Evaluation Ethics of LLMs in Legal Domain
- URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2403.11152v1
- Date: Sun, 17 Mar 2024 09:05:13 GMT
- Title: Evaluation Ethics of LLMs in Legal Domain
- Authors: Ruizhe Zhang, Haitao Li, Yueyue Wu, Qingyao Ai, Yiqun Liu, Min Zhang, Shaoping Ma,
- Abstract summary: We propose a novelty evaluation methodology, utilizing authentic legal cases to evaluate the fundamental language abilities, specialized legal knowledge and legal robustness of large language models (LLMs)
The findings from our comprehensive evaluation contribute significantly to the academic discourse surrounding the suitability and performance of large language models in legal domains.
- Score: 35.725470391038264
- License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
- Abstract: In recent years, the utilization of large language models for natural language dialogue has gained momentum, leading to their widespread adoption across various domains. However, their universal competence in addressing challenges specific to specialized fields such as law remains a subject of scrutiny. The incorporation of legal ethics into the model has been overlooked by researchers. We asserts that rigorous ethic evaluation is essential to ensure the effective integration of large language models in legal domains, emphasizing the need to assess domain-specific proficiency and domain-specific ethic. To address this, we propose a novelty evaluation methodology, utilizing authentic legal cases to evaluate the fundamental language abilities, specialized legal knowledge and legal robustness of large language models (LLMs). The findings from our comprehensive evaluation contribute significantly to the academic discourse surrounding the suitability and performance of large language models in legal domains.
Related papers
- Legal Evalutions and Challenges of Large Language Models [42.51294752406578]
We use the OPENAI o1 model as a case study to evaluate the performance of large models in applying legal provisions.
We compare current state-of-the-art LLMs, including open-source, closed-source, and legal-specific models trained specifically for the legal domain.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-11-15T12:23:12Z) - Natural Language Processing for the Legal Domain: A Survey of Tasks, Datasets, Models, and Challenges [4.548047308860141]
Natural Language Processing is revolutionizing the way legal professionals and laypersons operate in the legal field.
This survey follows the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses framework, reviewing 148 studies, with a final selection of 127 after manual filtering.
It explores foundational concepts related to Natural Language Processing in the legal domain.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-10-25T01:17:02Z) - Prompting Encoder Models for Zero-Shot Classification: A Cross-Domain Study in Italian [75.94354349994576]
This paper explores the feasibility of employing smaller, domain-specific encoder LMs alongside prompting techniques to enhance performance in specialized contexts.
Our study concentrates on the Italian bureaucratic and legal language, experimenting with both general-purpose and further pre-trained encoder-only models.
The results indicate that while further pre-trained models may show diminished robustness in general knowledge, they exhibit superior adaptability for domain-specific tasks, even in a zero-shot setting.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-07-30T08:50:16Z) - Precedent-Enhanced Legal Judgment Prediction with LLM and Domain-Model
Collaboration [52.57055162778548]
Legal Judgment Prediction (LJP) has become an increasingly crucial task in Legal AI.
Precedents are the previous legal cases with similar facts, which are the basis for the judgment of the subsequent case in national legal systems.
Recent advances in deep learning have enabled a variety of techniques to be used to solve the LJP task.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2023-10-13T16:47:20Z) - Enhancing Pre-Trained Language Models with Sentence Position Embeddings
for Rhetorical Roles Recognition in Legal Opinions [0.16385815610837165]
The size of legal opinions continues to grow, making it increasingly challenging to develop a model that can accurately predict the rhetorical roles of legal opinions.
We propose a novel model architecture for automatically predicting rhetorical roles using pre-trained language models (PLMs) enhanced with knowledge of sentence position information.
Based on an annotated corpus from the LegalEval@SemEval2023 competition, we demonstrate that our approach requires fewer parameters, resulting in lower computational costs.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2023-10-08T20:33:55Z) - Domain Specialization as the Key to Make Large Language Models Disruptive: A Comprehensive Survey [100.24095818099522]
Large language models (LLMs) have significantly advanced the field of natural language processing (NLP)
They provide a highly useful, task-agnostic foundation for a wide range of applications.
However, directly applying LLMs to solve sophisticated problems in specific domains meets many hurdles.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2023-05-30T03:00:30Z) - LexGLUE: A Benchmark Dataset for Legal Language Understanding in English [15.026117429782996]
We introduce the Legal General Language Evaluation (LexGLUE) benchmark, a collection of datasets for evaluating model performance across a diverse set of legal NLU tasks.
We also provide an evaluation and analysis of several generic and legal-oriented models demonstrating that the latter consistently offer performance improvements across multiple tasks.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2021-10-03T10:50:51Z) - Lawformer: A Pre-trained Language Model for Chinese Legal Long Documents [56.40163943394202]
We release the Longformer-based pre-trained language model, named as Lawformer, for Chinese legal long documents understanding.
We evaluate Lawformer on a variety of LegalAI tasks, including judgment prediction, similar case retrieval, legal reading comprehension, and legal question answering.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2021-05-09T09:39:25Z) - On the Ethical Limits of Natural Language Processing on Legal Text [9.147707153504117]
We argue that researchers struggle when it comes to identifying ethical limits to using natural language processing systems.
We place emphasis on three crucial normative parameters which have, to the best of our knowledge, been underestimated by current debates.
For each of these three parameters we provide specific recommendations for the legal NLP community.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2021-05-06T15:22:24Z)
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.