EMNLP Findings2025
CLaw: Benchmarking Chinese Legal Knowledge in Large Language Models - A Fine-grained Corpus and Reasoning Analysis
Xinzhe Xu, Liang Zhao, Hongshen Xu, Chen Chen
Abstract
Large Language Models (LLMs) are increasingly tasked with analyzing legal texts and citing relevant statutes, yet their reliability is often compromised by general pre-training that ingests legal texts without specialized focus, obscuring the true depth of their legal knowledge. This paper introduces CLAW, a novel benchmark specifically engineered to meticulously evaluate LLMs on Chinese legal knowledge and its application in reasoning. CLAW comprises two key components: (1) a comprehensive, fine-grained corpus of all 306 Chinese national statutes, segmented to the subparagraph level and incorporating precise historical revision timesteps for rigorous recall evaluation (64,849 entries), and (2) a challenging set of 254 case-based reasoning instances derived from China Supreme Court curated materials to assess the practical application of legal knowledge. Our empirical evaluation reveals that most contemporary LLMs significantly struggle to faithfully reproduce legal provisions. As accurate retrieval and citation of legal provisions form the basis of legal reasoning, this deficiency critically undermines the reliability of their responses. We contend that achieving trustworthy legal reasoning in LLMs requires a robust synergy of accurate knowledge retrieval-potentially enhanced through supervised fine-tuning (SFT) or retrieval-augmented generation (RAG)-and strong general reasoning capabilities. This work provides an essential benchmark and critical insights for advancing domain-specific LLM reasoning, particularly within the complex legal sphere.
Ask Lune
Ask anything. The answer quotes the paper.
Lune reads all of it and the papers around it, then shows you the passages behind every answer.
Builds on4
- BERTScore: Evaluating Text Generation with BERTTianyi Zhang, Varsha Kishore, Felix Wu, Kilian Q. Weinberger et al.ICLR 2020 · 8,443 citations
- LawBench: Benchmarking Legal Knowledge of Large Language ModelsZhiwei Fei, Xiaoyu Shen, Dawei Zhu, Fengzhe Zhou et al.EMNLP 2024 · 59 citations
- LEXTREME: A Multi-Lingual and Multi-Task Benchmark for the Legal DomainJoel Niklaus, Veton Matoshi, Pooja Rani, Andrea Galassi et al.EMNLP Findings 2023 · 50 citations
- Memorization vs. Reasoning: Updating LLMs with New KnowledgeAochong Oliver Li, Tanya GoyalACL Findings 2025 · 2 citations
Related papers
- NitiBench: Benchmarking LLM Frameworks on Thai Legal Question Answering CapabilitiesPawitsapak Akarajaradwong, Pirat Pothavorn, Chompakorn Chaksangchaichot, Panuthep Tasawong et al.EMNLP 2025 · 1 citation
- MedBench: A Large-Scale Chinese Benchmark for Evaluating Medical Large Language ModelsYan Cai, Linlin Wang, Ye Wang, Gerard de Melo et al.AAAI 2024 · 42 citations
- Developing a Pragmatic Benchmark for Assessing Korean Legal Language Understanding in Large Language ModelsKimyeeun Kimyeeun, Choi Youngrok, Eunkyung Choi, Jinhwan Choi et al.EMNLP Findings 2024 · 6 citations
- Evaluating Test-Time Scaling LLMs for Legal Reasoning: OpenAI o1, DeepSeek-R1, and BeyondYinghao Hu, Yaoyao Yu, Leilei Gan, Bin Wei et al.EMNLP Findings 2025 · 1 citation
- LexRel: Benchmarking Legal Relation Extraction for Chinese Civil CasesYida Cai, Ranjuexiao Hu, Huiyuan Xie, Chenyang Li et al.ACL 2026
