mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

ContractEval: Benchmarking LLMs for Clause-Level Legal Risk Identification in Commercial Contracts

arXiv 2508.03080 ↗First posted 5 Aug 2025cs.AIcited by 9

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

The potential of large language models (LLMs) in specialized domains such as legal risk analysis remains underexplored. In response to growing interest in locally deploying open-source LLMs for legal tasks while preserving data confidentiality, this paper introduces ContractEval, the first benchmark to thoroughly evaluate whether open-source LLMs could match proprietary LLMs in identifying clause-level legal risks in commercial contracts. Using the Contract Understanding Atticus Dataset (CUAD), we assess 4 proprietary and 15 open-source LLMs. Our results highlight five key findings: (1) Proprietary models outperform open-source models in both correctness and output effectiveness, though some open-source models are competitive in certain specific dimensions. (2) Larger open-source models generally perform better, though the improvement slows down as models get bigger. (3) Reasoning ("thinking") mode improves output effectiveness but reduces correctness, likely due to over-complicating simpler tasks. (4) Open-source models generate "no related clause" responses more frequently even when relevant clauses are present. This suggests "laziness" in thinking or low confidence in extracting relevant content. (5) Model quantization speeds up inference but at the cost of performance drop, showing the tradeoff between efficiency and accuracy. These findings suggest that while most LLMs perform at a level comparable to junior legal assistants, open-source models require targeted fine-tuning to ensure correctness and effectiveness in high-stakes legal settings. ContractEval offers a solid benchmark to guide future development of legal-domain LLMs.

Key facts. Cited by 9 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 15 of its 26 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 5 Aug 2025.

Builds on

15 of 26 references.

References · 15

  1. 2018BERT: Pre-training of Deep Bidirectional Transformers for Language Understandingcited by 40,204
  2. 2024The Llama 3 Herd of Modelscited by 14,192
  3. 2025Qwen3 Technical Reportcited by 8,195
  4. 2025DeepSeek-R1: Incentivizing Reasoning Capability in LLMs via Reinforcement Learningcited by 6,146
  5. 2025Gemini 2.5: Pushing the Frontier with Advanced Reasoning, Multimodality, Long Context, and Next Generation Agentic Capabilitiescited by 3,655
  6. 2025Gemma 3 Technical Reportcited by 1,686
  7. 2021CUAD: An Expert-Annotated NLP Dataset for Legal Contract Reviewcited by 232
  8. 2018CAIL2018: A Large-Scale Legal Dataset for Judgment Predictioncited by 168
  9. 2021ContractNLI: A Dataset for Document-level Natural Language Inference for Contractscited by 145
  10. 2024SaulLM-7B: A pioneering Large Language Model for Lawcited by 136
  11. 2023LawBench: Benchmarking Legal Knowledge of Large Language Modelscited by 111
  12. 2025A Reasoning-Focused Legal Retrieval Benchmarkcited by 37
3 more
  1. 2024Lawma: The Power of Specialization for Legal Annotationcited by 7
  2. 2024AGB-DE: A Corpus for the Automated Legal Assessment of Clauses in German Consumer Contractscited by 4
  3. 2025CHANCERY: Evaluating Corporate Governance Reasoning Capabilities in Language Modelscited by 2

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 7 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2025: 1; 2026: 8.

9 papers.