Upload README.md

README.md

@@ -94,6 +94,11 @@ for post-training and evaluation of frontier language models on high-complexity
 The sample contains **one task per legal subdomain**, drawn from a larger internal corpus of
 50 expert-authored tasks.
 
+- **Curated by:** Human Edge
+- **Language:** English
+- **License:** CC BY 4.0
+- **Repository:** [HumanEdgeAI/LegalReasoning](https://huggingface.co/datasets/HumanEdgeAI/LegalReasoning)
+
 ## Why this dataset exists
 
 Most legal evaluations reduce to multiple-choice recall or bar-exam-style questions. Real legal work
@@ -259,6 +264,10 @@ Rating scales, as presented to reviewers:
 - **Difficulty:** `1 - Trivial` → `5 - Very Hard` (`3 - Moderate`, `4 - Hard`)
 - **Task specification quality:** `Underspecified`, `Well-Specified`, `Overspecified`
 
+## Personal and sensitive information
+
+The dataset contains no personal data. Scenarios are built on fictional parties and hypothetical facts; the only real names are the litigants in cited case law, which is public record. Author and reviewer identities are not published.
+
 ## Intended uses
 
 - Evaluating LLM performance on open-ended, high-complexity legal reasoning
@@ -269,6 +278,9 @@ Rating scales, as presented to reviewers:
 - A reference template for anyone constructing expert-authored rubric evaluations in other
   professional domains
 
+**Out of scope:** legal advice of any kind. The golden answers are evaluation artifacts written
+against hypothetical facts, not guidance on any real matter, and must not be relied on as such.
+
 ## Limitations
 
 - **Six tasks.** This is a methodology sample, not a benchmark. Do not report aggregate scores over
@@ -281,10 +293,8 @@ Rating scales, as presented to reviewers:
   results on this sample as indicative once models trained after its publication are involved.
 - **Reviewer identities are withheld.** Cohort-level credentials are described above; individual
   names and affiliations are not published.
-- **Not legal advice.** The golden answers are evaluation artifacts written against hypothetical
-  facts. They are not advice and must not be relied on.
 
-## License & Citation
+## License
 
 Released under the **Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International** license ([CC BY 4.0](https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/)).
 
@@ -292,23 +302,25 @@ You are free to share and adapt this dataset for any purpose, including commerci
 
 The license covers Human Edge's contribution — the prompts, golden answers, rubrics, and review ratings. It does not grant rights in the third-party statutes, regulations, and court opinions cited within the tasks; those remain governed by their own terms. It does not extend to the remainder of the corpus.
 
+## Citation
+
 If you use this dataset, please cite it:
 
+**BibTeX:**
+
 ```bibtex
 @misc{humanedgeai2026legalreasoning,
-  title        = {Human Edge Legal Reasoning Evaluation: Showcase Sample},
-  author       = {{Human Edge}},
-  year         = {2026},
-  publisher    = {Hugging Face},
-  howpublished = {Hugging Face dataset repository},
-  url          = {https://huggingface.co/datasets/HumanEdgeAI/LegalReasoning},
-  note         = {Rubric-based expert evaluation dataset for legal reasoning,
-                  CC BY 4.0}
+  title     = {Human Edge Legal Reasoning Evaluation: Showcase Sample},
+  author    = {{Human Edge}},
+  year      = {2026},
+  publisher = {Hugging Face},
+  url       = {https://huggingface.co/datasets/HumanEdgeAI/LegalReasoning}
 }
 ```
 
-Human Edge. *Human Edge Legal Reasoning Evaluation: Showcase Sample.* Hugging Face, 2026.
-https://huggingface.co/datasets/HumanEdgeAI/LegalReasoning
+**APA:**
+
+Human Edge. (2026). *Human Edge Legal Reasoning Evaluation: Showcase Sample* [Data set]. Hugging Face. https://huggingface.co/datasets/HumanEdgeAI/LegalReasoning
 
 ## About Human Edge