Accurate Legal Reasoning at Scale: Neuro-Symbolic Offloading and Structural Auditability for Robust Legal Adjudication

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.02472v1
• Date: Mon, 04 May 2026 11:13:59 GMT
• Title: Accurate Legal Reasoning at Scale: Neuro-Symbolic Offloading and Structural Auditability for Robust Legal Adjudication
• Abstract summary: Legal texts often contain computational legal clauses, whose understanding requires complex logic.<n>We propose Amortized Intelligence, a neuro-symbolic approach where we use an LLM once to translate a legal text into Deterministic Autonomous Contract Language.<n>Our DACL-based Agent achieves near-perfect consistency and mitigates the "reasoning cliff" observed in probabilistic models.
• Score: 0.0
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: Legal texts often contain computational legal clauses--provisions whose understanding requires complex logic. While frontier Large Reasoning Models (LRMs) can describe such clauses, building production-ready systems is limited by reasoning errors and the high cost of inference. We propose Amortized Intelligence, a neuro-symbolic approach where we use an LLM once to translate a legal text into Deterministic Autonomous Contract Language (DACL): a typed graph intermediate representation. Adjudication then relies on deterministic graph executions with a visually auditable trace. In comparison against runtime LRM baselines (including GPT-5.2 and Gemini 3 Pro), our DACL-based Agent achieves near-perfect consistency and mitigates the "reasoning cliff" observed in probabilistic models. The system reduces compute costs by over 90% in high-volume workflows while satisfying the strict auditability requirements of legal adjudication.

Related papers

• From Statute to Control Flow: Span-Grounded Deontic Trees for Defeasible Scope Parsing [13.077273684682886]
  Rule-following agents often fail via Silent Scope Omission (SSO)<n>The underlying bottleneck is statutory and policy understanding.<n>NormBench is a benchmark of 2,290 provisions spanning Chinese (laws and local policies), English (U.S. tax law), and corporate policies.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-06-08T02:17:53Z)
• Reasoners or Translators? Contamination-aware Evaluation and Neuro-Symbolic Robustness in Tax Law [19.724405436101495]
  We study tax law reasoning approaches and implement a contamination detection protocol to rigorously assess reliability.<n>We show that performance can be inflated by contamination.<n>Our findings indicate that legal reasoning is inherently compositional and that neuro-symbolic frameworks offer a more reliable and robust foundation for legal AI.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-05-15T15:20:16Z)
• IMPACT-CYCLE: A Contract-Based Multi-Agent System for Claim-Level Supervisory Correction of Long-Video Semantic Memory [73.22944697933603]
  Existing pipelines produce opaque, end-to-end outputs that expose no intermediate state for inspection.<n>We present IMPACT-Cycle, a supervisory multi-agent system that reformulates long-video understanding as a multimodal iterative claim-level maintenance.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-04-22T03:03:33Z)
• Neuro-Symbolic Financial Reasoning via Deterministic Fact Ledgers and Adversarial Low-Latency Hallucination Detector [2.950245545999729]
  We introduce the Verifiable Numerical Reasoning Agent (VeNRA)<n>VeNRA shifts the RAG paradigm from retrieving probabilistic text to retrieving deterministic variables via a strictly typed Universal Fact Ledger (UFL)<n>We train the Sentinel: a 3-billion SLM trained to forensically audit candidate using a single-token inference budget.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-03-04T22:55:16Z)
• Adaptive Collaboration of Arena-Based Argumentative LLMs for Explainable and Contestable Legal Reasoning [1.4988096015658898]
  ACAL is a neuro-symbolic framework that integrates adaptive multi-agent collaboration with an Arena-based Quantitative Bipolar Argumentation Framework (A-QBAF)<n>ACAL dynamically deploys expert agent teams to construct arguments, employs a clash resolution mechanism to adjudicate conflicting claims, and utilizes uncertainty-aware escalation for borderline cases.<n>Our framework supports a Human-in-the-Loop (HITL) contestability workflow, enabling users to directly audit and modify the underlying reasoning graph to influence the final judgment.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-02-21T17:47:13Z)
• Multi-Source Retrieval and Reasoning for Legal Sentencing Prediction [50.6851250608938]
  Legal sentencing prediction (LSP) remains difficult due to its need for fine-grained objective knowledge and flexible subjective reasoning.<n>We propose $MSR2$, a framework that integrates multi-source retrieval and reasoning in LLMs with reinforcement learning.<n>Experiments on two real-world datasets show that $MSR2$ improves both accuracy and interpretability in LSP.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-02-04T15:55:55Z)
• OrLog: Resolving Complex Queries with LLMs and Probabilistic Reasoning [51.58235452818926]
  We introduce OrLog, a neuro-symbolic retrieval framework that decouples predicate-level plausibility estimation from logical reasoning.<n>A large language model (LLM) provides plausibility scores for atomic predicates in one decoding-free forward pass, from which a probabilistic reasoning engine derives the posterior probability of query satisfaction.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-01-30T15:31:58Z)
• Autonomous Chain-of-Thought Distillation for Graph-Based Fraud Detection [73.9189065770752]
  Graph-based fraud detection on text-attributed graphs (TAGs) requires jointly modeling rich textual semantics and relational dependencies.<n>We propose FraudCoT, a unified framework that advances TAG-based fraud detection through autonomous, graph-aware chain-of-thought (CoT) reasoning and scalable LLM-GNN co-training.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-01-30T13:12:12Z)
• HalluGraph: Auditable Hallucination Detection for Legal RAG Systems via Knowledge Graph Alignment [0.0]
  We introduce HalluGraph, a graph-theoretic framework that quantifies hallucinations through structural alignment between knowledge graphs extracted from context, query, and response.<n>Our approach produces bounded, interpretable metrics into textitEntity Grounding (EG), measuring whether entities in the response appear in source documents, and textitRelation Preservation (RP), verifying that asserted relationships are supported by context.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-12-01T13:31:06Z)
• Better Call CLAUSE: A Discrepancy Benchmark for Auditing LLMs Legal Reasoning Capabilities [15.35489310097019]
  CLAUSE is a first-of-its-kind benchmark designed to evaluate the fragility of an LLM's legal reasoning.<n>Our work outlines a path to identify and correct such reasoning failures in legal AI.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-11-01T00:51:21Z)
• 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)
• Neuro-Symbolic Integration Brings Causal and Reliable Reasoning Proofs [95.07757789781213]
  Two lines of approaches are adopted for complex reasoning with LLMs.<n>One line of work prompts LLMs with various reasoning structures, while the structural outputs can be naturally regarded as intermediate reasoning steps.<n>The other line of work adopt LLM-free declarative solvers to do the reasoning task, rendering higher reasoning accuracy but lacking interpretability due to the black-box nature of the solvers.<n>We present a simple extension to the latter line of work. Specifically, we showcase that the intermediate search logs generated by Prolog interpreters can be accessed and interpreted into human-readable reasoning.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-11-16T11:26:21Z)

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.