Can We Measure Legislative Complexity with LLMs?

The complexity of legislative language is of theoretical importance to many substantive questions about legislative politics. However, most existing measures of bill complexity are either generated at the broad issue level and applied to individual bills, or they are reliant on a simple metric like length. In this paper, we apply a pairwise comparison framework to the measurement of complexity in legislative texts. We compare the results of a Bradley-Terry model (Bradley and Terry, 1952) fit on pairwise comparisons made by human coders with the results of the same model fit on comparisons made by a large language models (LLMs). There is a moderately high level of agreement between human coders and the LLMs, and the relationships between observable text features and the underlying trait of complexity are similar in comparisons made by human coders and by the LLMs. Our work demonstrates that, with researcher-selected bridging texts and carefully designed prompts, LLMs can be used to measure complexity in legislative texts.

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Journal of Political Institutions and Political Economy
Published
2025-10-01
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1561/113.00000130
Primary Topic
Advanced Graph Theory Research
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Can We Measure Legislative Complexity with LLMs?

Journal of Political Institutions and Political Economy
Advanced Graph Theory Research
article

Can We Measure Legislative Complexity with LLMs?

article en

Abstract

The complexity of legislative language is of theoretical importance to many substantive questions about legislative politics. However, most existing measures of bill complexity are either generated at the broad issue level and applied to individual bills, or they are reliant on a simple metric like length. In this paper, we apply a pairwise comparison framework to the measurement of complexity in legislative texts. We compare the results of a Bradley-Terry model (Bradley and Terry, 1952) fit on pairwise comparisons made by human coders with the results of the same model fit on comparisons made by a large language models (LLMs). There is a moderately high level of agreement between human coders and the LLMs, and the relationships between observable text features and the underlying trait of complexity are similar in comparisons made by human coders and by the LLMs. Our work demonstrates that, with researcher-selected bridging texts and carefully designed prompts, LLMs can be used to measure complexity in legislative texts.

Journal of Political Institutions and Political EconomyVol. 6(3-4)
Concordia University Wisconsin (US), Concordia College - New York (US), Concordia University (US), Concordia University (US), Trinity University (US), Methodist University (US)
Openalex Percentile: Top 44%
Advanced Graph Theory Research
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

Can We Measure Legislative Complexity with LLMs? · Journal of Political Institutions and Political Economy (2025) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS