infrastructures and linear text generation. To address these limitations, we introduce SciLENS (Scientific Localized Evidence Navigation and Synthesis), an autonomous agent framework operating entirely upon a localized dual-tier data infrastructure for deterministic access to massive academic corpora. To mitigate online dependency, SciLENS utilizes a comprehensive offline toolbox featuring topological graph traversal and structural visualization. This empowers the agent to navigate deep citation networks and organize macro-level trends into structured visual representations, mitigating context exhaustion. To train this system without human annotation, we develop an automated multi-hop data synthesis pipeline validated by cross-model consensus, followed by rubric-based reinforcement learning to align the logical planning of the agent. Evaluations across standard tasks and newly constructed complex synthesis benchmarks demonstrate that SciLENS achieves robust factual precision, outperforming existing open-source baselines and achieving performance comparable to frontier proprietary models. Our source code and data are released at https://anonymous.4open.science/r/SciLENS-48DB .

Legal judgment prediction (LJP) aims to predict judicial outcomes from case facts and typically includes law article, charge, and sentencing prediction. While recent methods perform well on the first two subtasks, legal sentencing prediction (LSP) remains difficult due to its need for fine-grained objective knowledge and flexible subjective reasoning. To address these limitations, we propose MSR², a framework that integrates multi-source retrieval and reasoning in LLMs with reinforcement learning. MSR² enables LLMs to perform multi-source retrieval based on reasoning needs and applies a process-level reward to guide intermediate subjective reasoning steps. Experiments on two real-world datasets show that MSR² improves both accuracy and interpretability in LSP, providing a promising step toward practical legal AI. Our code is available at https://github.com/cjj826/MSR2.

As large language models (LLMs) are increasingly used for long-form generation, reliably evaluating long-form outputs has become a critical challenge. LLM-as-a-judge offers a scalable alternative to human evaluation, yet its reliability in long-form output evaluation remains underexamined: existing meta-evaluation benchmarks focus mainly on short-form outputs. Compared with short-form evaluation, long-form evaluation is not merely a matter of output length; it often requires judges to handle more complex document-level demands. In this work, we introduce LongJudgeBench, a comprehensive benchmark for evaluating LLM judges on long-form outputs across diverse real-world scenarios and judging protocols. We systematically evaluate a broad range of LLM judges, covering multiple base models and judging settings. Our results reveal a substantial reliability gap: current LLM judges remain unstable across scenarios, and rubrics or references are helpful but not always sufficient. We hope LongJudgeBench will support future research on more robust, context-aware, and human-aligned LLM-as-a-judge methods. Our code is available at https://github.com/cjj826/LongJudgeBench.

Reinforcement Learning with Verifiable Rewards (RLVR) is widely used to improve reasoning across domains, but outcome-only scalar rewards are often sparse and uninformative, especially for failed samples, where they indicate only failure without explaining why the reasoning breaks down. In this paper, we leverage richer verbal feedback to guide RLVR on failed samples and convert feedback-induced progress into trainable learning signals. We propose MulFeRL (Multi-turn Feedback-guided Reinforcement Learning), a multi-turn, event-triggered RLVR framework that combines progress induction for feedback-guided regeneration of failed samples, progress credit assignment for learning from verifier-confirmed progress, and structured feedback injection for integrating feedback into the model’s reasoning process. Trained on sampled OpenR1-Math, MulFeRL outperforms supervised, self-distillation-based, and RLVR baselines in-domain and shows strong out-of-domain generalization. [We release our code at <https://anonymous.4open.science/r/MulFeRL>.]

Large language models (LLMs) are largely static and often redo reasoning or repeat mistakes. Prior experience reuse typically relies on external retrieval, which is similarity-based, can introduce noise, and adds latency. We introduce SEAM (Structured Experience Adapter Module), a lightweight, executor-specific plug-in that stores experience in its parameters and generates a structured, instance-tailored experience entry in a single forward pass to guide a frozen LLM executor. SEAM is trained for utility via executor rollouts and GRPO while keeping the executor frozen, and can be further improved with logged-success SFT after deployment. Experiments on mathematical reasoning benchmarks show consistent accuracy gains across executors with low overhead. Extensive ablation and analysis further elucidate the mechanisms underlying SEAM’s effectiveness and robustness.

Existing retrieval-augmented code generation (RACG) methods typically use an external retrieval module to fetch semantically similar code snippets used for generating subsequent fragments. However, even for consecutive code fragments, the content often diverges due to logical progression, resulting in a content gap. This gap undermines the performance of current RACG methods, as external retrieval modules based on content matching fail to infer the specific information need of LLMs to generate the next code fragment. Therefore, we propose SelfRACG, a novel paradigm that enables large language models (LLMs) to Self-express their information needs to enhance RACG. Specifically, SelfRACG includes an information need expression module and a two-stage information need-guided training strategy, which encourages LLMs to express their information need. Extensive experiments demonstrate that SelfRACG can retrieve external knowledge that better aligns with the LLM’s own information needs, resulting in superior generation performance compared to vanilla RACG. Moreover, both the training and deployment costs for retrieval in our framework are much lower than those of the strongest retrieval model.

The use of large language models (LLMs) as automated evaluation tools to assess the quality of generated natural language, known as ”LLMs-as-Judges”, has demonstrated promising capabilities and is rapidly gaining widespread attention. However, when applied to pairwise comparisons of candidate responses, LLM-based evaluators often exhibit selection bias. Specifically, their judgments may become inconsistent when the option positions or ID tokens are swapped, compromising the effectiveness and fairness of the evaluation result. To address this challenge, we introduce CalibraEval, a novel label-free method for mitigating selection bias during inference. Specifically, CalibraEval reformulates debiasing as an optimization task aimed at adjusting observed prediction distributions to align with unbiased prediction distributions. To solve this optimization problem, we propose a non-parametric order-preserving algorithm (NOA). This algorithm leverages the partial order relationships between model prediction distributions, thereby eliminating the need for explicit labels and precise mathematical function modeling. Empirical evaluations of LLMs in multiple representative benchmarks demonstrate that CalibraEval effectively mitigates selection bias and improves performance compared to existing debiasing methods. This work marks a step toward building more robust and unbiased automated evaluation frameworks, paving the way for improved reliability in AI-driven assessments. The code can be found at https://github.com/CSHaitao/CalibraEval.

With the increasing intelligence and autonomy of LLM Agents, their potential applications in the legal domain are becoming increasingly apparent. However, existing general-domain benchmarks are unable to fully capture the complexity and subtle nuances inherent in real-world judicial cognition and decision-making. Therefore, we propose LegalAgentBench, a comprehensive benchmark specifically designed to evaluate LLM Agents in the Chinese legal domain. LegalAgentBench includes 17 corpora from real-world legal scenarios and provides 37 tools for interacting with external knowledge. To cover tasks of varying difficulty and types, we designed a scalable task construction process that enables a more precise evaluation of performance in both tool utilization and reasoning. Moreover, Beyond assessing performance through the success rate of final outcomes, LegalAgentBench incorporates keyword analysis during intermediate processes to calculate progress rates, facilitating a more fine-grained evaluation. We evaluated eight popular LLMs, highlighting the strengths, limitations, and potential areas for improvement of existing models and methods. LegalAgentBench sets a new benchmark for the practical application of LLMs in the legal domain, with its code and data available at https://github.com/CSHaitao/LegalAgentBench.