mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

LexChronos: An Agentic Framework for Structured Event Timeline Extraction in Indian Jurisprudence

arXiv 2603.01651 ↗First posted 2 Mar 2026cs.CL cs.AIcited by 1

On the map: LLM agents and tool use → Social simulation and multi-agent debate

Abstract (arXiv)

Understanding and predicting judicial outcomes demands nuanced analysis of legal documents. Traditional approaches treat judgments and proceedings as unstructured text, limiting the effectiveness of large language models (LLMs) in tasks such as summarization, argument generation, and judgment prediction. We propose LexChronos, an agentic framework that iteratively extracts structured event timelines from Supreme Court of India judgments. LexChronos employs a dual-agent architecture: a LoRA-instruct-tuned extraction agent identifies candidate events, while a pre-trained feedback agent scores and refines them through a confidence-driven loop. To address the scarcity of Indian legal event datasets, we construct a synthetic corpus of 2000 samples using reverse-engineering techniques with DeepSeek-R1 and GPT-4, generating gold-standard event annotations. Our pipeline achieves a BERT-based F1 score of 0.8751 against this synthetic ground truth. In downstream evaluations on legal text summarization, GPT-4 preferred structured timelines over unstructured baselines in 75% of cases, demonstrating improved comprehension and reasoning in Indian jurisprudence. This work lays a foundation for future legal AI applications in the Indian context, such as precedent mapping, argument synthesis, and predictive judgment modelling, by harnessing structured representations of legal events.

Key facts. Cited by 1 paper in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Placed in Social simulation and multi-agent debate, one of 16 directions in LLM agents and tool use. Builds on 12 of its 33 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 2 Mar 2026.

Builds on

12 of 33 references.

References · 12

  1. 2025Qwen3 Technical Reportcited by 8,195
  2. 2019BERTScore: Evaluating Text Generation with BERTcited by 5,462
  3. 2023Self-Refine: Iterative Refinement with Self-Feedbackcited by 3,317
  4. 2025Gemma 3 Technical Reportcited by 1,686
  5. 2023Benchmarking Generation and Evaluation Capabilities of Large Language Models for Instruction Controllable Summarizationcited by 69
  6. 2025Phi-4-Mini-Reasoning: Exploring the Limits of Small Reasoning Language Models in Mathcited by 44
  7. 2023Bounding the Capabilities of Large Language Models in Open Text Generation with Prompt Constraintscited by 31
  8. 2022Named Entity Recognition in Indian court judgmentscited by 26
  9. 2021Global Explainability of BERT-Based Evaluation Metrics by Disentangling along Linguistic Factorscited by 25
  10. 2020Document-level Event Extraction with Efficient End-to-end Learning of Cross-event Dependenciescited by 17
  11. 2024Aalap: AI Assistant for Legal & Paralegal Functions in Indiacited by 4
  12. 2024Large Language Models for Judicial Entity Extraction: A Comparative Studycited by 4

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 7 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2026: 1.

1 paper.

Similar, not cited

Close in wording, no citation either way

  1. 2026PROSLEX: A Novel Dataset for Expert-Annotated Legal Statute Prediction for Indian Judiciary
  2. 2025Structured Definitions and Segmentations for Legal Reasoning in LLMs: A Study on Indian Legal Data
  3. 2025A Data Science Approach to Calcutta High Court Judgments: An Efficient LLM and RAG-powered Framework for Summarization and Similar Cases Retrieval
  4. 2024AgentsCourt: Building Judicial Decision-Making Agents with Court Debate Simulation and Legal Knowledge Augmentation
  5. 2025Scaling Legal AI: Benchmarking Mamba and Transformers for Statutory Classification and Case Law Retrieval
  6. 2026Gavel: Agent Meets Checklist for Evaluating LLMs on Long-Context Legal Summarization
  7. 2026NyayaAI: An AI-Powered Legal Assistant Using Multi-Agent Architecture and Retrieval-Augmented Generation
  8. 2023One Law, Many Languages: Benchmarking Multilingual Legal Reasoning for Judicial Support