A Progressive Visual-Logic-Aligned Framework for Ride-Hailing Adjudication
Weiming Wu, Zi-Jian Cheng, Jie Meng, Peng Zhen, Shan Huang, Qun Li, Guobin Wu, Lan-Zhe Guo
Abstract
The efficient adjudication of responsibility disputes is pivotal for maintaining marketplace fairness. However, the exponential surge in ride-hailing volume renders manual review intractable, while conventional automated methods lack the reasoning transparency required for quasi-judicial decisions. Although Multimodal LLMs offer a promising paradigm, they fundamentally struggle to bridge the gap between general visual semantics and rigorous evidentiary protocols, often leading to perceptual hallucinations and logical looseness. To address these systemic misalignments, we introduce RideJudge, a Progressive Visual-Logic-Aligned Framework. Instead of relying on generic pre-training, we bridge the semantic gap via SynTraj, a synthesis engine that grounds abstract liability concepts into concrete trajectory patterns. To resolve the conflict between massive regulation volume and limited context windows, we propose an Adaptive Context Optimization strategy that distills expert knowledge, coupled with a Chain-of-Adjudication mechanism to enforce active evidentiary inquiry. Furthermore, addressing the inadequacy of sparse binary feedback for complex liability assessment, we implement a novel Ordinal-Sensitive Reinforcement Learning mechanism that calibrates decision boundaries against hierarchical severity. Extensive experiments show that our RideJudge-8B achieves 88.41% accuracy, surpassing 32B-scale baselines and establishing a new standard for interpretable adjudication.
Ask about this paper
Your agent reads all of it.
Lune indexed this paper to the last equation, along with the top-tier papers that cite it. Ask a question and the answer quotes them.
Your agent calls
Luneget_paper_fulltext
Free to start. No credit card required.
Terminal
Install the CLIlune papers fulltext 036b3bf2-7be5-4462-ae7a-dc2289132cd6Builds on13
- Chain-of-Thought Prompting Elicits Reasoning in Large Language ModelsJason Wei, Xuezhi Wang, Dale Schuurmans, Maarten Bosma et al.NeurIPS 2022 · 22,562 citations
- Retrieval-Augmented Generation for Knowledge-Intensive NLP TasksPatrick Lewis, Ethan Perez, Aleksandra Piktus, Fabio Petroni et al.NeurIPS 2020 · 19,162 citations
- Reflexion: language agents with verbal reinforcement learningNoah Shinn, Federico Cassano, Ashwin Gopinath, Karthik Narasimhan et al.NeurIPS 2023 · 5,828 citations
- DAPO: An Open-Source LLM Reinforcement Learning System at ScaleQiying Yu, Zheng Zhang, Ruofei Zhu, Yufeng Yuan et al.NeurIPS 2025 · 2,828 citations
- Prometheus: Inducing Fine-Grained Evaluation Capability in Language ModelsSeungone Kim, Jamin Shin, Yejin Choi, Joel Jang et al.ICLR 2024 · 468 citations
Related papers
- Jury-and-Judge Chain-of-Thought for Uncovering Toxic Data in 3D Visual GroundingKaixiang Huang, Qifeng Zhang, Jin Wang, Jingru Yang et al.NeurIPS 2025
- Incentivizing Agentic Reasoning in LLM Judges via Tool-Integrated Reinforcement LearningRan Xu, Jingjing Chen, Jiayu Ye, Yu Wu et al.ICLR 2026 · 17 citations
- InsLogicBench: An Argumentation Logic Grounded Benchmark for Complex Insurance Claims AdjudicationJin Liu, Yunpeng Liu, Keyi Wang, Jie Shi et al.ACL 2026
- Iteratively Questioning and Answering for Interpretable Legal Judgment PredictionHaoxi Zhong, Yuzhong Wang, Cunchao Tu, Tianyang Zhang et al.AAAI 2020 · 133 citations
- On Robustness and Chain-of-Thought Consistency of RL-Finetuned VLMsRosie Zhao, Anshul Shah, Xiaoyu Zhu, Xinke Deng et al.ICML 2026 · 10 citations
