Opportunity summary
Score7.0Public score shown from the verified overall while the stale axis breakdown refreshesThis canonical paper page includes Commercialization Proof and Related Resources.
ARXIV:2604.02276 · LLM EXTRACTION · SUBMITTED 03 APR · 20:50 UTC · FRESHNESS STALE
ARXIV:2604.02276LLM EXTRACTIONSUBMITTED 03 APR · 20:50 UTCFRESHNESS STALEKeerat Guliani · Deepkamal Gill · David Landsman · Nima Eshraghi · Krishna Kumar · Lovedeep Gondara · arXiv
An automated pipeline for extracting structured regulatory rules from legal documents using LLM self-refinement, improving downstream compliance question-answering.
Opportunity summary
Pain An automated pipeline for extracting structured regulatory rules from legal documents using LLM self-refinement, improving downstream compliance question-answering.
Evidence 0 refs | 0 sources | 33% coverage
Blocker Evidence unverified
An automated pipeline for extracting structured regulatory rules from legal documents using LLM self-refinement, improving downstream compliance question-answering. Yet converting dense, hierarchically structured legal text into machine-readable rules remains a costly, expert-intensive process.
Regulatory documents encode legally binding obligations that LLM-based systems must respect. Yet converting dense, hierarchically structured legal text into machine-readable rules remains a costly, expert-intensive process.
ScienceToStartup currently rates this 7.0/10 on the public viability pass. These results demonstrate that explicit, interpretable evaluation criteria can substitute for human annotation in complex regulatory domains, offering a scalable and auditable path toward…
LLM Extraction moved forward this cycle; last verified April 2026. Public score 7.0/10. Production flags indicate code availability.
Continue into Read for claims, analysis, references, and neighboring papers.
mobile layout uses overflow-hidden min-w-0 break-wordsOpportunity summary
Score7.0Public score shown from the verified overall while the stale axis breakdown refreshesAnalysis summary
An automated pipeline for extracting structured regulatory rules from legal documents using LLM self-refinement, improving downstream compliance question-answering.
Loading BUILD…
Paper Pack
10.48550/arXiv.2604.02276An automated pipeline for extracting structured regulatory rules from legal documents using LLM self-refinement, improving downstream compliance question-answering.
Abstract
Regulatory documents encode legally binding obligations that LLM-based systems must respect. Yet converting dense, hierarchically structured legal text into machine-readable rules remains a costly, expert-intensive process. We present De Jure, a fully automated, domain-agnostic pipeline for extracting structured regulatory rules from raw documents, requiring no human annotation, domain-specific prompting, or annotated gold data. De Jure operates through four sequential stages: normalization of source documents into structured Markdown; LLM-driven semantic decomposition into structured rule units; multi-criteria LLM-as-a-judge evaluation across 19 dimensions spanning metadata, definitions, and rule semantics; and iterative repair of low-scoring extractions within a bounded regeneration budget, where upstream components are repaired before rule units are evaluated. We evaluate De Jure across four models on three regulatory corpora spanning finance, healthcare, and AI governance. On the finance domain, De Jure yields consistent and monotonic improvement in extraction quality, reaching peak performance within three judge-guided iterations. De Jure generalizes effectively to healthcare and AI governance, maintaining high performance across both open- and closed-source models. In a downstream compliance question-answering evaluation via RAG, responses grounded in De Jure extracted rules are preferred over prior work in 73.8% of cases at single-rule retrieval depth, rising to 84.0% under broader retrieval, confirming that extraction fidelity translates directly into downstream utility. These results demonstrate that explicit, interpretable evaluation criteria can substitute for human annotation in complex regulatory domains, offering a scalable and auditable path toward regulation-grounded LLM alignment.
Source availability
PDF linkedThe paper record includes a public PDF URL.
Extraction status
Derived fallbackRead summaries are estimated from adjacent metadata, not verified extraction rows.
Proof status
unverified0 refs; 0 sources; 33% coverage.
What was readable
Derived fallback: Estimated from adjacent evidence; not verified from source.
Viability
Time to MVP
Commercial
Export
Preparing verified analysis
Dimensions overall score 7.0
PROBLEM
An automated pipeline for extracting structured regulatory rules from legal documents using LLM self-refinement, improving downstream compliance question-answering. Yet converting dense, hierarchically structured legal text into machine-readable rules remains a costly, expert-in...
METHOD
Regulatory documents encode legally binding obligations that LLM-based systems must respect. Yet converting dense, hierarchically structured legal text into machine-readable rules remains a costly, expert-intensive process.
RESULT
ScienceToStartup currently rates this 7.0/10 on the public viability pass. These results demonstrate that explicit, interpretable evaluation criteria can substitute for human annotation in complex regulatory domains, offering a scalable and auditable path toward regulation-groun...
WHY NOW
LLM Extraction moved forward this cycle; last verified April 2026. Public score 7.0/10. Production flags indicate code availability.
We present De Jure, a fully automated, domain-agnostic pipeline for extracting structured regulatory rules from raw documents, requiring no human annotation, domain-specific prompting, or annotated gold data.
Explicitly stated in the abstract as a core contribution of the paper
partial
De Jure operates through four sequential stages: normalization of source documents into structured Markdown; LLM-driven semantic decomposition into structured rule units; multi-criteria LLM-as-a-judge evaluation across 19 dimensions spanning metadata, definitions, and rule semantics; and iterative repair of low-scoring extractions within a bounded regeneration budget
Directly described in the abstract as the pipeline's operational stages
partial
On the finance domain, De Jure yields consistent and monotonic improvement in extraction quality, reaching peak performance within three judge-guided iterations.
Explicitly stated in the abstract with specific performance characteristics
partial
De Jure generalizes effectively to healthcare and AI governance, maintaining high performance across both open- and closed-source models.
Directly stated in the abstract with domain generalization claims
partial
In a downstream compliance question-answering evaluation via RAG, responses grounded in De Jure extracted rules are preferred over prior work in 73.8% of cases at single-rule retrieval depth, rising to 84.0% under broader retrieval
Explicitly stated with precise numeric results in the abstract
partial
These results demonstrate that explicit, interpretable evaluation criteria can substitute for human annotation in complex regulatory domains
Strongly implied conclusion from the abstract's final statement
partial
multi-criteria LLM-as-a-judge evaluation across 19 dimensions spanning metadata, definitions, and rule semantics
Directly stated in the abstract with specific detail about evaluation dimensions
partial
confirming that extraction fidelity translates directly into downstream utility
Directly stated conclusion based on the RAG evaluation results
partial
Paper-native neighborhood for concepts, methods, materials, markets, and competitors. Missing lanes stay labeled instead of disappearing behind commercialization gates.
Concepts
Methods
Materials
Markets
Competitors
An automated pipeline for extracting structured regulatory rules from legal documents using LLM self-refinement, improving downstream compliance question-answering.
Segment
LLM Extraction
Adoption evidence
No public code link in the paper record yet
Commercial read
7.0/10 public viability
Direct
Adjacent
Substitute
Unknown
No indexed public discussion is attached to 2604.02276 yet. That is a visibility signal, not a blank module: the monitor is watching the public channels below.
Hacker News
Not indexed yet
Not indexed yet
Bluesky
Not indexed yet
Preview the source document here, or use the hero PDF action for a new tab.
Reference metadata is not materialized in the public index yet. The source PDF remains the authority; cache refresh is optional.
CITED BY
No citing papers are indexed in the public S2S graph yet. This is an explicit zero-signal state, not a hidden lookup.
Foundation
Extension
Commercially relevant
Conflicting
Owned Distribution
Get the weekly shortlist of commercializable papers, benchmark movers, and proof receipts that matter for product execution.
0/3 checks · 0%
Build Passport
Build passport pending - Proof Lab budget No verified cost estimate / $7.00 cap
status
missing
reason
passport_row_missing
proof status
unverified
cost/budget
No verified cost estimate
confidence low
next verification path
Build brief missing until Build Passport data exists.
Source missing: Build Passport payload.
Experiment plan missing until prototype path is available.
No prototype path attached.
Validation checklist missing until required assets, cost, and regulatory flags are verified.
No checklist artifact is attached to the Build Passport payload.
Derived signals show verified:false until source-backed receipts exist.
Evidence coverage
OpportunityKernel evidence_receipt
0 refs / 0 sources / 33% coverage
stale
Verify missing sources before using this as buyer proof. verified:false
Build readiness
BuildPassport EvidenceState
passport absent
stale
Run Proof Lab or inspect typed missing state. verified:false
Artifact maturity
GitHub and Hugging Face maturity payloads
No public artifact surface observed
stale
Open source artifacts or mark the gap as missing. verified:false
Technical feasibility
partial
Current read
Runnable path is not fully verified.
Evidence
No Build Passport payload attached.
Gaps
Next test
Run minimal reproduction from the Build Passport prototype path.
Market urgency
missing
Current read
Buyer urgency is not verified from source.
Evidence
0 references, 0 sources, 33% evidence coverage.
Gaps
Next test
Collect buyer interview, deployment evidence, or cited demand signal.
Buyer clarity
missing
Current read
No budget owner is verified for this paper.
Evidence
Build tab has no CRM, procurement, or operator source.
Gaps
Next test
Map target operator, economic buyer, and procurement trigger.
Defensibility
missing
Current read
Defensibility signals are missing.
Evidence
No defensibility receipt attached.
Gaps
Next test
Refresh defensibility bars with source receipts.
Integration burden
missing
Current read
No public implementation surface observed.
Evidence
No GitHub or Hugging Face payload attached.
Gaps
Next test
Write integration checklist from prototype path and target workflow.
Capital intensity
missing
Current read
No observed cost estimate is verified.
Evidence
Cost passport has no observed_usd value.
Gaps
Next test
Run cost passport or mark the cost field not applicable.
Regulatory load
missing
Current read
No regulatory classification is attached.
Evidence
Build Passport ledger does not include regulatory flags.
Gaps
Next test
Classify regulatory flags before commercialization planning.
No named scientific founder assigned.
Paper authors are not treated as operators without consent.
People
No named person assigned.
Gaps
Next verification path
Prototype owner missing.
Build Passport does not name an implementer.
People
No named person assigned.
Gaps
Next verification path
Operator workflow not sourced.
No buyer or workflow interview attached.
People
No named person assigned.
Gaps
Next verification path
No GTM owner verified.
No CRM or outreach source attached.
People
No named person assigned.
Gaps
Next verification path
Regulatory need unclassified.
No clinical or regulatory source attached.
People
No named person assigned.
Gaps
Next verification path
ARTIFACTS
No public artifacts yet.
DEFENSIBILITY
Defensibility and confidence evidence pending.
WATCHTOWER
No verified watchtower monitor rows yet.
FORESIGHT
No prediction yet — minted on next Foresight batch.
OPPORTUNITYKERNEL CHANGES SINCE LAST VIEW
No verified OpportunityKernel changes since the last view.
COMPETITIVE LANDSCAPE UPDATES
No verified competitive landscape changes yet.
RELATED PAPER UPDATES
No verified related paper changes yet.
SIGNAL CANVAS HISTORY AND DELTAS
No Signal Canvas history deltas yet.
TIMELINE
Save this paper to start tracking momentum - commits, demos, and score changes appear here.
No tracked events yet.
Score trend will appear after multiple data points.
BUZZ
Buzz trend pending.