UA-Legal-Bench: A Benchmark for Evaluating Large Language Models on Ukrainian Legal Reasoning
On the map: LLM reasoning → Reasoning for agents, planning and code
Abstract (arXiv)
Legal NLP benchmarks are overwhelmingly English-centric, leaving failure modes in morphologically rich, non-Latin-script languages undetected. We introduce UA-Legal-Bench, a five-task benchmark for evaluating large language models on Ukrainian legal reasoning, built from the Unified State Register of Court Decisions (EDRSR) -- one of the world's largest open judicial corpora (99.5 million decisions). The benchmark comprises: (1) case-type classification (4 classes, n=2,000), (2) judgment form classification (4 classes, n=2,000), (3) case-outcome prediction (6 classes, n=800), (4) legal norm extraction (n=1,794), and (5) cause category prediction (22 classes, n=1,871). We evaluate 11 LLMs (3B--675B) from five families under zero-shot and 3-shot prompting via AWS Bedrock with 158K API calls. Our results reveal sharply task-dependent few-shot effects: few-shot prompting improves judgment form classification by up to +38.6 pp but has mixed effects on outcome prediction. We show that accuracy is misleading on imbalanced legal tasks: the model with highest COP accuracy (62%) is a majority-class predictor (macro-F1: 23%), while the genuinely best model scores only 44% macro-F1. Within-family scaling analysis reveals that 8B models can match frontier performance on surface-level tasks but scaling thresholds vary dramatically across families. We release all data, prompts, and model predictions.
Key facts. Cited by 1 paper in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Placed in Reasoning for agents, planning and code, one of 17 directions in LLM reasoning. Builds on 14 of its 17 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 27 May 2026.
Builds on
14 of 17 references.
Closest ancestors · 2
Same direction, newest first
- 2023LegalBench: A Collaboratively Built Benchmark for Measuring Legal Reasoning in Large Language Models20 Aug
- 2023One Law, Many Languages: Benchmarking Multilingual Legal Reasoning for Judicial Support15 Jun
Other references · 12
- 2020Language Models are Few-Shot Learnerscited by 32,419
- 2021Calibrate Before Use: Improving Few-Shot Performance of Language Modelscited by 1,392
- 2018Datasheets for Datasetscited by 1,386
- 2020How Good is Your Tokenizer? On the Monolingual Performance of Multilingual Language Modelscited by 318
- 2021LexGLUE: A Benchmark Dataset for Legal Language Understanding in Englishcited by 310
- 2021CUAD: An Expert-Annotated NLP Dataset for Legal Contract Reviewcited by 236
- 2021When Does Pretraining Help? Assessing Self-Supervised Learning for Law and the CaseHOLD Datasetcited by 201
- 2020Metrics for Multi-Class Classification: an Overviewcited by 143
- 2023LEXTREME: A Multi-Lingual and Multi-Task Benchmark for the Legal Domaincited by 68
- 2023MultiLegalPile: A 689GB Multilingual Legal Corpuscited by 60
- 2026Tokenizer Fertility and Zero-Shot Performance of Foundation Models on Ukrainian Legal Text: A Comparative Studycited by 4
- 2026The Tokenizer Tax Across 25 European Languages: Domain Invariance, Cross-Lingual Few-Shot Effects, and the Ukrainian Penaltycited by 4
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2026: 1.
1 paper.
Similar, not cited
Close in wording, no citation either way
- 2023LawBench: Benchmarking Legal Knowledge of Large Language Models
- 2025Evaluating the Limits of Large Language Models in Multilingual Legal Reasoning
- 2024Enabling Discriminative Reasoning in LLMs for Legal Judgment Prediction
- 2025Scaling Legal AI: Benchmarking Mamba and Transformers for Statutory Classification and Case Law Retrieval
- 2026Evaluation of Large Language Models in Legal Applications: Challenges, Methods, and Future Directions
- 2026Legal Reasoning Is Not Lawyering: Rethinking Legal Benchmarks for Pro Se Access to Justice
- 2026BenGER: Benchmarking LLM Systems on Subsumption-Based Legal Reasoning in German Law
- 2025Evaluating Test-Time Scaling LLMs for Legal Reasoning: OpenAI o1, DeepSeek-R1, and Beyond