Explainable Statute Prediction via Attention-based Model and LLM Prompting
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
In this paper, we explore the problem of automatic statute prediction where for a given case description, a subset of relevant statutes are to be predicted. Here, the term "statute" refers to a section, a sub-section, or an article of any specific Act. Addressing this problem would be useful in several applications such as AI-assistant for lawyers and legal question answering system. For better user acceptance of such Legal AI systems, we believe the predictions should also be accompanied by human understandable explanations. We propose two techniques for addressing this problem of statute prediction with explanations -- (i) AoS (Attention-over-Sentences) which uses attention over sentences in a case description to predict statutes relevant for it and (ii) LLMPrompt which prompts an LLM to predict as well as explain relevance of a certain statute. AoS uses smaller language models, specifically sentence transformers and is trained in a supervised manner whereas LLMPrompt uses larger language models in a zero-shot manner and explores both standard as well as Chain-of-Thought (CoT) prompting techniques. Both these models produce explanations for their predictions in human understandable forms. We compare statute prediction performance of both the proposed techniques with each other as well as with a set of competent baselines, across two popular datasets. Also, we evaluate the quality of the generated explanations through an automated counter-factual manner as well as through human evaluation.
Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 16 of its 25 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 26 Dec 2025.
Builds on
16 of 25 references.
References · 16
- 2018BERT: Pre-training of Deep Bidirectional Transformers for Language Understandingcited by 40,204
- 2019Sentence-BERT: Sentence Embeddings using Siamese BERT-Networkscited by 9,049
- 2019BERTScore: Evaluating Text Generation with BERTcited by 5,462
- 2022Large Language Models are Zero-Shot Reasonerscited by 4,323
- 2020Longformer: The Long-Document Transformercited by 3,362
- 2019Attention is not Explanationcited by 916
- 2019Attention is not not Explanationcited by 629
- 2021LexGLUE: A Benchmark Dataset for Legal Language Understanding in Englishcited by 302
- 2019Neural Legal Judgment Prediction in Englishcited by 208
- 2019Leveraging BERT for Extractive Text Summarization on Lecturescited by 63
- 2020Distinguish Confusing Law Articles for Legal Judgment Predictioncited by 62
- 2021Counterfactual Explainable Recommendationcited by 60
4 more
- 2022Pre-trained Language Models for the Legal Domain: A Case Study on Indian Lawcited by 39
- 2023ChatGPT may Pass the Bar Exam soon, but has a Long Way to Go for the LexGLUE benchmarkcited by 33
- 2021LeSICiN: A Heterogeneous Graph-based Approach for Automatic Legal Statute Identification from Indian Legal Documentscited by 23
- 2023Measuring Information in Text Explanationscited by 1
Built on by
Not cited yet.
Similar, not cited
Close in wording, no citation either way
- 2026PROSLEX: A Novel Dataset for Expert-Annotated Legal Statute Prediction for Indian Judiciary
- 2026Cross-Architecture LLM Ensembles, Feature-Based Reranking and Retrieval-Augmented Prompting for Legal Information Processing
- 2024Enabling Discriminative Reasoning in LLMs for Legal Judgment Prediction
- 2025Elevating Legal LLM Responses: Harnessing Trainable Logical Structures and Semantic Knowledge with Legal Reasoning
- 2025Explainable Rule Application via Structured Prompting: A Neural-Symbolic Approach
- 2025Aplicacc~ao de Large Language Models na An'alise e S'intese de Documentos Jur'idicos: Uma Revis~ao de Literatura
- 2023Legal Syllogism Prompting: Teaching Large Language Models for Legal Judgment Prediction
- 2025A Reasoning-Focused Legal Retrieval Benchmark