The reasoning abilities are one of the most enigmatic and captivating aspects of large language models (LLMs). Numerous studies are dedicated to exploring and expanding the boundaries of this reasoning capability. However, tasks that embody both reasoning and recall characteristics are often overlooked. In this paper, we introduce such a novel task, code reasoning, to provide a new perspective for the reasoning abilities of LLMs. We summarize three meta-benchmarks based on established forms of logical reasoning, and instantiate these into eight specific benchmark tasks. Our testing on these benchmarks reveals that LLMs continue to struggle with identifying satisfactory reasoning pathways. Additionally, we present a new pathway exploration pipeline inspired by human intricate problem-solving methods. This Reflective Hypothesis Decomposition and Amendment (RHDA) pipeline consists of the following iterative steps: (1) Proposing potential hypotheses based on observations and decomposing them; (2) Utilizing tools to validate hypotheses and reflection outcomes; (3) Revising hypothesis in light of observations. Our approach effectively mitigates logical chain collapses arising from forgetting or hallucination issues in multi-step reasoning, resulting in performance gains of up to $3\times$. Finally, we expanded this pipeline by applying it to simulate complex household tasks in real-world scenarios, specifically in VirtualHome, enhancing the handling of failure cases. We release our code and all of results at https://github.com/TnTWoW/code_reasoning.

As an important component of intelligent legal systems, legal case retrieval plays a critical role in ensuring judicial justice and fairness. However, the development of legal case retrieval technologies in the Chinese legal system is restricted by three problems in existing datasets: limited data size, narrow definitions of legal relevance, and naive candidate pooling strategies used in data sampling. To alleviate these issues, we introduce LeCaRDv2, a large-scale Legal Case Retrieval Dataset (version 2). It consists of 800 queries and 55,192 candidates extracted from 4.3 million criminal case documents. To the best of our knowledge, LeCaRDv2 is one of the largest Chinese legal case retrieval datasets, providing extensive coverage of criminal charges. Additionally, we enrich the existing relevance criteria by considering three key aspects: characterization, penalty, procedure. This comprehensive criteria enriches the dataset and may provides a more holistic perspective. Furthermore, we propose a two-level candidate set pooling strategy that effectively identify potential candidates for each query case. It's important to note that all cases in the dataset have been annotated by multiple legal experts specializing in criminal law. Their expertise ensures the accuracy and reliability of the annotations. We evaluate several state-of-the-art retrieval models at LeCaRDv2, demonstrating that there is still significant room for improvement in legal case retrieval. The details of LeCaRDv2 can be found at the anonymous website https://github.com/anonymous1113243/LeCaRDv2.

Legal case retrieval is a special Information Retrieval~(IR) task focusing on legal case documents. Depending on the downstream tasks of the retrieved case documents, users' information needs in legal case retrieval could be significantly different from those in Web search and traditional ad-hoc retrieval tasks. While there are several studies that retrieve legal cases based on text similarity, the underlying search intents of legal retrieval users, as shown in this paper, are more complicated than that yet mostly unexplored. To this end, we present a novel hierarchical intent taxonomy of legal case retrieval. It consists of five intent types categorized by three criteria, i.e., search for Particular Case(s), Characterization, Penalty, Procedure, and Interest. The taxonomy was constructed transparently and evaluated extensively through interviews, editorial user studies, and query log analysis. Through a laboratory user study, we reveal significant differences in user behavior and satisfaction under different search intents in legal case retrieval. Furthermore, we apply the proposed taxonomy to various downstream legal retrieval tasks, e.g., result ranking and satisfaction prediction, and demonstrate its effectiveness. Our work provides important insights into the understanding of user intents in legal case retrieval and potentially leads to better retrieval techniques in the legal domain, such as intent-aware ranking strategies and evaluation methodologies.

Legal case retrieval is a critical process for modern legal information systems. While recent studies have utilized pre-trained language models (PLMs) based on the general domain self-supervised pre-training paradigm to build models for legal case retrieval, there are limitations in using general domain PLMs as backbones. Specifically, these models may not fully capture the underlying legal features in legal case documents. To address this issue, we propose CaseEncoder, a legal document encoder that leverages fine-grained legal knowledge in both the data sampling and pre-training phases. In the data sampling phase, we enhance the quality of the training data by utilizing fine-grained law article information to guide the selection of positive and negative examples. In the pre-training phase, we design legal-specific pre-training tasks that align with the judging criteria of relevant legal cases. Based on these tasks, we introduce an innovative loss function called Biased Circle Loss to enhance the model's ability to recognize case relevance in fine grains. Experimental results on multiple benchmarks demonstrate that CaseEncoder significantly outperforms both existing general pre-training models and legal-specific pre-training models in zero-shot legal case retrieval.