TW-LegalBench: Measuring Taiwanese Legal Understanding

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2606.18699v1
• Date: Wed, 17 Jun 2026 05:25:21 GMT
• Title: TW-LegalBench: Measuring Taiwanese Legal Understanding
• Abstract summary: Large language models (LLMs) have shown impressive capabilities across diverse tasks, yet their performance on jurisdiction-specific legal reasoning remains underexplored.<n>We present TW-LegalBench that utilizes Taiwanese legal system's rich official corpus open to the public to fill the gap in evaluating LLMs on Taiwanese law.
• Score: 1.8953545128709688
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) have shown impressive capabilities across diverse tasks, yet their performance on jurisdiction-specific legal reasoning remains underexplored. We present TW-LegalBench that utilizes Taiwanese legal system's rich official corpus open to the public to fill the gap in evaluating LLMs on Taiwanese law, among common-law benchmarks that focus on English sources and civil-law benchmarks focusing on sources of Simplified Chinese. TW-LegalBench comprises three task types: (1) over 16,000 multiple-choice questions (MCQs) across five years of official examinations in 18 professional domains; (2) 117 open-ended essay questions (OEQs) from examinations for legal professionals with official scoring rubrics; and (3) more than 14,000 legal judgment prediction (LJP) instances covering hundreds of crime categories. We evaluate 13 LLMs using accuracy for MCQs, a decomposed LLM-as-Judge framework based on the scoring rubric points for OEQs, and metrics for sentencing accuracy and statute citation for LJP. Our results reveal that top-performing models exceed the passing threshold for qualified lawyers (passing rate: 11%) but fall short of that for judges and prosecutors (passing rate: 1~2%). For LJP, while models demonstrate reasonable verdict type accuracy and sentence prediction capability, they struggle to cite exact legal articles. These findings highlight that reliable legal text generation remains challenging for LLMs, even though their performance on qualification examinations approaches human level.

Related papers

• Magis-Bench: Evaluating LLMs on Magistrate-Level Legal Tasks [8.678622777553263]
  Magis-Bench is a benchmark for evaluating magistrate-level writing tasks.<n>It comprises 74 questions from eight examinations conducted between 2023 and 2025.<n>We evaluate 23 state-of-the-art LLMs using an LLM-as-a-judge methodology.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-05-08T20:00:14Z)
• WisdomInterrogatory (LuWen): An Open-Source Legal Large Language Model Technical Report [55.27414605169639]
  We present WisdomInterrogatory (LuWen), an open-source Chinese legal language model built upon the Baichuan foundation model.<n>We evaluate LuWen on five representative legal tasks spanning both prediction and generation settings.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-04-08T06:59:07Z)
• PLawBench: A Rubric-Based Benchmark for Evaluating LLMs in Real-World Legal Practice [67.71760070255425]
  We introduce PLawBench, a practical benchmark for evaluating large language models (LLMs) in legal practice scenarios.<n>PLawBench comprises 850 questions across 13 practical legal scenarios, with each question accompanied by expert-designed evaluation rubrics.<n>Using an LLM-based evaluator aligned with human expert judgments, we evaluate 10 state-of-the-art LLMs.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-01-23T11:36:10Z)
• LexGenius: An Expert-Level Benchmark for Large Language Models in Legal General Intelligence [74.05988707492058]
  Legal general intelligence (GI) refers to artificial intelligence (AI) that encompasses legal understanding, reasoning, and decision-making.<n>Existing benchmarks are result-oriented and fail to systematically evaluate the legal intelligence of large language models (LLMs)<n>We propose LexGenius, an expert-level Chinese legal benchmark for evaluating legal GI in LLMs.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-12-04T08:48:02Z)
• CLaw: Benchmarking Chinese Legal Knowledge in Large Language Models - A Fine-grained Corpus and Reasoning Analysis [13.067377421250557]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) are increasingly tasked with analyzing legal texts and citing relevant statutes.<n>This paper introduces CLaw, a novel benchmark specifically engineered to meticulously evaluate LLMs on Chinese legal knowledge and its application in reasoning.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-09-25T14:19:51Z)
• 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)
• Legal Evalutions and Challenges of Large Language Models [42.51294752406578]
  We use the OPENAI o1 model as a case study to evaluate the performance of large models in applying legal provisions. We compare current state-of-the-art LLMs, including open-source, closed-source, and legal-specific models trained specifically for the legal domain.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-11-15T12:23:12Z)
• Developing a Pragmatic Benchmark for Assessing Korean Legal Language Understanding in Large Language Models [7.797885529152412]
  Large language models (LLMs) have demonstrated remarkable performance in the legal domain. However their efficacy remains limited for non-standardized tasks and tasks in languages other than English. This underscores the need for careful evaluation of LLMs within each legal system before application.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-11T11:41:02Z)
• InternLM-Law: An Open Source Chinese Legal Large Language Model [72.2589401309848]
  InternLM-Law is a specialized LLM tailored for addressing diverse legal queries related to Chinese laws. We meticulously construct a dataset in the Chinese legal domain, encompassing over 1 million queries. InternLM-Law achieves the highest average performance on LawBench, outperforming state-of-the-art models, including GPT-4, on 13 out of 20 subtasks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-21T06:19:03Z)
• A Survey on Legal Judgment Prediction: Datasets, Metrics, Models and Challenges [73.34944216896837]
  Legal judgment prediction (LJP) applies Natural Language Processing (NLP) techniques to predict judgment results based on fact descriptions automatically. We analyze 31 LJP datasets in 6 languages, present their construction process and define a classification method of LJP. We show the state-of-art results for 8 representative datasets from different court cases and discuss the open challenges.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-04-11T04:06:28Z)

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.