EURO-5K: When Does Domain Pretraining Matter? Benchmarking Transformers for EU Reporting Obligation Extraction
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Extracting reporting obligations from EU legislation is critical for assessing and reducing regulatory reporting burden. However, distinguishing reporting requirements from structurally similar provisions requires specialised legal understanding. Current legal NLP methods lack specialised datasets with clear guidelines and comparative evaluation of extraction paradigms and domain adaptation strategies. We curate EURO-5K, a corpus of sentence-level reporting obligations and challenging negative examples from 136 EU legislative acts. On this dataset, we train and compare discriminative token-classification models (BERT-style) and generative span-extraction models (LLMs), evaluating both full fine-tuning and parameter-efficient QLoRA against baselines (pattern and dependency-based extraction, few-shot prompting). Results show that fully fine-tuned generic and legal BERT models achieve similar performance (0.89 F1), while fine-tuned LLMs match encoder accuracy for sentence-level extraction. Legal pretraining offers only small gains for generative models. In contrast, it is clearly beneficial when adaptation capacity is constrained, as parameter-efficient tuning of Legal-BERT outperforms its generic counterpart. Learning curve analysis demonstrates that legal pretraining accelerates early learning with minimal data. All approaches converge around 3K samples with diminishing returns thereafter, validating dataset sufficiency. Cross-dataset evaluation on two external regulatory corpora shows that our models behave as specialised reporting obligation extractors rather than generic regulatory classifiers. We release EURO-5K, trained models, and an interactive demo with explainability visualizations and structured RDF export. These demonstrate that both paradigms and parameter-efficient training provide practical tools for regulatory compliance automation.
Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 17 of its 54 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 2 Jun 2026.
Builds on
17 of 54 references.
References · 17
- 2018BERT: Pre-training of Deep Bidirectional Transformers for Language Understandingcited by 40,399
- 2021LoRA: Low-Rank Adaptation of Large Language Modelscited by 14,380
- 2020Measuring Massive Multitask Language Understandingcited by 7,963
- 2016"Why Should I Trust You?": Explaining the Predictions of Any Classifiercited by 5,070
- 2023QLoRA: Efficient Finetuning of Quantized LLMscited by 3,418
- 2019Optuna: A Next-generation Hyperparameter Optimization Frameworkcited by 2,501
- 2019Energy and Policy Considerations for Deep Learning in NLPcited by 1,254
- 2020Dataset Cartography: Mapping and Diagnosing Datasets with Training Dynamicscited by 425
- 2020Fine-Tuning Pretrained Language Models: Weight Initializations, Data Orders, and Early Stoppingcited by 384
- 2023LegalBench: A Collaboratively Built Benchmark for Measuring Legal Reasoning in Large Language Modelscited by 336
- 2021When Does Pretraining Help? Assessing Self-Supervised Learning for Law and the CaseHOLD Datasetcited by 201
- 2024Large Legal Fictions: Profiling Legal Hallucinations in Large Language Modelscited by 150
5 more
- 2023Tree-Structured Parzen Estimator: Understanding Its Algorithm Components and Their Roles for Better Empirical Performancecited by 147
- 2024SaulLM-7B: A pioneering Large Language Model for Lawcited by 142
- 2023Unlocking Practical Applications in Legal Domain: Evaluation of GPT for Zero-Shot Semantic Annotation of Legal Textscited by 33
- 2018Why Comparing Single Performance Scores Does Not Allow to Draw Conclusions About Machine Learning Approachescited by 15
- 2025Computational Identification of Regulatory Statements in EU Legislationcited by 1
Built on by
Not cited yet.