Searcharxiv⌕ Search
Home/Archive/arXiv

arXiv · 2610.19992

SoK: Grading Open-Text Legal Answers, from Law School Exams to Trustworthy Rubric Judges

Sebastian Nagl
View original source ↗Read source document ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

Law students are examined through open-text answers: case solutions, essays and memos that apply the law to a set of facts. Such answers are expensive to grade, human graders disagree widely on them, and large language models (LLMs) now offer to grade them at scale, both in teaching and in the benchmarks that test legal AI. This paper systematizes how open-text legal answers can be evaluated. We derive eight desiderata from educational measurement and from the law that governs exams, among them validity, reliability, reasons, credit for defensible alternative solutions, robustness to gaming and human oversight. We then compare eight evaluation paradigms against them, from unstructured human grading to LLM judges with instance-specific rubrics and pairwise comparison. Three findings stand out. A rubric written for the task is the strongest lever for agreement between an LLM judge and human graders, but the reported figures answer different questions and rarely come with the human agreement they must be read against. The central validation gap lies where examination law is most demanding: defensible alternative solutions, follow-on errors, and the examiner's correction of model judgments. And rubric-centred grading is the most auditable family, because it makes the standard, its application and the final decision checkable. From this we derive the trustworthy rubric judge: an instance rubric that credits arguments and alternative paths,evidence checked in code, probes, repeated runs, calibration against independent human grades,logging, and an examiner who reads every script. We state what each safeguard rests on, what remains to be tested, and the uses the evidence supports today.

Explore related subjects

cs.CL

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Sebastian Nagl. 2026-10-14. SoK: Grading Open-Text Legal Answers, from Law School Exams to Trustworthy Rubric Judges. https://arxiv.org/abs/2610.19992

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

arXiv2026

Beyond Size: How Gradients Shape Pruning Decisions in Large Language Models

Large Language Models (LLMs) with billions of parameters are prime targets for network pruning, which removes some model weights without hurting performance. Prior approaches such as magnitude pruning, SparseGPT, and Wanda either concentrated solely on weights or integrated weights with activations for sparsity. However, they overlooked the informative gradients derived from pretrained LLMs. In this paper, we present a novel sparsity-centric pruning method for pretrained LLMs, termed Gradient-based Language Model Pruner (GBLM-Pruner). GBLM-Pruner leverages the first-order term of the Taylor expansion, operating in a training-free manner by harnessing properly normalized gradients from a few calibration samples to determine the pruning metric, and substantially outperforms competitive counterparts like SparseGPT and Wanda in multiple benchmarks. Intriguingly, by incorporating gradients, unstructured pruning with our method tends to reveal some structural patterns, which mirrors the geometric interdependence inherent in the LLMs' parameter structure. Additionally, GBLM-Pruner functions without any subsequent retraining or weight updates to maintain its simplicity as other counterparts. Extensive evaluations on LLaMA-series, Qwen-Series and Deepseek models across zero-shot, STEM-Reasoning and Coding benchmarks show that GBLM-Pruner surpasses magnitude pruning and Wanda by significant margins and performs competitively against SparseGPT which involves intensive weight updates. We further extend our approach on Vision Transformer and Vision Language Models. Our code and models are available at https://github.com/VILA-Lab/GBLM-Pruner.

cs.CL↗
arXiv2026

$π$-CoT: Prolog-Initialized Chain-of-Thought Prompting for Multi-Hop Question-Answering

Chain-of-Thought (CoT) prompting significantly enhances large language models' (LLMs) problem-solving capabilities, but still struggles with complex multi-hop questions, often falling into circular reasoning patterns or deviating from the logical path entirely. This limitation is particularly acute in retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) settings, where obtaining the right context is critical. We introduce Prolog-Initialized Chain-of-Thought ($π$-CoT), a novel prompting strategy that combines logic programming's structural rigor with language models' flexibility. $π$-CoT reformulates multi-hop questions into Prolog queries decomposed as single-hop sub-queries. These are resolved sequentially, producing intermediate artifacts, with which we initialize the subsequent CoT reasoning procedure. Extensive experiments demonstrate that $π$-CoT matches or outperforms standard RAG and in-context CoT on multi-hop question-answering benchmarks, with the largest gains on questions for which retrieval surfaces the necessary evidence.

cs.CL↗
arXiv2026

Scaling Personality Control in LLMs with Big Five Scaler Prompts

We present Big5-Scaler, a prompt-based framework for conditioning large language models (LLMs) with controllable Big Five personality traits. By embedding numeric trait values into natural language prompts, our method enables fine-grained personality control without additional training. We evaluate Big5-Scaler across trait expression, dialogue generation, and human trait imitation tasks. Results show that it induces consistent and distinguishable personality traits across models, with performance varying by prompt type and scale. Our analysis highlights the effectiveness of concise prompts and lower trait intensities, providing a efficient approach for building personality-aware dialogue agents.

cs.CL↗