GreenLeaf Law Embed Tiny: A Compact Embedding Model for Legal Domain Retrieval

The rapid proliferation of Large Language Models (LLMs) has revolutionized Natural Language Processing (NLP) but has simultaneously created a "resource divide." State-of-the-art legal intelligence systems typically rely on massive parameter counts (7B+) and cloud-based inference, rendering them inaccessible to practitioners in resource-constrained environments and posing significant data sovereignty risks. This paper introduces Quecto-V1, a domain-specific Small Language Model (SLM) engineered to democratize access to Indian legal intelligence. Built upon a custom configuration of the GPT-2 architecture (124 million parameters), Quecto-V1 was trained from scratch exclusively on a corpus of Indian statutes, including the Indian Penal Code (IPC), the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC), and the Constitution of India. Unlike generalist models, which prioritize broad world knowledge, our approach maximizes "lexical density" within the legal domain. Furthermore, we address the deployment bottleneck by applying post-training 8-bit quantization (GGUF format), compressing the model to a memory footprint of under 150 MB. Our empirical analysis demonstrates that Quecto-V1 achieves high fidelity in retrieving statutory definitions and penal provisions, outperforming general-purpose SLMs in domain-specific exact match tasks while running entirely offline on consumer-grade CPUs. We further present an ablation study showing that 8-bit quantization yields a 74% reduction in model size with less than 3.5% degradation in retrieval accuracy compared to full-precision baselines. These findings suggest that for specialized, high-stakes domains like law, domain-specific training coupled with aggressive quantization offers a viable, privacy-preserving alternative to monolithic cloud models.

We investigate domain adaptation of modern BERT models in the legal domain. We further pre-train ModernBERT on all US court opinions using the masked language modeling objective. Although ModernBERT has been trained on roughly 500x more data than original BERT, we still find that this model benefits from further pre-training and domain adaptation in the legal domain: we report significant improvements compared to vanilla ModernBERT on all datasets connected to US court opinions. We find gains similar to those reported in early work on domain adaptation of BERT-like models. However, from scratch pre-training does not match the performance of further pre-training an existing ModernBERT checkpoint in our experiments. The resulting models are capable of processing sequences up to 8,192 tokens, and can be used to compute meaningful embeddings of legal passages, or could quickly rerank hundreds of legal passages for a given search query. We release all model checkpoints publicly.

Large language models show promise for legal applications, but deploying frontier models raises concerns about cost, latency, and data privacy. We evaluate whether sub-10B parameter models can serve as practical alternatives by testing nine models across three legal benchmarks (ContractNLI, CaseHOLD, and ECtHR) using five prompting strategies (direct, chain-of-thought, few-shot, BM25 RAG, and dense RAG). Across 405 experiments with three random seeds per configuration, we find that a Mixture-of-Experts model activating only 3B parameters matches GPT-4o-mini in mean accuracy while surpassing it on legal holding identification, and that architecture and training quality matter more than raw parameter count. Our largest model (9B parameters) performs worst overall. Chain-of-thought prompting proves sharply task-dependent, improving contract entailment but degrading multiple-choice legal reasoning, while few-shot prompting emerges as the most consistently effective strategy. Comparing BM25 and dense retrieval for RAG, we find near-identical results, suggesting the bottleneck lies in the language model's utilization of retrieved context rather than retrieval quality. All experiments were conducted via cloud inference APIs at a total cost of $62, demonstrating that rigorous LLM evaluation is accessible without dedicated GPU infrastructure.