Figshare
open access
CC BY 4.0
Table 1_Fact construction as a missing layer in legal AI: a practice-grounded framework for evaluating multi-agent legal consultation.docx
Legal AI research often evaluates large language models (LLMs) on legal reasoning tasks under the assumption that relevant facts are already structured and available. This assumption overlooks a prior and practically consequential stage of legal work: fact construction, namely the transformation
Conceptio Open Archive
Analyze & explore related research in Conceptio
Connect this record directly into your research workflow or AI agent. Explore citations across open repositories, query full text, and export structured proof bundles.
This document is indexed with metadata only: full text is not available in the archive for this record. Open the official source ↗
Related documents
- How Do LLMs Understand Legal Philosophy? Diagnosing Legal-Philosophical Reasoning in LLMs#1345250
- Multi-Granularity Argument Mining in Legal Texts#679224
- An arugmentation framework for contested cases of statutory interpertation#776163
- Emerging challenges in legal informatics from machine learning to LLMs - Preface to the proceedings of the 1st PLC workshop#1360035
- Emerging challenges in legal informatics from machine learning to LLMs - Preface to the proceedings of the 1st PLC workshop#1178260
Record · ID 1390307
Retrieved via Conceptio: every document is proof-bundled with source, license, and retrieval metadata.
Retrieved via Conceptio: every document is proof-bundled with source, license, and retrieval metadata.
Bring this data into your agent: Connect via MCP or API · 20 free credits to start · no card required
Read the Docs → · View CLI source on GitHub · Conceptio Open Knowledge Archive
Read the Docs → · View CLI source on GitHub · Conceptio Open Knowledge Archive