Can Small Models Reason About Legal Documents? A Comparative Study

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2603.25944v1
• Date: Thu, 26 Mar 2026 22:28:20 GMT
• Title: Can Small Models Reason About Legal Documents? A Comparative Study
• Abstract summary: Large language models show promise for legal applications, but deploying frontier models raises concerns about cost, latency, and data privacy.<n>We evaluate whether sub-10B parameter models can serve as practical alternatives by testing nine models across three legal benchmarks.
• Score: 0.0
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: Large language models show promise for legal applications, but deploying frontier models raises concerns about cost, latency, and data privacy. We evaluate whether sub-10B parameter models can serve as practical alternatives by testing nine models across three legal benchmarks (ContractNLI, CaseHOLD, and ECtHR) using five prompting strategies (direct, chain-of-thought, few-shot, BM25 RAG, and dense RAG). Across 405 experiments with three random seeds per configuration, we find that a Mixture-of-Experts model activating only 3B parameters matches GPT-4o-mini in mean accuracy while surpassing it on legal holding identification, and that architecture and training quality matter more than raw parameter count. Our largest model (9B parameters) performs worst overall. Chain-of-thought prompting proves sharply task-dependent, improving contract entailment but degrading multiple-choice legal reasoning, while few-shot prompting emerges as the most consistently effective strategy. Comparing BM25 and dense retrieval for RAG, we find near-identical results, suggesting the bottleneck lies in the language model's utilization of retrieved context rather than retrieval quality. All experiments were conducted via cloud inference APIs at a total cost of $62, demonstrating that rigorous LLM evaluation is accessible without dedicated GPU infrastructure.

Related papers

• NovGauge: A Fine-Grained Benchmark for Diagnosing LLMs' Capability in Paper Novelty Assessment [54.4265627247104]
  Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly used in peer review at major AI conferences.<n>Existing benchmarks assess novelty as a single holistic score.<n>We present NovGauge, a human-anchored benchmark for fine-grained novelty assessment diagnosis.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-09-10T08:34:56Z)
• Getting the Parameters Right: A Difficulty-Graded Benchmark and Probe-Guided Training for LLM Tool Calls [43.88014476513854]
  In domains such as cloud networking, even frontier models correctly complete fewer than half of tool calls.<n>We propose a unified probe-guided framework with two complementary approaches.<n>We show that our method substantially improves parameter generation, raising the average exact match from 19.7% to 59.6%.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-08-04T03:36:41Z)
• RAG over Thinking Traces Can Improve Reasoning Tasks [45.57562898423325]
  Retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) has proven effective for knowledge-intensive tasks, but is widely believed to offer limited benefit for reasoning-intensive problems.<n>We propose retrieving thinking traces, i.e., intermediate thinking trajectories generated during problem solving attempts.<n>Using these traces as a corpus, a simple retrieve-then-generate pipeline consistently improves reasoning performance.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-05-05T04:03:28Z)
• Deterministic Fuzzy Triage for Legal Compliance Classification and Evidence Retrieval [0.0]
  Legal teams increasingly use machine learning to triage large volumes of contractual evidence.<n>Many models are opaque, non-deterministic, and difficult to align with frameworks such as HIPAA or NERC-CIP.<n>We study a simple, reproducible alternative based on deterministic dual encoders and transparent fuzzy triage bands.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-03-08T00:31:34Z)
• PROMISE: Process Reward Models Unlock Test-Time Scaling Laws in Generative Recommendations [52.67948063133533]
  Generative Recommendation has emerged as a promising paradigm, reformulating recommendation as a sequence-to-sequence generation task over hierarchical Semantic IDs.<n>Existing methods suffer from a critical issue we term Semantic Drift, where errors in early, high-level tokens irreversibly divert the generation trajectory into irrelevant semantic subspaces.<n>We propose Promise, a novel framework that integrates dense, step-by-step verification into generative models.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-01-08T07:38:46Z)
• HuggingR$^{4}$: A Progressive Reasoning Framework for Discovering Optimal Model Companions [50.61510609116118]
  HuggingR$4$ is a novel framework that combines Reasoning, Retrieval, Refinement, and Reflection to efficiently select models.<n>It attains a workability rate of 92.03% and a reasonability rate of 82.46%, surpassing existing method by 26.51% and 33.25% respectively.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-11-24T03:13:45Z)
• Teaching Language Models to Reason with Tools [73.21700643314917]
  We present emphHint-Engineering, a new data synthesis strategy that strategically injects diverse hints at optimal points within reasoning paths.<n>CoRT significantly enhances efficiency, reducing token usage by approximately 30% for the 32B model and 50% for the 1.5B model.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-10-23T08:41:44Z)
• David vs. Goliath: A comparative study of different-sized LLMs for code generation in the domain of automotive scenario generation [1.6752458252726459]
  NL-to-Scenic generation with large language models (LLMs) suffers from scarce data, limited metrics.<n>We introduce NL2Scenic, an open dataset and framework with 146 NL/Scenic pairs, a difficulty-stratified 30-case test split, and an Example Retriever.<n>We evaluate 13 models: four proprietary (GPT-4o, GPT-5, Claude-Sonnet-4, Gemini-2.5-pro) and nine open-source code models (Qwen2.5Coder 0.5B-32B; CodeLlama 7B/13B/34B)
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-10-15T21:37:02Z)
• The NazoNazo Benchmark: A Cost-Effective and Extensible Test of Insight-Based Reasoning in LLMs [3.9977256267361754]
  We present Nazonazo, a cost-effective benchmark built from Japanese children's riddles to test insight-based reasoning.<n>No model except for GPT-5 is comparable to human performance, which achieves a 52.9% mean accuracy.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-09-18T07:50:04Z)
• Value-Guided Search for Efficient Chain-of-Thought Reasoning [49.971608979012366]
  We propose a simple and efficient method for value model training on long-context reasoning traces.<n>By collecting a dataset of 2.5 million reasoning traces, we train a 1.5B token-level value model.<n>We find that block-wise value-guided search (VGS) with a final weighted majority vote achieves better test-time scaling than standard methods.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-05-23T01:05:07Z)
• Reliable Decision Support with LLMs: A Framework for Evaluating Consistency in Binary Text Classification Applications [0.7124971549479361]
  This study introduces a framework for evaluating consistency in large language model (LLM) binary text classification.<n>We determine sample size requirements, develop metrics for invalid responses, and evaluate intra- and inter-rater reliability.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-05-20T21:12:58Z)
• Are You Getting What You Pay For? Auditing Model Substitution in LLM APIs [71.7892165868749]
  Commercial Large Language Model (LLM) APIs create a fundamental trust problem.<n>Users pay for specific models but have no guarantee that providers deliver them faithfully.<n>We formalize this model substitution problem and evaluate detection methods under realistic adversarial conditions.<n>We propose and evaluate the use of Trusted Execution Environments (TEEs) as one practical and robust solution.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-04-07T03:57:41Z)
• Empowering Smaller Models: Tuning LLaMA and Gemma with Chain-of-Thought for Ukrainian Exam Tasks [0.0]
  Small or compact models, though more efficient, often lack sufficient support for underrepresented languages.<n>This work explores the potential of parameter-efficient fine-tuning of compact open-weight language models to handle reasoning-intensive tasks.<n> tuning method with joint task topic and step-by-step solution generation outperforms standard chain-of-thought tuning in matching tasks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-03-18T07:44:49Z)
• SORRY-Bench: Systematically Evaluating Large Language Model Safety Refusal [64.9938658716425]
  SORRY-Bench is a proposed benchmark for evaluating large language models' (LLMs) ability to recognize and reject unsafe user requests.<n>First, existing methods often use coarse-grained taxonomy of unsafe topics, and are over-representing some fine-grained topics.<n>Second, linguistic characteristics and formatting of prompts are often overlooked, like different languages, dialects, and more -- which are only implicitly considered in many evaluations.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-20T17:56:07Z)

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.