ContractScrub: A benchmark for final review of legal contracts
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Legal work, with its heavy reliance on processing large amounts of text, is often considered one of the domains most exposed to the use of LLMs. Contract ``scrubbing,'' the final review of transactional agreements for errors and inconsistencies, is a particularly suitable task for automation, because it is routine, painstaking work requiring detailed attention to long documents. Scrubbing also seems to align naturally with the general capabilities expected of frontier LLMs around long-context reasoning, consistency checking, and named entity recognition (NER). Despite the economic value and potential for automation, no formal evaluations of LLMs performing contract scrubbing have been conducted. We introduce ContractScrub, the first benchmark designed to evaluate contract scrubbing capabilities, comprising contracts hand-crafted by experienced lawyers over diverse error categories such as misuse of defined terms, incorrect references, and inconsistent language. Frontier models perform surprisingly poorly with only one model reaching 0.75 macro average recall despite strong performance on seemingly related general benchmarks, demonstrating the practical limits of current models and the importance of narrowly targeted, domain-specific benchmarks for measuring real-world impact.
Key facts. Cited by 1 paper in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 16 of its 22 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 20 Aug 2026.
Builds on
16 of 22 references.
References · 16
- 2024RULER: What's the Real Context Size of Your Long-Context Language Models?cited by 1,346
- 2023LegalBench: A Collaboratively Built Benchmark for Measuring Legal Reasoning in Large Language Modelscited by 336
- 2021LexGLUE: A Benchmark Dataset for Legal Language Understanding in Englishcited by 310
- 2021CUAD: An Expert-Annotated NLP Dataset for Legal Contract Reviewcited by 236
- 2021ContractNLI: A Dataset for Document-level Natural Language Inference for Contractscited by 148
- 2025Measuring what Matters: Construct Validity in Large Language Model Benchmarkscited by 119
- 2023LawBench: Benchmarking Legal Knowledge of Large Language Modelscited by 117
- 2024FaithEval: Can Your Language Model Stay Faithful to Context, Even If "The Moon is Made of Marshmallows"cited by 86
- 2024Alice in Wonderland: Simple Tasks Showing Complete Reasoning Breakdown in State-Of-the-Art Large Language Modelscited by 68
- 2025LEXam: Benchmarking Legal Reasoning on 340 Law Examscited by 54
- 2025LongReason: A Synthetic Long-Context Reasoning Benchmark via Context Expansioncited by 50
- 2023MAUD: An Expert-Annotated Legal NLP Dataset for Merger Agreement Understandingcited by 33
4 more
- 2020A Benchmark for Lease Contract Reviewcited by 26
- 2025Reality Check: A New Evaluation Ecosystem Is Necessary to Understand AI's Real World Effectscited by 19
- 2025ContractEval: Benchmarking LLMs for Clause-Level Legal Risk Identification in Commercial Contractscited by 9
- 2024IdentifyMe: A Challenging Long-Context Mention Resolution Benchmark for LLMscited by 4
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2026: 1.
1 paper.
Similar, not cited
Close in wording, no citation either way
- 2025Metadata Extraction Leveraging Large Language Models
- 2025Better Call CLAUSE: A Discrepancy Benchmark for Auditing LLMs Legal Reasoning Capabilities
- 2026Gavel: Agent Meets Checklist for Evaluating LLMs on Long-Context Legal Summarization
- 2025Streamlining Industrial Contract Management with Retrieval-Augmented LLMs
- 2026A Few Good Clauses: Comparing LLMs vs Domain-Trained Small Language Models on Structured Contract Extraction
- 2026Multi-Legal-Bench: Evaluating LLMs on Legal Reasoning Across Jurisdictions, Languages, and Legal Traditions
- 2025LegalEval-Q: A New Benchmark for The Quality Evaluation of LLM-Generated Legal Text
- 2026LAURA: Knowledge Distillation for Interpretable Ambiguous Clause Identification in Legal Contracts