(A)I Am Not a Lawyer, But...: Engaging Legal Experts towards Responsible LLM Policies for Legal Advice

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2402.01864v2
• Date: Fri, 3 May 2024 07:32:34 GMT
• Title: (A)I Am Not a Lawyer, But...: Engaging Legal Experts towards Responsible LLM Policies for Legal Advice
• Authors: Inyoung Cheong, King Xia, K. J. Kevin Feng, Quan Ze Chen, Amy X. Zhang,
• Abstract summary: Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly capable of providing users with advice in a wide range of professional domains, including legal advice. We conducted workshops with 20 legal experts using methods inspired by case-based reasoning. Our findings reveal novel legal considerations, such as unauthorized practice of law, confidentiality, and liability for inaccurate advice.
• Score: 8.48013392781081
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/
• Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly capable of providing users with advice in a wide range of professional domains, including legal advice. However, relying on LLMs for legal queries raises concerns due to the significant expertise required and the potential real-world consequences of the advice. To explore \textit{when} and \textit{why} LLMs should or should not provide advice to users, we conducted workshops with 20 legal experts using methods inspired by case-based reasoning. The provided realistic queries ("cases") allowed experts to examine granular, situation-specific concerns and overarching technical and legal constraints, producing a concrete set of contextual considerations for LLM developers. By synthesizing the factors that impacted LLM response appropriateness, we present a 4-dimension framework: (1) User attributes and behaviors, (2) Nature of queries, (3) AI capabilities, and (4) Social impacts. We share experts' recommendations for LLM response strategies, which center around helping users identify `right questions to ask' and relevant information rather than providing definitive legal judgments. Our findings reveal novel legal considerations, such as unauthorized practice of law, confidentiality, and liability for inaccurate advice, that have been overlooked in the literature. The case-based deliberation method enabled us to elicit fine-grained, practice-informed insights that surpass those from de-contextualized surveys or speculative principles. These findings underscore the applicability of our method for translating domain-specific professional knowledge and practices into policies that can guide LLM behavior in a more responsible direction.

Related papers

• LawLuo: A Chinese Law Firm Co-run by LLM Agents [1.9857357818932064]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) deliver legal consultation services to users without a legal background. Existing Chinese legal LLMs limit interaction to a single model-user dialogue. We propose a novel legal dialogue framework that leverages the collaborative capabilities of multiple LLM agents, termed LawLuo.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-07-23T07:40:41Z)
• InternLM-Law: An Open Source Chinese Legal Large Language Model [72.2589401309848]
  InternLM-Law is a specialized LLM tailored for addressing diverse legal queries related to Chinese laws. We meticulously construct a dataset in the Chinese legal domain, encompassing over 1 million queries. InternLM-Law achieves the highest average performance on LawBench, outperforming state-of-the-art models, including GPT-4, on 13 out of 20 subtasks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-21T06:19:03Z)
• A Survey on Large Language Models for Critical Societal Domains: Finance, Healthcare, and Law [65.87885628115946]
  Large language models (LLMs) are revolutionizing the landscapes of finance, healthcare, and law. We highlight the instrumental role of LLMs in enhancing diagnostic and treatment methodologies in healthcare, innovating financial analytics, and refining legal interpretation and compliance strategies. We critically examine the ethics for LLM applications in these fields, pointing out the existing ethical concerns and the need for transparent, fair, and robust AI systems.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-05-02T22:43:02Z)
• Untangle the KNOT: Interweaving Conflicting Knowledge and Reasoning Skills in Large Language Models [51.72963030032491]
  Knowledge documents for large language models (LLMs) may conflict with the memory of LLMs due to outdated or incorrect knowledge. We construct a new dataset, dubbed KNOT, for knowledge conflict resolution examination in the form of question answering.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-04-04T16:40:11Z)
• BLT: Can Large Language Models Handle Basic Legal Text? [50.46167465931653]
  GPT-4, Claude, and PaLM 2 perform poorly at basic legal text handling. Fine-tuning for these tasks brings even a smaller model to near-perfect performance on our test set.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-11-16T09:09:22Z)
• A Comprehensive Evaluation of Large Language Models on Legal Judgment Prediction [60.70089334782383]
  Large language models (LLMs) have demonstrated great potential for domain-specific applications. Recent disputes over GPT-4's law evaluation raise questions concerning their performance in real-world legal tasks. We design practical baseline solutions based on LLMs and test on the task of legal judgment prediction.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-18T07:38:04Z)
• LAiW: A Chinese Legal Large Language Models Benchmark [17.66376880475554]
  General and legal domain LLMs have demonstrated strong performance in various tasks of LegalAI. We are the first to build the Chinese legal LLMs benchmark LAiW, based on the logic of legal practice.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-09T11:19:55Z)
• LawBench: Benchmarking Legal Knowledge of Large Language Models [35.2812008533622]
  Large language models (LLMs) have demonstrated strong capabilities in various aspects. It is unclear how much legal knowledge they possess and whether they can reliably perform legal-related tasks. LawBench has been meticulously crafted to have precise assessment of the LLMs' legal capabilities from three cognitive levels.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-09-28T09:35:59Z)
• Investigating the Factual Knowledge Boundary of Large Language Models with Retrieval Augmentation [91.30946119104111]
  We show that large language models (LLMs) possess unwavering confidence in their capabilities to respond to questions. Retrieval augmentation proves to be an effective approach in enhancing LLMs' awareness of knowledge boundaries. We also find that LLMs have a propensity to rely on the provided retrieval results when formulating answers.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-07-20T16:46:10Z)
• Large Language Models as Tax Attorneys: A Case Study in Legal Capabilities Emergence [5.07013500385659]
  This paper explores Large Language Models' (LLMs) capabilities in applying tax law. Our experiments demonstrate emerging legal understanding capabilities, with improved performance in each subsequent OpenAI model release. Findings indicate that LLMs, particularly when combined with prompting enhancements and the correct legal texts, can perform at high levels of accuracy but not yet at expert tax lawyer levels.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-06-12T12:40:48Z)

This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.

This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.