Scaling Legal AI: Benchmarking Mamba and Transformers for Statutory Classification and Case Law Retrieval

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2509.00141v1
• Date: Fri, 29 Aug 2025 17:38:47 GMT
• Title: Scaling Legal AI: Benchmarking Mamba and Transformers for Statutory Classification and Case Law Retrieval
• Authors: Anuraj Maurya,
• Abstract summary: We present the first comprehensive benchmarking of Mamba, a state-space model with linear-time selective mechanisms, against leading transformer models for statutory classification and case law retrieval.<n>Results show that Mamba's linear scaling enables processing of legal documents several times longer than transformers.<n>Our findings highlight trade-offs between state-space models and transformers, providing guidance for deploying legal AI in statutory analysis, judicial decision support, and policy research.
• Score: 0.0
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/
• Abstract: The rapid growth of statutory corpora and judicial decisions requires scalable legal AI systems capable of classification and retrieval over extremely long contexts. Transformer-based architectures (e.g., Longformer, DeBERTa) dominate current legal NLP benchmarks but struggle with quadratic attention costs, limiting efficiency and scalability. In this work, we present the first comprehensive benchmarking of Mamba, a state-space model (SSM) with linear-time selective mechanisms, against leading transformer models for statutory classification and case law retrieval. We evaluate models on open-source legal corpora including LexGLUE, EUR-Lex, and ILDC, covering statutory tagging, judicial outcome prediction, and case retrieval tasks. Metrics include accuracy, recall at k, mean reciprocal rank (MRR), and normalized discounted cumulative gain (nDCG), alongside throughput measured in tokens per second and maximum context length. Results show that Mamba's linear scaling enables processing of legal documents several times longer than transformers, while maintaining or surpassing retrieval and classification performance. This study introduces a new legal NLP benchmark suite for long-context modeling, along with open-source code and datasets to support reproducibility. Our findings highlight trade-offs between state-space models and transformers, providing guidance for deploying scalable legal AI in statutory analysis, judicial decision support, and policy research.

Related papers

• Towards Robust Scaling Laws for Optimizers [89.21160945066737]
  Empirical scaling laws are widely used to predict loss as model size and training data grow.<n>We show that Chinchilla-style scaling laws emerge naturally as a result of loss decomposition into irreducible, approximation, and optimization errors.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-02-07T21:40:33Z)
• LegalOne: A Family of Foundation Models for Reliable Legal Reasoning [54.57434222018289]
  We present LegalOne, a family of foundational models specifically tailored for the Chinese legal domain.<n>LegalOne is developed through a comprehensive three-phase pipeline designed to master legal reasoning.<n>We publicly release the LegalOne weights and the LegalKit evaluation framework to advance the field of Legal AI.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-01-31T10:18:32Z)
• AppellateGen: A Benchmark for Appellate Legal Judgment Generation [30.9030336647868]
  We introduce AppellateGen, a benchmark for second-instance legal judgment generation comprising 7,351 case pairs.<n>The task requires models to draft legally binding judgments by reasoning over the initial verdict and evidentiary updates.<n>We propose a judicial Standard Operating Procedure (SOP)-based Legal Multi-Agent System (SLMAS) to simulate judicial, which decomposes the generation process into discrete stages of issue identification, retrieval, and drafting.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-01-04T02:15:17Z)
• Hybrid Retrieval-Augmented Generation Agent for Trustworthy Legal Question Answering in Judicial Forensics [30.232667436008978]
  We present a hybrid legal QA agent tailored for judicial settings.<n>It integrates retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) with multi-model ensembling to deliver reliable, auditable, and continuously updatable counsel.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-11-03T15:30:58Z)
• Relative Scaling Laws for LLMs [91.73497548097775]
  Scaling laws describe how language models improve with additional data, parameters, and compute.<n>We introduce relative scaling laws, which track how performance gaps between test distributions evolve with scale.<n>These results show that although scaling improves overall performance, it is not a universal equalizer.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-10-28T16:55:22Z)
• AI for Statutory Simplification: A Comprehensive State Legal Corpus and Labor Benchmark [5.268588811689132]
  One U.S. state has claimed to eliminate one third of its state code using AI.<n>We introduce LaborBench, a benchmark dataset to evaluate AI capabilities in this domain.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-08-26T18:53:39Z)
• RLJP: Legal Judgment Prediction via First-Order Logic Rule-enhanced with Large Language Models [58.69183479148083]
  Legal Judgment Prediction (LJP) is a pivotal task in legal AI.<n>Existing LJP models integrate judicial precedents and legal knowledge for high performance.<n>But they neglect legal reasoning logic, a critical component of legal judgments requiring rigorous logical analysis.<n>This paper proposes a rule-enhanced legal judgment prediction framework based on first-order logic (FOL) formalism and comparative learning (CL)
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-05-27T14:50:21Z)
• AUTOLAW: Enhancing Legal Compliance in Large Language Models via Case Law Generation and Jury-Inspired Deliberation [5.732271982985626]
  AutoLaw is a novel violation detection framework for domain-specific large language models (LLMs)<n>It combines adversarial data generation with a jury-inspired deliberation process to enhance legal compliance of LLMs.<n>Our results highlight the framework's ability to adaptively probe legal misalignments and deliver reliable, context-aware judgments.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-05-20T07:09:13Z)
• Exploring Training and Inference Scaling Laws in Generative Retrieval [50.82554729023865]
  Generative retrieval reformulates retrieval as an autoregressive generation task, where large language models generate target documents directly from a query.<n>We systematically investigate training and inference scaling laws in generative retrieval, exploring how model size, training data scale, and inference-time compute jointly influence performance.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-03-24T17:59:03Z)
• LegalAgentBench: Evaluating LLM Agents in Legal Domain [53.70993264644004]
  LegalAgentBench is a benchmark specifically designed to evaluate LLM Agents in the Chinese legal domain.<n>LegalAgentBench includes 17 corpora from real-world legal scenarios and provides 37 tools for interacting with external knowledge.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-12-23T04:02:46Z)
• Bayesian scaling laws for in-context learning [72.17734205418502]
  In-context learning (ICL) is a powerful technique for getting language models to perform complex tasks with no training updates. We show that ICL approximates a Bayesian learner and develop a family of novel Bayesian scaling laws for ICL.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-21T21:45:22Z)
• Enhancing Legal Case Retrieval via Scaling High-quality Synthetic Query-Candidate Pairs [67.54302101989542]
  Legal case retrieval aims to provide similar cases as references for a given fact description. Existing works mainly focus on case-to-case retrieval using lengthy queries. Data scale is insufficient to satisfy the training requirements of existing data-hungry neural models.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-09T06:26:39Z)
• LawLLM: Law Large Language Model for the US Legal System [43.13850456765944]
  We introduce the Law Large Language Model (LawLLM), a multi-task model specifically designed for the US legal domain. LawLLM excels at Similar Case Retrieval (SCR), Precedent Case Recommendation (PCR), and Legal Judgment Prediction (LJP) We propose customized data preprocessing techniques for each task that transform raw legal data into a trainable format.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-07-27T21:51:30Z)
• Precedent-Enhanced Legal Judgment Prediction with LLM and Domain-Model Collaboration [52.57055162778548]
  Legal Judgment Prediction (LJP) has become an increasingly crucial task in Legal AI. Precedents are the previous legal cases with similar facts, which are the basis for the judgment of the subsequent case in national legal systems. Recent advances in deep learning have enabled a variety of techniques to be used to solve the LJP task.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-13T16:47:20Z)
• CaseEncoder: A Knowledge-enhanced Pre-trained Model for Legal Case Encoding [15.685369142294693]
  CaseEncoder is a legal document encoder that leverages fine-grained legal knowledge in both the data sampling and pre-training phases. CaseEncoder significantly outperforms both existing general pre-training models and legal-specific pre-training models in zero-shot legal case retrieval.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-05-09T12:40:19Z)

This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.

This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.