Artificial Intelligence and Legal Analysis: Implications for Legal Education and the Profession
원문 초록
This article reports the results of a study examining the ability of legal and non-legal Large Language Models to perform legal analysis using the Issue-Rule-Application-Conclusion framework. LLMs were tested on legal reasoning tasks involving rule analysis and analogical reasoning. The results show that LLMs can conduct basic IRAC analysis, but are limited by brief responses lacking detail, an inability to commit to answers, false confidence, and hallucinations. The study compares legal and nonlegal LLMs, identifies shortcomings, and explores traits that may hinder their ability to think like a lawyer. It also discusses the implications for legal education and practice, highlighting the need for critical thinking skills in future lawyers and the potential pitfalls of overreliance on artificial intelligence AI resulting in a loss of logic, reasoning, and critical thinking skills.
함께 살펴볼 논문
공통 태그를 근거로 연결했습니다. 실제 인용 관계나 논문의 우수성을 뜻하지 않습니다.
Can ChatGPT Perform Reasoning Using the IRAC Method in Analyzing Legal Scenarios Like a Lawyer?
LLM-based HSE Compliance Assessment: Benchmark, Performance, and Advancements
Incorporating Legal Structure in Retrieval-Augmented Generation: A Case Study on Copyright Fair Use
CaseGen: A Benchmark for Multi-Stage Legal Case Documents Generation
JUREX-4E: Juridical Expert-Annotated Four-Element Knowledge Base for Legal Reasoning
NitiBench: A Comprehensive Studies of LLM Frameworks Capabilities for Thai Legal Question Answering
토론
이 논문과 연결된 포럼 글이 아직 없습니다.