AI サービスが一時的に利用できないため、復旧後に翻訳を補完します。
[Submitted on 15 Jul 2026] Title:Legal LLM Hallucination Should Be Evaluated as Failure of Legal Warrant View a PDF of the paper titled Legal LLM Hallucination Should Be Evaluated as Failure of Legal Warrant, by Maksym Taranukhin and 1 other authors View PDF HTML (experimental) Abstract:In this position paper, we argue that legal LLMs' hallucinations should be evaluated as a failure of legal warrant rather than as factual inaccuracy or citation failure. We define claim-authority warrant as the context-sensitive relation between a consequential legal claim and authority that exists, applies to the relevant jurisdiction, is current for the date of analysis, has the legal status represented by the system, and supports the proposition asserted. Warranted legal generation is the broader system behavior that answers, narrows, asks, warns, corrects a false premise, or abstains according to that relation. The falsifiable prediction is that warrant metrics reveal material failures that answer accuracy, citation existence, generic attribution, LegalHalBench-style statute relevance, and CitaLaw-style sentence-citation alignment can miss. We sharpen this claim with a side-by-side comparison item and a small, reproducible pilot over public-rule tests. We then specify benchmark records, claim boundaries, support labels, mixed response-policy scoring, risk weights, annotation reliability reporting, and jurisdiction-specific authority ontologies. The result is a concrete research agenda for evaluating legal AI systems by whether their consequential claims are licensed by law. Comments: Accepted at AI4Law@ICML2026 Subjects: Computation and Language (cs.CL) Cite as: arXiv:2609.17546 [cs.CL] (or arXiv:2609.17546v1 [cs.CL] for this version) https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2609.17546 arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite Submission history From: Maksym Taranukhin [view email] [v1] Wed, 15 Jul 2026 09:15:22 UTC (67 KB) Full-text links: Access Paper: View a PDF of the paper titled Legal LLM Hallucination Should Be Evaluated as Failure of Legal Warrant, by Maksym Taranukhin and 1 other authors View PDF HTML (experimental) TeX Source view license Current browse context: cs.CL new | recent | 2026-09 Change to browse by: cs References & Citations NASA ADS Google Scholar Semantic Scholar Loading... Data provided by: 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?)