The digital transformation of jurisprudence: an evaluation of ChatGPT-4’s applicability to solve cases in business law

IF 3.1 2区 社会学 Q2 COMPUTER SCIENCE, ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE
Sascha Schweitzer, Markus Conrads
{"title":"The digital transformation of jurisprudence: an evaluation of ChatGPT-4’s applicability to solve cases in business law","authors":"Sascha Schweitzer,&nbsp;Markus Conrads","doi":"10.1007/s10506-024-09406-w","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>In the evolving landscape of legal information systems, ChatGPT-4 and other advanced conversational agents (CAs) offer the potential to disruptively transform the law industry. This study evaluates commercially available CAs within the German legal context, thereby assessing the generalizability of previous U.S.-based findings. Employing a unique corpus of 200 distinct legal tasks, ChatGPT-4 was benchmarked against Google Bard, Google Gemini, and its predecessor, ChatGPT-3.5. Human-expert and automated assessments of 4000 CA-generated responses reveal ChatGPT-4 to be the first CA to surpass the threshold of solving realistic legal tasks and passing a German business law exam. While ChatGPT-4 outperforms ChatGPT-3.5, Google Bard, and Google Gemini in both consistency and quality, the results demonstrate a considerable degree of variability, especially in complex cases with no predefined response options. Based on these findings, legal professionals should manually verify all texts produced by CAs before use. Novices must exercise caution with CA-generated legal advice, given the expertise needed for its assessment.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":51336,"journal":{"name":"Artificial Intelligence and Law","volume":"33 3","pages":"847 - 871"},"PeriodicalIF":3.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s10506-024-09406-w.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Artificial Intelligence and Law","FirstCategoryId":"94","ListUrlMain":"https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10506-024-09406-w","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"COMPUTER SCIENCE, ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

In the evolving landscape of legal information systems, ChatGPT-4 and other advanced conversational agents (CAs) offer the potential to disruptively transform the law industry. This study evaluates commercially available CAs within the German legal context, thereby assessing the generalizability of previous U.S.-based findings. Employing a unique corpus of 200 distinct legal tasks, ChatGPT-4 was benchmarked against Google Bard, Google Gemini, and its predecessor, ChatGPT-3.5. Human-expert and automated assessments of 4000 CA-generated responses reveal ChatGPT-4 to be the first CA to surpass the threshold of solving realistic legal tasks and passing a German business law exam. While ChatGPT-4 outperforms ChatGPT-3.5, Google Bard, and Google Gemini in both consistency and quality, the results demonstrate a considerable degree of variability, especially in complex cases with no predefined response options. Based on these findings, legal professionals should manually verify all texts produced by CAs before use. Novices must exercise caution with CA-generated legal advice, given the expertise needed for its assessment.

法学的数字化转型:评估 ChatGPT-4 在解决商业法案件中的适用性
在不断发展的法律信息系统中,ChatGPT-4和其他高级对话代理(ca)提供了颠覆性地改变法律行业的潜力。本研究在德国法律背景下评估了商业上可获得的ca,从而评估了以前美国研究结果的普遍性。ChatGPT-4采用了包含200个不同法律任务的独特语料库,与谷歌Bard、谷歌Gemini及其前身ChatGPT-3.5进行了基准测试。人类专家和对4000个CA生成的回复的自动评估表明,ChatGPT-4是第一个超越解决现实法律任务和通过德国商法考试门槛的CA。虽然ChatGPT-4在一致性和质量上都优于ChatGPT-3.5、谷歌Bard和谷歌Gemini,但结果显示出相当大的差异,特别是在没有预定义响应选项的复杂情况下。基于这些发现,法律专业人员应该在使用ca生成的所有文本之前手动验证。鉴于评估所需的专业知识,新手必须谨慎对待核证机关提供的法律意见。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
9.50
自引率
26.80%
发文量
33
期刊介绍: Artificial Intelligence and Law is an international forum for the dissemination of original interdisciplinary research in the following areas: Theoretical or empirical studies in artificial intelligence (AI), cognitive psychology, jurisprudence, linguistics, or philosophy which address the development of formal or computational models of legal knowledge, reasoning, and decision making. In-depth studies of innovative artificial intelligence systems that are being used in the legal domain. Studies which address the legal, ethical and social implications of the field of Artificial Intelligence and Law. Topics of interest include, but are not limited to, the following: Computational models of legal reasoning and decision making; judgmental reasoning, adversarial reasoning, case-based reasoning, deontic reasoning, and normative reasoning. Formal representation of legal knowledge: deontic notions, normative modalities, rights, factors, values, rules. Jurisprudential theories of legal reasoning. Specialized logics for law. Psychological and linguistic studies concerning legal reasoning. Legal expert systems; statutory systems, legal practice systems, predictive systems, and normative systems. AI and law support for legislative drafting, judicial decision-making, and public administration. Intelligent processing of legal documents; conceptual retrieval of cases and statutes, automatic text understanding, intelligent document assembly systems, hypertext, and semantic markup of legal documents. Intelligent processing of legal information on the World Wide Web, legal ontologies, automated intelligent legal agents, electronic legal institutions, computational models of legal texts. Ramifications for AI and Law in e-Commerce, automatic contracting and negotiation, digital rights management, and automated dispute resolution. Ramifications for AI and Law in e-governance, e-government, e-Democracy, and knowledge-based systems supporting public services, public dialogue and mediation. Intelligent computer-assisted instructional systems in law or ethics. Evaluation and auditing techniques for legal AI systems. Systemic problems in the construction and delivery of legal AI systems. Impact of AI on the law and legal institutions. Ethical issues concerning legal AI systems. In addition to original research contributions, the Journal will include a Book Review section, a series of Technology Reports describing existing and emerging products, applications and technologies, and a Research Notes section of occasional essays posing interesting and timely research challenges for the field of Artificial Intelligence and Law. Financial support for the Journal of Artificial Intelligence and Law is provided by the University of Pittsburgh School of Law.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信