Decompose-and-Refine: Structured Legal Question Answering with Parametric Retrieval

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.24454v1
• Date: Sat, 23 May 2026 08:03:31 GMT
• Title: Decompose-and-Refine: Structured Legal Question Answering with Parametric Retrieval
• Abstract summary: Large language models (LLMs) have shown strong performance in the legal domain, demonstrating notable potential in Legal Question Answering (LQA)<n>In statutory LQA, many questions require multi-hop reasoning across multiple legal issues, making accurate retrieval of supporting statutory provisions a critical prerequisite.<n>We propose Decompose-and-Refine (DaR), a statute-grounded LQA framework that tightly integrates step-wise question decomposition with parametric knowledge-based query refinement.
• Score: 12.468513292139695
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/
• Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) have shown strong performance in the legal domain, demonstrating notable potential in Legal Question Answering (LQA). However, unlike general QA, LQA requires answers that are not only accurate but also rigorously grounded in explicit legal authority. In statutory LQA, many questions require multi-hop reasoning across multiple legal issues, substantially increasing the risk of hallucination, thereby making accurate retrieval of supporting statutory provisions a critical prerequisite. Despite recent progress in multi-hop QA, existing approaches often rely on reasoning in natural language or retrieval without explicit query reformulation, leaving the vocabulary gap between user questions and statutory text largely unaddressed. To address this challenge, we propose Decompose-and-Refine (DaR), a statute-grounded LQA framework that tightly integrates step-wise question decomposition with parametric knowledge-based query refinement. DaR progressively decomposes a complex legal question into atomic sub-questions and generates statute-aligned parametric queries for each sub-question, enabling the selection of a single most central statutory provision corresponding to each legal issue. We evaluate DaR on KoBLEX, a Korean multi-hop LQA benchmark grounded in statutory law, using Qwen3-32B and Gemma3-27B. Experimental results demonstrate that DaR consistently improves both retrieval accuracy and final answer quality over existing approaches. Moreover, by explicitly separating sub-questions and their corresponding statutory provisions, DaR facilitates transparent, issue-level verification of complex legal reasoning processes.

Related papers

• CoAL-RAG: A Complexity-Aware Legal Retrieval-Augmented Generation Method [6.751636537163415]
  CoAL-RAG is a complexity-aware legal retrieval-augmented generation method.<n>It constructs a multi-dimensional evaluation mechanism based on question essence'' and retrieval consistency''<n>On Chinese datasets, the BLEU score improves by 42.5% and ROUGE-L reaches 3.6 times that of knowledge graph-based methods.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-08-18T08:58:11Z)
• R$^2$-Searcher: Calibrating Retrieval and Reasoning Boundaries for Agentic Search [59.034878430183305]
  R$2$-Searcher explicitly explores and calibrates the retrieval and reasoning boundaries.<n>We show that R$2$-Searcher significantly outperforms state-of-the-art agentic search methods in answer accuracy and retrieval-reasoning quality.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-06-26T19:44:34Z)
• 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)
• From Query to Counsel: Structured Reasoning with a Multi-Agent Framework and Dataset for Legal Consultation [7.115887917718381]
  Legal consultation question answering (Legal CQA) presents unique challenges compared to traditional legal QA tasks.<n>We construct JurisCQAD, a large-scale dataset of over 43,000 real-world Chinese legal queries annotated with expert-validated positive and negative responses.<n>We propose JurisMA, a modular multi-agent framework supporting dynamic routing, statutory grounding, and stylistic optimization.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-04-12T05:49:37Z)
• 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)
• 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)
• Evaluating Legal Reasoning Traces with Legal Issue Tree Rubrics [49.3262123849242]
  We introduce LEGIT (LEGal Issue Trees), a novel large-scale (24K instances) expert-level legal reasoning dataset.<n>We convert court judgments into hierarchical trees of opposing parties' arguments and the court's conclusions, which serve as rubrics for evaluating the issue coverage and correctness of the reasoning traces.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-11-30T18:32:43Z)
• Judicial Requirements for Generative AI in Legal Reasoning [0.0]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) are being integrated into professional domains, yet their limitations in high-stakes fields like law remain poorly understood.<n>This paper defines the core capabilities that an AI system must possess to function as a reliable reasoning tool in judicial decision-making.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-08-26T09:56:26Z)
• Augmented Question-guided Retrieval (AQgR) of Indian Case Law with LLM, RAG, and Structured Summaries [0.0]
  This paper proposes the use of Large Language Models (LLMs) to facilitate the retrieval of relevant cases.<n>Our approach combines Retrieval Augmented Generation (RAG) with structured summaries optimized for Indian case law.<n>The system generates targeted legal questions based on factual scenarios to identify relevant case law more effectively.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-07-23T05:24:44Z)
• LEXam: Benchmarking Legal Reasoning on 340 Law Exams [76.3521146499006]
  We introduce textscLEXam, a novel benchmark derived from 340 law exams spanning 116 law school courses across a range of subjects and degree levels.<n>The dataset comprises 4,886 law exam questions in English and German, including 2,841 long-form, open-ended questions and 2,045 multiple-choice questions.<n>Our results underscore the effectiveness of the dataset in differentiating between models with varying capabilities.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-05-19T08:48:12Z)
• JudgeRank: Leveraging Large Language Models for Reasoning-Intensive Reranking [81.88787401178378]
  We introduce JudgeRank, a novel agentic reranker that emulates human cognitive processes when assessing document relevance. We evaluate JudgeRank on the reasoning-intensive BRIGHT benchmark, demonstrating substantial performance improvements over first-stage retrieval methods. In addition, JudgeRank performs on par with fine-tuned state-of-the-art rerankers on the popular BEIR benchmark, validating its zero-shot generalization capability.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-31T18:43:12Z)
• Measuring Retrieval Complexity in Question Answering Systems [64.74106622822424]
  Retrieval complexity (RC) is a novel metric conditioned on the completeness of retrieved documents. We propose an unsupervised pipeline to measure RC given an arbitrary retrieval system. Our system can have a major impact on retrieval-based systems.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-05T19:30:52Z)
• Interpretable Long-Form Legal Question Answering with Retrieval-Augmented Large Language Models [10.834755282333589]
  Long-form Legal Question Answering dataset comprises 1,868 expert-annotated legal questions in the French language. Our experimental results demonstrate promising performance on automatic evaluation metrics. As one of the only comprehensive, expert-annotated long-form LQA dataset, LLeQA has the potential to not only accelerate research towards resolving a significant real-world issue, but also act as a rigorous benchmark for evaluating NLP models in specialized domains.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-09-29T08:23:19Z)

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.