Fetching the paper…
Reading the bibliography…
This study evaluates the performance of general-purpose AI, like ChatGPT, in legal question-answering tasks, highlighting significant risks to legal professionals and clients.
Medianik, Katherine. ”Artificially intelligent lawyers: updating the model rules of professional conduct in accordance with the new technological era.” Cardozo L. Rev. 39 (2017): 1497
2017
Earlier work this paper cites.
J. Kleinberg, J. Ludwig, S. Mullainathan, and C. R. Sunstein, “Discrimination in the Age of Algorithms,” Journal of Legal Analysis, vol. 10, pp. 113–174, Dec. 2018, doi: 10.1093/jla/laz001
2018
Earlier work this paper cites.
Geex, Law. ”Comparing the performance of artificial intelligence to human lawyers in the review of standard business contracts. Law Geex.” (2018)
2018
Earlier work this paper cites.
2018
Earlier work this paper cites.
Rudin, Cynthia. ”Stop explaining black box machine learning models for high stakes decisions and use interpretable models instead.” Nature machine intelligence 1.5 (2019): 206-215
2019
Earlier work this paper cites.
C. Markou and S. Deakin, “Ex Machina Lex: Exploring the Limits of Legal Computability.” Rochester, NY, Jun. 21, 2019. doi: 10.2139/ssrn.3407856
2019
Earlier work this paper cites.
Green, Bruce A., and Carole Silver. ”Technocapital@ Biglaw. com.” Nw. J. Tech. & Intell. Prop. 18 (2020): 265
2020
Earlier work this paper cites.
Samuel Dahan, Jonathan Touboul, Jason Lam, and Dan Sfedj, “Predicting Employment Notice Period with Machine Learning: Promises and Limitations,” McGill Law Journal, 2020
2020
Earlier work this paper cites.
R. Bhambhoria, S. Dahan, and X. Zhu, “Investigating the State-of-the-Art Performance and Explainability of Legal Judgment Prediction.,” in Canadian Conference on AI, 2021
2021
Earlier work this paper cites.
J. Hilton, R. Nakano, S. Balaji, and J. Schulman, “WebGPT: Improving the factual accuracy of language models through web browsing,” OpenAI Blog, December, vol. 16, 2021
2021
Earlier work this paper cites.
2021
Earlier work this paper cites.
Choi, Jonathan H. and Hickman, Kristin E. and Monahan, Amy and Schwarcz, Daniel, ChatGPT Goes to Law School (January 23, 2023). 71 Journal of Legal Education 387 (2022), Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=4335905 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4335905
2022
Earlier work this paper cites.
2022
Cited alongside, same era.
C. F. Luo, R. Bhambhoria, S. Dahan, and X. Zhu, “Evaluating Explanation Correctness in Legal Decision Making,” in Proceedings of the Canadian Conference on Artificial Intelligence (5 2022). https://doi. org/10.21428/594757db. 8718dc8b, 2022
2022
Cited alongside, same era.
2022
Cited alongside, same era.
Nan Du et al. ”GLaM: Efficient Scaling of Language Models with Mixture-of-Experts ”, Proceedings of the 39th International Conference on Machine Learning, PMLR 162:5547-5569, 2022
2022
Cited alongside, same era.
Sara Merken, ”New York lawyers sanctioned for using fake ChatGPT cases in legal brief”, Reuters, 2023
2023
Later among the works it cites.
Blair-Stanek, Andrew and Carstens, Anne-Marie and Goldberg, Daniel S. and Graber, Mark and Gray, David C. and Stearns, Maxwell L., GPT-4’s Law School Grades: Con Law C, Crim C-, Law & Econ C, Partnership Tax B, Property B-, Tax B (May 9, 2023). Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=4443471 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4443471
2023
Later among the works it cites.
Katz, Daniel Martin and Bommarito, Michael James and Gao, Shang and Arredondo, Pablo, GPT-4 Passes the Bar Exam (March 15, 2023). Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=4389233 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4389233
2023
Later among the works it cites.
2023
Later among the works it cites.
alphaXiv searches the wider corpus for related work and actual follow-ups.
alphaXiv is searching for related work…
2023
Cited alongside, same era.
2023
Cited alongside, same era.
2023
Cited alongside, same era.
M. Shur-Ofry, “Multiplicity as an AI Governance Principle.” Rochester, NY, May 10, 2023. doi: 10.2139/ssrn.4444354
2023
Cited alongside, same era.
D. M. Katz, M. J. Bommarito, S. Gao, and P. Arredondo, “GPT-4 Passes the Bar Exam.” Rochester, NY, Mar. 15, 2023. doi: 10.2139/ssrn.4389233
2023
Cited alongside, same era.
Jed Stiglitz, “Modeling Legal Reasoning: LM Annotation at the Edge of Human Agreement,” Working Paper, 2023
2023
Cited alongside, same era.
M. C. Cohen, S. Dahan, W. Khern-Am-Nuai, H. Shimao, and J. Touboul, “The use of AI in legal systems: determining independent contractor vs. employee status,” Artificial intelligence and law, pp. 1–30, 2023
2023
Cited alongside, same era.
Y. Chen, M. Andiappan, T. Jenkin, and A. Ovchinnikov, “A Manager and an AI Walk into a Bar: Does ChatGPT Make Biased Decisions Like We Do?” Rochester, NY, May 20, 2023. doi: 10.2139/ssrn.4380365
2023
Cited alongside, same era.
2023
Later among the works it cites.
Martínez, Eric. ”Re-Evaluating GPT-4’s Bar Exam Performance.” Available at SSRN 4441311 (2023)
2023
Later among the works it cites.
C. F. Luo, R. Bhambhoria, S. Dahan, and X. Zhu, “Prototype-Based Interpretability for Legal Citation Prediction.” arXiv, May 25, 2023. doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2305.16490
2023
Later among the works it cites.
2023
Later among the works it cites.
2023
Later among the works it cites.
2023
Later among the works it cites.