LexRubric: A Rubric-Guided Diagnostic Benchmark for Open-Ended Legal Tasks
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
As large language models (LLMs) are increasingly applied to real-world legal tasks, evaluating the reliability of their open-ended legal responses has become essential. These tasks require context-sensitive answers and allow little room for error, motivating fine-grained and diagnostic evaluation that can identify specific sources of response quality failures. We introduce LexRubric, a rubric-based benchmark for evaluating open-ended Chinese legal tasks. LexRubric contains 649 instances from legal consultation and judicial examination, which reflect both everyday legal needs and professional legal reasoning and cover 14 legal scenarios. It further includes 12,337 expert-written atomic scoring criteria organized under a unified six-dimensional framework, enabling accurate evaluation and diagnostic analysis across tasks and evaluation dimensions. To validate the reliability of the evaluation, we test multiple judge models and compare model-based judgments with human judgments. We further evaluate 18 recent general and legal-domain LLMs on LexRubric. Results show that different models exhibit distinct capability profiles, and that open-ended legal tasks remain challenging for current LLMs. Data is available at: https://github.com/foggpoy/LexRubric.
Key facts. Cited by 1 paper in the map (data through 13 Oct 2026). Builds on 21 of its 33 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 8 Jun 2026.
Builds on
21 of 33 references.
References · 21
- 2020Language Models are Few-Shot Learnerscited by 32,320
- 2026GLM-5: from Vibe Coding to Agentic Engineeringcited by 542
- 2025HealthBench: Evaluating Large Language Models Towards Improved Human Healthcited by 404
- 2025Rubrics as Rewards: Reinforcement Learning Beyond Verifiable Domainscited by 345
- 2021LexGLUE: A Benchmark Dataset for Legal Language Understanding in Englishcited by 303
- 2021CUAD: An Expert-Annotated NLP Dataset for Legal Contract Reviewcited by 233
- 2021When Does Pretraining Help? Assessing Self-Supervised Learning for Law and the CaseHOLD Datasetcited by 199
- 2024Hallucination-Free? Assessing the Reliability of Leading AI Legal Research Toolscited by 173
- 2018CAIL2018: A Large-Scale Legal Dataset for Judgment Predictioncited by 168
- 2024SaulLM-7B: A pioneering Large Language Model for Lawcited by 137
- 2023Large Language Models in Law: A Surveycited by 128
- 2023DISC-LawLLM: Fine-tuning Large Language Models for Intelligent Legal Servicescited by 119
9 more
- 2024LegalBench-RAG: A Benchmark for Retrieval-Augmented Generation in the Legal Domaincited by 116
- 2019JEC-QA: A Legal-Domain Question Answering Datasetcited by 115
- 2024LegalAgentBench: Evaluating LLM Agents in Legal Domaincited by 58
- 2024SaulLM-54B & SaulLM-141B: Scaling Up Domain Adaptation for the Legal Domaincited by 39
- 2023LeCaRDv2: A Large-Scale Chinese Legal Case Retrieval Datasetcited by 37
- 2024LawLLM: Law Large Language Model for the US Legal Systemcited by 37
- 2022LEVEN: A Large-Scale Chinese Legal Event Detection Datasetcited by 36
- 2025LexRAG: Benchmarking Retrieval-Augmented Generation in Multi-Turn Legal Consultation Conversationcited by 19
- 2025CaseGen: A Benchmark for Multi-Stage Legal Case Documents Generationcited by 8
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2026: 1.
1 paper.