Legislating World-Model-Based Planning with Legal Reasoning

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2609.15113v1
• Date: Mon, 14 Sep 2026 06:45:58 GMT
• Title: Legislating World-Model-Based Planning with Legal Reasoning
• Abstract summary: This paper measures two key challenges to robot normative control.<n>It introduces a legal planning stack that employs Defeasible Deontic Logic (DDL) to constrain a motion planner.<n>It was deployed on a simulated robot arm pushing a cube across a $3times3$ grid.
• Score: 13.125815933562633
• License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
• Abstract: As robotic systems grow more general, legal norms are needed to integrate them into society. This paper extends the isomorphism problem of aligning legal source texts with their encodings, and measures two key challenges to robot normative control: (1) the \textit{grounding isomorphism gap}, where perception error grounds false atoms for legal reasoning, and (2) the \textit{ontological isomorphism gap}, where one legal conclusion admits many faithful translations into planning constraints. The paper introduces a legal planning stack that employs Defeasible Deontic Logic (DDL) to constrain a motion planner. The stack leverages learned world models to plan and to provide legal context, enabling \textit{ex ante} governance that intervenes before an illegal action is executed. It was deployed on a simulated robot arm pushing a cube across a $3\times3$ grid. The findings were (1) the legislated agent abided substantially more often than the non-legislated one, and modeling perception uncertainty lifted abidance even further, (2) the legal reasoning ran efficiently at runtime and its verdicts were auditable, and (3) the stack adapted to exogenous signals and endogenous rule changes. Both gaps were measured: (4) world model and probe error corrupted the factual input for the DDL reasoner, and (5) a single law admitted several faithful metric interpretations yielding drastically different abidance. Thus, \textit{ex ante} legislation functions as intended, and closing these gaps with a standardized mapping from the law to runtime constraints and improved fact grounding from perception will yield robust laws that align robot behavior with society's norms.

Related papers

• Agentic World Modeling: Foundations, Capabilities, Laws, and Beyond [209.35045331678043]
  We introduce a "levels x laws" taxonomy organized along two axes.<n>The first defines three capability levels: L1 Predictor, which learns one-step local transition operators; L2 Simulator, which composes them into multi-step, action-conditioned rollouts that respect domain laws; and L3 Evolver, which autonomously revises its own model when predictions fail against new evidence.<n>We synthesize over 400 works and summarize more than 100 representative systems spanning model-based reinforcement learning, video generation, web and GUI agents, multi-agent social simulation, and AI-driven scientific discovery.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-04-24T17:48:47Z)
• Legal2LogicICL: Improving Generalization in Transforming Legal Cases to Logical Formulas via Diverse Few-Shot Learning [1.315248337031741]
  This work aims to improve the generalization of logic-based legal reasoning systems by integrating recent advances in NLP with legal-domain adaptive few-shot learning techniques using LLMs.<n>We introduce Legal2LogicICL, a few-shot retrieval framework that balances diversity and similarity of exemplars at both the latent semantic representation level and the legal text structure level.<n>Our approach significantly improves accuracy, stability, and generalization in transforming natural-language legal case descriptions into logical representations.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-04-13T16:36:48Z)
• 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)
• When AI output tips to bad but nobody notices: Legal implications of AI's mistakes [0.0]
  generative AI introduces a perilous failure mode in which the AI fabricates fictitious case law, statutes, and judicial holdings that appear entirely authentic.<n>Attorneys who unknowingly file such fabrications face professional sanctions, malpractice exposure, and reputational harm.<n>We propose that legal professionals, courts, and regulators replace the outdated black box' mental model with verification protocols based on how these systems actually fail.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-03-25T02:34:47Z)
• LawThinker: A Deep Research Legal Agent in Dynamic Environments [51.782293183431676]
  LawThinker is an autonomous legal research agent.<n>It enforces verification as an atomic operation after every knowledge exploration step.<n>LawThinker achieves a 24% improvement over direct reasoning.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-02-12T15:19:11Z)
• 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)
• Statutory Construction and Interpretation for Artificial Intelligence [19.65776192762091]
  We show how different interpretations of the same rule can lead to inconsistent or unstable model behavior.<n>We propose a computational framework that mirrors two legal mechanisms.<n>Our approach offers a first step toward systematically managing interpretive ambiguity.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-09-01T07:10:22Z)
• Legal$Δ$: Enhancing Legal Reasoning in LLMs via Reinforcement Learning with Chain-of-Thought Guided Information Gain [21.20249684727035]
  We propose Legal$Delta$ to enhance legal reasoning through chain-of-thought guided information gain.<n>Legal$Delta$ employs a dual-mode input setup-comprising direct answer and reasoning-augmented modes.<n>It consistently produces more robust and trustworthy legal judgments without relying on labeled preference data.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-08-17T08:10:08Z)
• 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)
• AnnoCaseLaw: A Richly-Annotated Dataset For Benchmarking Explainable Legal Judgment Prediction [56.797874973414636]
  AnnoCaseLaw is a first-of-its-kind dataset of 471 meticulously annotated U.S. Appeals Court negligence cases.<n>Our dataset lays the groundwork for more human-aligned, explainable Legal Judgment Prediction models.<n>Results demonstrate that LJP remains a formidable task, with application of legal precedent proving particularly difficult.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-02-28T19:14:48Z)

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.