arXiv:2509.00783cs.CLcs.AI2025-09

用法律链统一生成判案理由与量刑,提升司法一致性

LegalChainReasoner: A Legal Chain-guided Framework for Criminal Judicial Opinion Generation

  • 构建法律链结构,同步引导推理与量刑决策
  • 在两个中文真实案件数据集上超越基线模型
  • 适合需要可解释判决生成的法律AI研究者

刑事判决意见是法官对案件的处理结果,包含裁判理由和量刑。自动生成此类意见有助于分析量刑一致性,并为法官提供类似历史案例参考。然而,现有研究通常将任务拆分为法律推理与量刑预测两个独立子任务,导致二者常不一致,难以满足实际司法需求。此外,以往方法依赖人工标注知识增强适用性,实用性受限。为此,我们提出新任务:判决意见生成,旨在同时产出法律推理与量刑决定。为此,我们提出LegalChainReasoner框架,利用结构化法律链引导模型完成全面案件评估。通过整合事实前提、复合法律条件与量刑结论,该方法支持灵活的知识注入与端到端意见生成。在两个真实且开源的中文法律案例数据集上的实验表明,本方法优于基线模型。

原文摘要 · Abstract (English)

A criminal judicial opinion represents the judge's disposition of a case, including the decision rationale and sentencing. Automatically generating such opinions can assist in analyzing sentencing consistency and provide judges with references to similar past cases. However, current research typically approaches this task by dividing it into two isolated subtasks: legal reasoning and sentencing prediction. This separation often leads to inconsistency between the reasoning and predictions, failing to meet real-world judicial requirements. Furthermore, prior studies rely on manually curated knowledge to enhance applicability, yet such methods remain limited in practical deployment. To address these limitations and better align with legal practice, we propose a new LegalAI task: Judicial Opinion Generation, which simultaneously produces both legal reasoning and sentencing decisions. To achieve this, we introduce LegalChainReasoner, a framework that applies structured legal chains to guide the model through comprehensive case assessments. By integrating factual premises, composite legal conditions, and sentencing conclusions, our approach ensures flexible knowledge injection and end-to-end opinion generation. Experiments on two real-world and open-source Chinese legal case datasets demonstrate that our method outperforms baseline models.

司法AI法律推理量刑生成

Thank you to arXiv for use of its open access interoperability. PaperDance 不是 arXiv 官方产品;中文卡片由大模型生成,请以原文为准。