AI News HubLIVE
Original source3 min read

A Few Good Clauses: Comparing LLMs vs Domain-Trained Small Language Models on Structured Contract Extraction

A study compares domain-trained small language model Olava Extract against frontier LLMs for structured contract extraction. Olava achieves macro F1 0.812, micro F1 0.842, with 78-97% cost reduction and fewer hallucinations, challenging the need for large models.

SourcearXiv Computational LinguisticsAuthor: Nicole Lincoln, Nick Whitehouse, Jaron Mar, Rivindu Perera

[2605.05532] A Few Good Clauses: Comparing LLMs vs Domain-Trained Small Language Models on Structured Contract Extraction

Skip to main content

Learn about arXiv becoming an independent nonprofit.

We gratefully acknowledge support from the Simons Foundation, member institutions, and all contributors. Donate

> cs > arXiv:2605.05532

Help | Advanced Search

All fields Title Author Abstract Comments Journal reference ACM classification MSC classification Report number arXiv identifier DOI ORCID arXiv author ID Help pages Full text

Search

GO

quick links

Login

Help Pages

About

-->

Computer Science > Computation and Language

arXiv:2605.05532 (cs)

[Submitted on 7 May 2026]

Title:A Few Good Clauses: Comparing LLMs vs Domain-Trained Small Language Models on Structured Contract Extraction

Authors:Nicole Lincoln, Nick Whitehouse, Jaron Mar, Rivindu Perera

View a PDF of the paper titled A Few Good Clauses: Comparing LLMs vs Domain-Trained Small Language Models on Structured Contract Extraction, by Nicole Lincoln and 3 other authors

View PDF HTML (experimental)

Abstract:This paper evaluates whether a domain trained Small Language Model (SLM) can outperform frontier Large Language Models on structured contract extraction at radically lower cost. We test Olava Extract, a self hosted legal domain Mixture of Experts model, against five frontier models.

Olava Extract achieved the strongest aggregate performance in the study, with a macro F1 of 0.812 and a micro F1 of 0.842, while reducing inference cost by 78% to 97% compared with the frontier models tested. It also achieved the highest precision scores, producing fewer hallucinated and unsupported extractions, an important distinction in legal workflows where hallucinations create operational risk and downstream review burden.

The findings shows that high performing, human comparable legal AI no longer requires the largest externally hosted models. More broadly, they challenge the assumption that commercially valuable enterprise AI capability must remain tied to ever larger models, massive infrastructure expenditure, and centrally hosted providers.

Subjects:

Computation and Language (cs.CL); Computers and Society (cs.CY)

Cite as: arXiv:2605.05532 [cs.CL]

(or arXiv:2605.05532v1 [cs.CL] for this version)

https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2605.05532

Focus to learn more

arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite (pending registration)

Submission history

From: Rivindu Perera [view email] [v1] Thu, 7 May 2026 00:20:13 UTC (364 KB)

Full-text links:

Access Paper:

View a PDF of the paper titled A Few Good Clauses: Comparing LLMs vs Domain-Trained Small Language Models on Structured Contract Extraction, by Nicole Lincoln and 3 other authors

View PDF

HTML (experimental)

TeX Source

view license

Current browse context:

cs.CL

new | recent | 2026-05

Change to browse by:

cs cs.CY

References & Citations

NASA ADS

Google Scholar

Semantic Scholar

export BibTeX citation Loading...

BibTeX formatted citation

×

loading...

Data provided by:

Bookmark

Bibliographic Tools

Bibliographic and Citation Tools

Bibliographic Explorer Toggle

Bibliographic Explorer (What is the Explorer?)

Connected Papers Toggle

Connected Papers (What is Connected Papers?)

Litmaps Toggle

Litmaps (What is Litmaps?)

scite.ai Toggle

scite Smart Citations (What are Smart Citations?)

Code, Data, Media

Code, Data and Media Associated with this Article

alphaXiv Toggle

alphaXiv (What is alphaXiv?)

Links to Code Toggle

CatalyzeX Code Finder for Papers (What is CatalyzeX?)

DagsHub Toggle

DagsHub (What is DagsHub?)

GotitPub Toggle

Gotit.pub (What is GotitPub?)

Huggingface Toggle

Hugging Face (What is Huggingface?)

ScienceCast Toggle

ScienceCast (What is ScienceCast?)

Demos

Demos

Replicate Toggle

Replicate (What is Replicate?)

Spaces Toggle

Hugging Face Spaces (What is Spaces?)

Spaces Toggle

TXYZ.AI (What is TXYZ.AI?)

Related Papers

Recommenders and Search Tools

Link to Influence Flower

Influence Flower (What are Influence Flowers?)

Core recommender toggle

CORE Recommender (What is CORE?)

Author

Venue

Institution

Topic

About arXivLabs

arXivLabs: experimental projects with community collaborators

arXivLabs is a framework that allows collaborators to develop and share new arXiv features directly on our website.

Both individuals and organizations that work with arXivLabs have embraced and accepted our values of openness, community, excellence, and user data privacy. arXiv is committed to these values and only works with partners that adhere to them.

Have an idea for a project that will add value for arXiv's community? Learn more about arXivLabs.

Which authors of this paper are endorsers? | Disable MathJax (What is MathJax?)

About

Help

contact arXivClick here to contact arXiv Contact

subscribe to arXiv mailingsClick here to subscribe Subscribe

Copyright

Privacy Policy

Web Accessibility Assistance

arXiv Operational Status