analiza aiqbench
This research addresses a critical flaw in legal AI by introducing an adversarial agent that actively counters "guilty bias" during the inference phase of judgment prediction models. By integrating defense arguments into the reasoning process, the system significantly lowers false guilty rates while advancing the alignment of artificial intelligence with the presumption of innocence.
OBJECTION! Lawyer Agents Mitigate Guilty Bias in Legal Judgment Prediction
arXiv:2609.02158v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Legal Judgment Prediction (LJP) models are typically trained on documents that describe facts from a prosecutorial perspective. Existing datasets further exhibit severe label imbalance toward guilty outcomes. Consequently, these models suffer from "Guilty Bias", blindly accepting the prosecution's narrative as objective truth. Previous studies employing three-step reasoning structures or training on synthetically generated innocence data improve overall accuracy, but they still fail to mitigate bias at inference time. In this paper, we introduce OBJECTION, an inference-time pipeline that integrates an Adversarial Lawyer Agent into each 3-step reasoning of offense, unlawfulness, and culpability. Unlike generic critics, our agent actively challenges the model's presumptions of guilt by injecting legal defense arguments at each reasoning stage. To thoroughly evaluate this, we present a new "Natural Innocent" dataset including 3.4k real-world cases, overcoming the limitations of synthetic innocence benchmarks. Test results show that OBJECTION drastically reduces the False Guilty Rate (FGR) from 82.93% (SOTA baseline) to 16.69%, proving its capability to perform substantive legal reasoning. This work denotes a key progress toward aligning Legal AI with the presumption of innocence.
Title:OBJECTION! Lawyer Agents Mitigate Guilty Bias in Legal Judgment Prediction
Abstract:Legal Judgment Prediction (LJP) models are typically trained on documents that describe facts from a prosecutorial perspective. Existing datasets further exhibit severe label imbalance toward guilty outcomes. Consequently, these models suffer from "Guilty Bias", blindly accepting the prosecution's narrative as objective truth. Previous studies employing three-step reasoning structures or training on synthetically generated innocence data improve overall accuracy, but they still fail to mitigate bias at inference time. In this paper, we introduce OBJECTION, an inference-time pipeline that integrates an Adversarial Lawyer Agent into each 3-step reasoning of offense, unlawfulness, and culpability. Unlike generic critics, our agent actively challenges the model's presumptions of guilt by injecting legal defense arguments at each reasoning stage. To thoroughly evaluate this, we present a new "Natural Innocent" dataset including 3.4k real-world cases, overcoming the limitations of synthetic innocence benchmarks. Test results show that OBJECTION drastically reduces the False Guilty Rate (FGR) from 82.93% (SOTA baseline) to 16.69%, proving its capability to perform substantive legal reasoning. This work denotes a key progress toward aligning Legal AI with the presumption of innocence.
Accepted to EMNLP 2026 Main Conference. Dataset: this https URL
Computation and Language (cs.CL); Artificial Intelligence (cs.AI)
arXiv:2609.02158 [cs.CL]
(or arXiv:2609.02158v1 [cs.CL] for this version)
https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2609.02158 Focus to learn more arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite (pending registration)
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.
Text integral sub licența deschisă a publicației · 294 cuvinte
Subiecte conexe

LiveLaw Supreme Court Half-Yearly Digest: January - June 2026 [Part 2]
livelaw.in · 13 sept. 2026

Microsoft’s AI chief says superintelligence is near, but won’t take your job
The Verge · 8 iun. 2026
The Continual Constitutional Convention: How language models revise the documents that govern them
AI Alignment Forum · 13 oct. 2026
The J-Space Debate, Agent Swarms, and Pacing Frontier AI - Digital Minds Newsletter #4
LessWrong · 18 sept. 2026