Is this Citation on Point?
- 类型：arxiv
- 标识：2608.12571
- 链接：https://arxiv.org/abs/2608.12571
- 主分类：evaluation
- 形态：position
- 被引：0
- 被引来源：Semantic Scholar
- S2被引：0
- 影响力被引：0
- TLDR：In 2023, a New York judge sanctioned two attorneys in Mata v. Avianca for filing a brief with hallucinated citations generated by ChatGPT. Such failures are largely caught by database lookups; the harder problem is detecting citations that point to real cases but do not support the propositions for which they are offered -- a failure mode that existing evaluations of LLMs for legal use cases largely overlook. In this paper, we study proposition-level citation support verification through controlled perturbations of real legal citations obtained from two legal corpora, either replacing the cite
- 待LLM分类：否
- 标题中文：这条引用是否切中要点？
- TLDR中文：2023 年，一位纽约法官在 Mata v. Avianca 案中制裁了两位律师，因其提交的 brief 包含了由 ChatGPT 生成的虚构引用。此类失误大多能被数据库检索发现；但更棘手的问题在于检测那些指向真实案例、却不支持其所述命题的引用——这一失效模式是现有面向法律场景的 LLM 评测基本忽略的。本文通过对来自两个法律语料库的真实法律引用进行受控扰动（替换引用
- 来源文件：
- /inbox/tom/_candidates/2026-08-18-rag-retrieval-reranking-candidates.json
- [S2 enrich]