Problem
Legal RAG systems need more than relevant retrieval; they need answers that stay reliable, traceable, and measurable when the legal corpus, citations, and reasoning path become complex.
Solution
A practical research pipeline for testing which interventions most improve Legal RAG reliability, with documented experiments across retrieval, graph structure, reasoning, citation checks, and evaluation metrics.
My contribution
Building the baseline, evaluation workflow, experiment logs, and reliability checks needed to compare retrieval and graph-based methods without changing the base model too early.
Technical challenge
The hardest current challenge is handling heavy evaluation compute. I am working on batching evaluation jobs and moving larger runs to Colab so experiments stay reproducible and affordable.
Baseline architecture
Future architecture
Engineering highlights
- Reliability-focused Legal RAG experiments
- Planned additions: GNN, NLP, reranking, and USA legal data
- Batched evaluation workflow for heavy compute runs
Stack
Status: Reliability experiment in progress
