Legal Judgment Prediction (LJP) refers to the task of automatically predicting judgment results (e.g., charges, law articles and term of penalty) given the fact description of cases. While SOTA models have achieved high accuracy and F1 scores on public datasets, existing datasets fail to evaluate specific aspects of these models (e.g., legal fairness, which significantly impact their applications in real scenarios). Inspired by functional testing in software engineering, we introduce LJPCHECK, a suite of functional tests for LJP models, to comprehend LJP models’ behaviors and offer diagnostic insights. We illustrate the utility of LJPCHECK on five SOTA LJP models. Extensive experiments reveal vulnerabilities in these models, prompting an in-depth discussion into the underlying reasons of their shortcomings.

Recent advancements in large language models (LLMs) have showcased significant improvements in mathematics. However, traditional math benchmarks like GSM8k offer a unidimensional perspective, which fall short in providing a holistic assessment of the LLMs’ math capabilities. To address this gap, we introduce MathBench, a new benchmark that rigorously assesses the mathematical capabilities of large language models. MathBench spans a wide range of mathematical disciplines, offering a detailed evaluation of both theoretical understanding and practical problem-solving skills. The benchmark progresses through five distinct stages, from basic arithmetic to college mathematics, and is structured to evaluate models at various depths of knowledge. Each stage includes theoretical questions and application problems, allowing us to measure a model’s mathematical proficiency and its ability to apply concepts in practical scenarios. MathBench aims to enhance the evaluation of LLMs’ mathematical abilities, providing a nuanced view of their knowledge understanding levels and problem solving skills in a bilingual context.