arXiv subjects

Christoph Engel

Publications and source records attributed to Christoph Engel.

3 recordsLinked to original sources

arXiv2026

Identifying Latent Intentions via Inverse Reinforcement Learning in Repeated Linear Public Good Games

Behavior in repeated public goods games continues to challenge standard theory: heterogeneous social preferences can explain first-round contributions, but not the substantial volatility observed across repeated interactions. Using 50,390 decisions from 2,938 participants, we introduce two methodological advances to address this gap. First, we cluster behavioral trajectories by their temporal shape using Dynamic Time Warping, yielding distinct and theoretically interpretable behavioral types. Second, we apply a hierarchical inverse Q-learning framework that models decisions as discrete switches between latent cooperative and defective intentions. This approach reveals a large (21.4%) and previously unmodeled behavioral type -- Switchers -- who frequently reverse intentions rather than commit to stable strategies. At the same time, the framework recovers canonical strategic behaviors such as persistent cooperation and free-riding. Substantively, recognizing intentional volatility helps sustain cooperation: brief defections by Switchers often reverse, so strategic patience can prevent unnecessary breakdowns.

econ.GN↗

arXiv2025

LEXam: Benchmarking Legal Reasoning on 340 Law Exams

Long-form legal reasoning remains a key challenge for large language models (LLMs) in spite of recent advances in test-time scaling. To address this, we introduce LEXam, a novel benchmark derived from 340 law exams spanning 116 law school courses across a range of subjects and degree levels. The dataset comprises 7,537 law exam questions in English and German. It includes both long-form, open-ended questions and multiple-choice questions with varying numbers of options. Besides reference answers, the open questions are also accompanied by explicit guidance outlining the expected legal reasoning approach such as issue spotting, rule recall, or rule application. Our evaluation on both open-ended and multiple-choice questions present significant challenges for current LLMs; in particular, they notably struggle with open questions that require structured, multi-step legal reasoning. Moreover, our results underscore the effectiveness of the dataset in differentiating between models with varying capabilities. Deploying an ensemble LLM-as-a-Judge paradigm with rigorous human expert validation, we demonstrate how model-generated reasoning steps can be evaluated consistently and accurately, closely aligning with human expert assessments. Our evaluation setup provides a scalable method to assess legal reasoning quality beyond simple accuracy metrics. Project page: https://lexam-benchmark.github.io/.

cs.CL↗

arXiv2024

Lawma: The Power of Specialization for Legal Annotation

Annotation and classification of legal text are central components of empirical legal research. Traditionally, these tasks are often delegated to trained research assistants. Motivated by the advances in language modeling, empirical legal scholars are increasingly turning to prompting commercial models, hoping that it will alleviate the significant cost of human annotation. Despite growing use, our understanding of how to best utilize large language models for legal annotation remains limited. To bridge this gap, we introduce CaselawQA, a benchmark comprising 260 legal annotation tasks, nearly all new to the machine learning community. We demonstrate that commercial models, such as GPT-4.5 and Claude 3.7 Sonnet, achieve non-trivial yet highly variable accuracy, generally falling short of the performance required for legal work. We then demonstrate that small, lightly fine-tuned models outperform commercial models. A few hundred to a thousand labeled examples are usually enough to achieve higher accuracy. Our work points to a viable alternative to the predominant practice of prompting commercial models. For concrete legal annotation tasks with some available labeled data, researchers are likely better off using a fine-tuned open-source model.

cs.CL↗