IntLawNER: A Named Entity Recognition Dataset and Benchmark in International Law
Summary
IntLawNER is a new named entity recognition dataset and benchmark for international law, covering gold-annotated sentences from legal texts and evaluating model performance with few-shot improvements.
View Cached Full Text
Cached at: 09/23/26, 09:08 AM
# IntLawNER: A Named Entity Recognition Dataset and Benchmark in International Law Source: [https://arxiv.org/abs/2609.22529](https://arxiv.org/abs/2609.22529) [View PDF](https://arxiv.org/pdf/2609.22529) > Abstract:International law provides the normative framework through which states coordinate action, regulate armed conflict, and protect human rights, yet its texts remain without token\-level named entity recognition \(NER\) resources\. We introduce IntLawNER, a NER dataset and benchmark for codified sources of international law, covering 2,987 gold\-annotated sentences and 8,094 entity spans from International Court of Justice \(ICJ\) decisions, UN Security Council resolutions, and European Court of Human Rights \(ECtHR\) judgments, annotated with seven institution\-specific entity types\. We construct IntLawNER with a cost\-effective hybrid algorithmic\-agentic pipeline that reduces 468k source sentences to a compact annotation set through candidate retrieval, LLM\-based vetting, and human review, with 89\.6% of gold spans accepted unchanged from the silver layer\. However, the silver\-to\-gold analysis reveals that human\-machine aggregate agreement metrics can be misleading in domain\-specific NER: Cohen's kappa=0\.964 on boundary\-matched spans masks a macro\-F1 of 0\.753 when missing entities, boundary errors, and label corrections are included\. The benchmark shows that zero\-shot span\-based GLiNER collapses on entity types dependent on institutional function rather than surface form \(0\.243 micro\-F1\), while fine\-tuned transformers struggle on rare labels\. Carefully selected few\-shot examples that demonstrate label contrasts improve every LLM over zero\-shot prompting, with Claude Opus 4\.6 reaching the best score of 0\.873 micro\-F1\. We release IntLawNER as a benchmark and reusable resource for extracting references in international legal texts\. ## Submission history From: Genis Skura \[[view email](https://arxiv.org/show-email/b621d16a/2609.22529)\] **\[v1\]**Fri, 18 Sep 2026 19:36:30 UTC \(509 KB\)
Similar Articles
DE-NER : Zero-shot Named Entity Recognition via Dialogue Elicitation of Large Language Models
Introduces DE-NER, a dialogue elicitation framework for zero-shot named entity recognition that uses self-play between questioner and roleplayer LLMs to clarify entity boundaries, achieving an average 3.75% F1 improvement over baselines.
AutoSpecNER: A Fine-Grained Named Entity Recognition Dataset for Vehicle Specification Extraction
Introduces AutoSpecNER, an expert-annotated dataset for fine-grained named entity recognition in vehicle listings, with 659 advertisements annotated across 15 entity types. Benchmark results show DeBERTa achieves 90% micro-F1, outperforming rule-based and LLM approaches.
GLiNER-Relex: A Unified Framework for Joint Named Entity Recognition and Relation Extraction
GLiNER-Relex is a unified framework for joint named entity recognition and relation extraction that leverages a shared transformer encoder for zero-shot capabilities. The paper demonstrates competitive performance on standard benchmarks and releases the model as an open-source Python package.
LegalPincite: Multi-level Legal Information Retrieval Dataset
Introduces LegalPincite, a large-scale legal information retrieval dataset built from CJEU judgments, featuring masked queries, full corpora, and paragraph-level citation annotations to enable multi-level retrieval evaluation.
UA-Legal-Bench: A Benchmark for Evaluating Large Language Models on Ukrainian Legal Reasoning
Introduces UA-Legal-Bench, a five-task benchmark for evaluating large language models on Ukrainian legal reasoning, built from the Unified State Register of Court Decisions. Evaluates 11 LLMs, revealing task-dependent few-shot effects and the misleading nature of accuracy on imbalanced legal tasks.