De Jure: Iterative LLM Self-Refinement for Structured Extraction of Regulatory Rules

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.02276v1
• Date: Thu, 02 Apr 2026 17:06:50 GMT
• Title: De Jure: Iterative LLM Self-Refinement for Structured Extraction of Regulatory Rules
• Abstract summary: De Jure is a fully automated, domain-agnostic pipeline for extracting structured regulatory rules from raw documents.<n>We evaluate De Jure across four models on three regulatory corpora spanning finance, healthcare, and AI governance.
• Score: 1.6865681749065902
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/
• Abstract: Regulatory documents encode legally binding obligations that LLM-based systems must respect. Yet converting dense, hierarchically structured legal text into machine-readable rules remains a costly, expert-intensive process. We present De Jure, a fully automated, domain-agnostic pipeline for extracting structured regulatory rules from raw documents, requiring no human annotation, domain-specific prompting, or annotated gold data. De Jure operates through four sequential stages: normalization of source documents into structured Markdown; LLM-driven semantic decomposition into structured rule units; multi-criteria LLM-as-a-judge evaluation across 19 dimensions spanning metadata, definitions, and rule semantics; and iterative repair of low-scoring extractions within a bounded regeneration budget, where upstream components are repaired before rule units are evaluated. We evaluate De Jure across four models on three regulatory corpora spanning finance, healthcare, and AI governance. On the finance domain, De Jure yields consistent and monotonic improvement in extraction quality, reaching peak performance within three judge-guided iterations. De Jure generalizes effectively to healthcare and AI governance, maintaining high performance across both open- and closed-source models. In a downstream compliance question-answering evaluation via RAG, responses grounded in De Jure extracted rules are preferred over prior work in 73.8% of cases at single-rule retrieval depth, rising to 84.0% under broader retrieval, confirming that extraction fidelity translates directly into downstream utility. These results demonstrate that explicit, interpretable evaluation criteria can substitute for human annotation in complex regulatory domains, offering a scalable and auditable path toward regulation-grounded LLM alignment.

Related papers

• Grounded Normative Rule Generation with Structured Search [47.28595196084396]
  We formalize the problem as Grounded Normative Rule Synthesis (GNRS)<n>We introduce GNRS-Search, a framework that utilizes Markov Chain Monte Carlo (MCMC) sampling to optimize a discrete, five-slot And-Or Graph (AOG)<n>We evaluate our approach on GNRS-Bench, a benchmark spanning 116 controlled goals across eight scene families, and RealCharterBench, which evaluates transfer to 53 real-derived policy tasks with hidden source clauses.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-08-23T05:43:42Z)
• CTRAG: An In-Context Retrieval-based Framework for Automated Compliance Checking using LLMs [3.4983716329137344]
  We present CTRAG, a novel Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) pipeline designed for automated compliance checking.<n>CTRAG achieves highly accurate, document-informed compliance verification, even in cases of indirect compliance through third-party services.<n> Empirical evaluations demonstrate significant improvements, with CTRAG achieving an F1-score of 78% and a recall of 85% in the final deployed configuration.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-08-03T16:40:16Z)
• When Rules Learn: A Self-Evolving Agent for Legal Case Retrieval [20.750798833808556]
  We propose a self-evolving framework for rule-driven query rewriting that enhances BM25 without any parameter training.<n>We evaluate our method on the Chinese legal case retrieval benchmark LeCaRD-v2.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-06-15T19:09:31Z)
• Citation-Closure Retrieval and Per-Rule Attribution for Real-World Regulatory Compliance Question Answering [54.97384993676565]
  We formalize Regulatory Compliance QA with RegOps-Bench, a novel benchmark featuring an Operational Knowledge Graph derived from complex national R&D regulations.<n>RefWalk traverses cross-document citations, fuses multi-view candidates via max-based aggregation, and enforces per-rule attribution to explicitly map claims to sources.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-05-28T10:38:38Z)
• Who judges the judges? Governance from metrics: a runtime framework for continuous LLM compliance monitoring [0.0]
  Current approaches to AI compliance treat conformity as a binary, audit-time verdict.<n>We argue that this compliance fiction is structurally ill-suited to the requirements of the EU AI Act.<n>We introduce governance from metrics, a principle whereby regulatory compliance is derived as a continuous signal from behavioural observability.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-05-23T21:21:33Z)
• Time to REFLECT: Can We Trust LLM Judges for Evidence-based Research Agents? [61.49434544687523]
  We introduce REFLECT, a meta-evaluation benchmark targeting fine-grained failure detection in agentic environments.<n> REFLECT defines a detailed taxonomy of process- and outcome-level failure modes, instantiated by performing controlled and localized interventions.<n>Our experiments show that even the best-performing models achieve overall accuracies below 55% across reasoning, tool-use, and report-quality failures.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-05-18T23:55:08Z)
• Optimizing RAG Rerankers with LLM Feedback via Reinforcement Learning [47.963236269307735]
  Rerankers play a pivotal role in refining retrieval results for Retrieval-Augmented Generation.<n>Current reranking models are typically optimized on static human annotated relevance labels in isolation, decoupled from the downstream generation process.<n>We introduce ReRanking Preference Optimization (RRPO), a reinforcement learning framework that directly aligns reranking with the LLM's generation quality.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-04-02T14:19:47Z)
• RegGuard: AI-Powered Retrieval-Enhanced Assistant for Pharmaceutical Regulatory Compliance [3.354018798133739]
  RegGuard is an industrial-scale AI assistant designed to automate the interpretation of heterogeneous regulatory texts.<n>The system ingests heterogeneous document sources through a secure pipeline.<n>RegGuard improves answer quality specifically in terms of relevance, groundedness, and contextual focus.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-01-25T13:11:39Z)
• LegalMALR:Multi-Agent Query Understanding and LLM-Based Reranking for Chinese Statute Retrieval [10.997604609194033]
  Statute retrieval is essential for legal assistance and judicial decision support.<n>Real-world legal queries are often implicit, multi-issue, and expressed in colloquial or underspecified forms.<n>We present LegalMALR, a retrieval framework that integrates a Multi-Agent Query Understanding System with a zero-shot large-language-generated reranking module.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-01-25T04:44:56Z)
• Inference-Time Scaling of Verification: Self-Evolving Deep Research Agents via Test-Time Rubric-Guided Verification [71.98473277917962]
  Recent advances in Deep Research Agents (DRAs) are transforming automated knowledge discovery and problem-solving.<n>We propose an alternative paradigm: self-evolving the agent's ability by iteratively verifying the policy model's outputs, guided by meticulously crafted rubrics.<n>We present DeepVerifier, a rubrics-based outcome reward verifier that leverages the asymmetry of verification.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-01-22T09:47:31Z)
• Towards Comprehensive Stage-wise Benchmarking of Large Language Models in Fact-Checking [64.97768177044355]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) are increasingly deployed in real-world fact-checking systems.<n>We present FactArena, a fully automated arena-style evaluation framework.<n>Our analyses reveal significant discrepancies between static claim-verification accuracy and end-to-end fact-checking competence.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-01-06T02:51:56Z)
• Judging by the Rules: Compliance-Aligned Framework for Modern Slavery Statement Monitoring [24.13989765643719]
  Modern slavery affects millions of people worldwide, and regulatory frameworks such as Modern Slavery Acts now require companies to publish detailed disclosures.<n>These statements are often vague and inconsistent, making manual review time-consuming and difficult to scale.<n>We propose a novel framework that harnesses AI for rule-level compliance verification while preserving expert oversight.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-11-11T03:41:44Z)
• Learning to Route: A Rule-Driven Agent Framework for Hybrid-Source Retrieval-Augmented Generation [55.47971671635531]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) have shown remarkable performance on general Question Answering (QA)<n>Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) addresses this limitation by enriching LLMs with external knowledge.<n>Existing systems primarily rely on unstructured documents, while largely overlooking relational databases.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-09-30T22:19:44Z)
• All for law and law for all: Adaptive RAG Pipeline for Legal Research [0.8819595592190884]
  Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) has transformed how we approach text generation tasks.<n>This work introduces a novel end-to-end RAG pipeline that improves upon previous baselines.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-08-18T17:14:03Z)
• RIRAG: Regulatory Information Retrieval and Answer Generation [51.998738311700095]
  We introduce a task of generating question-passages pairs, where questions are automatically created and paired with relevant regulatory passages.<n>We create the ObliQA dataset, containing 27,869 questions derived from the collection of Abu Dhabi Global Markets (ADGM) financial regulation documents.<n>We design a baseline Regulatory Information Retrieval and Answer Generation (RIRAG) system and evaluate it with RePASs, a novel evaluation metric.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-09-09T14:44:19Z)

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.