mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

Elevating Legal LLM Responses: Harnessing Trainable Logical Structures and Semantic Knowledge with Legal Reasoning

arXiv 2502.07912 ↗First posted 11 Feb 2025cs.CLcited by 13

On the map: LLM reasoning → Reasoning for agents, planning and code

Abstract (arXiv)

Large Language Models (LLMs) have achieved impressive results across numerous domains, yet they experience notable deficiencies in legal question-answering tasks. LLMs often generate generalized responses that lack the logical specificity required for expert legal advice and are prone to hallucination, providing answers that appear correct but are unreliable. Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) techniques offer partial solutions to address this challenge, but existing approaches typically focus only on semantic similarity, neglecting the logical structure essential to legal reasoning. In this paper, we propose the Logical-Semantic Integration Model (LSIM), a novel supervised framework that bridges semantic and logical coherence. LSIM comprises three components: reinforcement learning predicts a structured fact-rule chain for each question, a trainable Deep Structured Semantic Model (DSSM) retrieves the most relevant candidate questions by integrating semantic and logical features, and in-context learning generates the final answer using the retrieved content. Our experiments on a real-world legal QA dataset-validated through both automated metrics and human evaluation-demonstrate that LSIM significantly enhances accuracy and reliability compared to existing methods.

Key facts. Cited by 13 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Placed in Reasoning for agents, planning and code, one of 17 directions in LLM reasoning. Builds on 11 of its 44 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 11 Feb 2025.

Builds on

11 of 44 references.

Closest ancestors · 1

Same direction, newest first

  1. 2024CBR-RAG: Case-Based Reasoning for Retrieval Augmented Generation in LLMs for Legal Question Answering4 Apr

Other references · 10

  1. 2019RoBERTa: A Robustly Optimized BERT Pretraining Approachcited by 13,266
  2. 2024M3-Embedding: Multi-Linguality, Multi-Functionality, Multi-Granularity Text Embeddings Through Self-Knowledge Distillationcited by 1,050
  3. 2020Generation-Augmented Retrieval for Open-domain Question Answeringcited by 186
  4. 2024Large Legal Fictions: Profiling Legal Hallucinations in Large Language Modelscited by 144
  5. 2023Chatlaw: A Multi-Agent Legal Assistant based on a Role-Aligned Mixture-of-Experts Architecturecited by 119
  6. 2024Enhancing LLM Factual Accuracy with RAG to Counter Hallucinations: A Case Study on Domain-Specific Queries in Private Knowledge-Basescited by 76
  7. 2023RETA-LLM: A Retrieval-Augmented Large Language Model Toolkitcited by 40
  8. 2020Explaining Question Answering Models through Text Generationcited by 33
  9. 2024Retrieval Augmented Generation for Domain-specific Question Answeringcited by 22
  10. 2024LexDrafter: Terminology Drafting for Legislative Documents using Retrieval Augmented Generationcited by 6

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 7 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2025: 4; 2026: 9.

13 papers.

Sort:

By area:

Similar, not cited

Close in wording, no citation either way

  1. 2025A Reasoning-Focused Legal Retrieval Benchmark
  2. 2024Exploiting LLMs' Reasoning Capability to Infer Implicit Concepts in Legal Information Retrieval
  3. 2026Fine-grained Claim-level RAG Benchmark for Law
  4. 2026Legal2LogicICL: Improving Generalization in Transforming Legal Cases to Logical Formulas via Diverse Few-Shot Learning
  5. 2025KoBLEX: Open Legal Question Answering with Multi-hop Reasoning
  6. 2026Decompose-and-Refine: Structured Legal Question Answering with Parametric Retrieval
  7. 2024Experimenting with Legal AI Solutions: The Case of Question-Answering for Access to Justice
  8. 2025NitiBench: A Comprehensive Study of LLM Framework Capabilities for Thai Legal Question Answering