跳到正文
arXiv cs.CL· Serhii Zabolotnii (Cherkasy State Business College, State Scientific Research Institute of Armament,Military Equipment Testing,Certification, Uzhhorod University), Alina Tarasova (PJSC "Finport Technologies Inc.")·· 10 小时前AI 评分25

基于 TRACE 框架的立法草案反腐败审查 AI 助手

An AI Assistant for Automating Anti-Corruption Expertise of Draft Legislation Based on the TRACE Framework

AI 导读

研究者提出基于 TRACE 架构的 AI 助手,用于自动筛查立法草案中的腐败风险,标出专家会批评的条款并指出监管缺陷。团队用乌克兰 NAZK 公开结论构建基准,含 132 份草案、474 条模型提取的发现;在 100 份草案上,本地 Gemma 4 31B 前十条标记匹配 0.28,Sonnet 5.5 为 0.30,全标记 0.43-0.46,冻结盲基线为 0.21。

正文 · 原文

Authors:Serhii Zabolotnii (Cherkasy State Business College, State Scientific Research Institute of Armament and Military Equipment Testing and Certification, Uzhhorod University), Alina Tarasova (PJSC "Finport Technologies Inc.")

View PDF HTML (experimental)

Abstract:We present an AI assistant for automating anti-corruption expertise of draft legislation based on the TRACE architecture, designed to screen bills for corruption risks: pinpoint provisions an expert would criticise and name the regulatory defect in each. The pipeline combines a deterministic parsing core, model-guided single-provision qualification, rule-based factor assignment, and external human oversight. To evaluate the assistant, we constructed an open benchmark from the published conclusions of Ukraine's National Agency on Corruption Prevention (NAZK), comprising 132 draft laws with 474 model-extracted findings. A system flag agrees with a finding when it targets a compatible provision and an LLM judge rates the risk as the same (strict) or partly the same (lenient). On 100 draft laws, the pipeline matches 0.28 of the findings within its top ten flags using the local Gemma 4 31B model, 0.30 with Sonnet 5.5, and 0.43-0.46 across all flags (non-blind; the frozen blind baseline achieves 0.21, 95% CI 0.16-0.26). Across all runs, most misses occur on provisions that the system located but qualified as a different risk, and none of the 32 legal-collision findings was matched. On 21 acts held out from tuning, the pipeline outperforms a monolithic prompt containing the full methodology under the strict measure, though not under the lenient one, and Opus 5.5 adds nothing over Sonnet. The reported scores reflect agreement with model-extracted findings rated by an LLM judge whose two access routes agree on 73 of 74 labels, without human expert validation.
Comments: 18 pages, 3 figures, 8 tables
Subjects: Computation and Language (cs.CL); Artificial Intelligence (cs.AI)
Cite as: arXiv:2611.14244 [cs.CL]
  (or arXiv:2611.14244v1 [cs.CL] for this version)
  https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2611.14244

arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite (pending registration)

Submission history

From: Serhii Zabolotnii Dr. [view email]
[v1] Tue, 10 Nov 2026 15:56:01 UTC (400 KB)

来源:arXiv cs.CL · arxiv.org