Graph-based Retrieval-Augmented Generation (GraphRAG) advances flat document retrieval by structuring knowledge as relational graphs, enabling more coherent and effective reasoning. However, applying it to specific domains like legal reasoning faces critical challenges. (i) Legal corpora are heterogeneous, containing multi-granular knowledge from cases, articles and interpretations. A flat knowledge graph cannot adequately differentiate between factual details, applied rules, and abstract principles, limiting accurate retrieval. (ii) Reliable legal judgment demands transparent, evidence-based reasoning. Traditional RAG passes retrieved context directly to an LLM without verification, resulting in opaque, error-prone reasoning. To this end, we propose LegalGraphRAG, a framework designed for reliable legal reasoning. Our approach introduces two core components: a hierarchical legal graph that hierarchically organizes legal sources to enable retrieval at appropriate abstraction levels, and a multi-agent system for reliable legal reasoning, where a Researcher retrieves candidate evidence, an Auditor rigorously verifies its validity against source documents, and an Adjudicator synthesizes the set of verified evidence to render a final judgment. Extensive experiments show that LegalGraphRAG achieves the state-of-the-art performance, outperforming existing GraphRAG baselines in accurate and trustworthy legal analysis. Our code, datasets and implementation details are available at https://github.com/XMUDeepLIT/LegalGraphRAG.

Recent advancements in large language models (LLMs) have significantly improved the performance of multi-hop question answering (MHQA) systems. Despite the success of MHQA systems, the evaluation of MHQA is not deeply investigated. Existing evaluations mainly focus on comparing the final answers of the reasoning method and given ground-truths. We argue that the reasoning process should also be evaluated because wrong reasoning process can also lead to the correct final answers. Motivated by this, we propose a “Planner-Executor-Reasoner” (PER) architecture, which forms the core of the Plan-anchored Data Preprocessing (PER-DP) and the Plan-guided Multi-Hop QA (PER-QA).The former provides the ground-truth of intermediate reasoning steps and final answers, and the latter offers them of a reasoning method. Moreover, we design a fine-grained evaluation metric called Plan-aligned Stepwise Evaluation (PSE), which evaluates the intermediate reasoning steps from two aspects: planning and solving. Extensive experiments on ten types of questions demonstrate competitive reasoning performance, improved explainability of the MHQA system, and uncover issues such as “fortuitous reasoning continuance” and “latent reasoning suspension” in RAG-based MHQA systems. Besides, we also demonstrate the potential of our approach in data contamination scenarios.

Neural topic models have been widely used in discovering the latent semantics from a corpus. Recently, there are several researches on hierarchical neural topic models since the relationships among topics are valuable for data analysis and exploration. However, the existing hierarchical neural topic models are limited to generate a single topic tree. In this study, we present a nonparametric forest-structured neural topic model by firstly applying the self-attention mechanism to capture parent-child topic relationships, and then build a sparse directed acyclic graph to form a topic forest. Experiments indicate that our model can automatically learn a forest-structured topic hierarchy with indefinite numbers of trees and leaves, and significantly outperforms the baseline models on topic hierarchical rationality and affinity.