REVIEW 6 cited by
Large Language Models in Law: A Survey
Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.
This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.
SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event
T0 review · schema-true
One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.
pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp
read the original abstract
The advent of artificial intelligence (AI) has significantly impacted the traditional judicial industry. Moreover, recently, with the development of AI-generated content (AIGC), AI and law have found applications in various domains, including image recognition, automatic text generation, and interactive chat. With the rapid emergence and growing popularity of large models, it is evident that AI will drive transformation in the traditional judicial industry. However, the application of legal large language models (LLMs) is still in its nascent stage. Several challenges need to be addressed. In this paper, we aim to provide a comprehensive survey of legal LLMs. We not only conduct an extensive survey of LLMs, but also expose their applications in the judicial system. We first provide an overview of AI technologies in the legal field and showcase the recent research in LLMs. Then, we discuss the practical implementation presented by legal LLMs, such as providing legal advice to users and assisting judges during trials. In addition, we explore the limitations of legal LLMs, including data, algorithms, and judicial practice. Finally, we summarize practical recommendations and propose future development directions to address these challenges.
Forward citations
Cited by 6 Pith papers
-
Large language models replicate and predict human cooperation across experiments in game theory
Llama-3.1-8B with a multi-step reasoning-and-filter prompt reproduces human cooperation rates across 121 dyadic games (MSD=0.031, r=0.89), outperforming Nash-equilibrium predictions (MSD=0.096, r=0.78).
-
The Incomplete Bridge: How AI Research (Mis)Engages with Psychology
A citation-based study of 1,006 LLM papers finds psychology is increasingly cited, concentrated in psychometrics and neural mechanisms, and identifies repeated misapplications of Theory of Mind.
-
Abstract Counterfactuals for Language Model Agents
Counterfactuals for LM agents computed over a high-level abstraction of the action, instead of its tokens, preserve the observed action's meaning across counterfactual contexts far more often than token-level counterfactuals.
-
LLMs for LLMs: A Structured Prompting Methodology for Long Legal Documents
On CUAD legal contracts, a prompt-engineered QWEN-2 pipeline with chunking and two answer-selection heuristics reportedly outperforms the fine-tuned DeBERTa-large baseline by about 9%, reaching claimed state-of-the-ar...
-
Tools in the Loop: Quantifying Uncertainty of LLM Question Answering Systems That Use Tools
The paper proposes adding the entropy of an LLM's final answer to the entropy of an external tool's output as an uncertainty score for tool-calling QA systems, and shows it predicts answer correctness on synthetic and...
-
Modeling the Diachronic Evolution of Legal Norms: An LRMoo-Based, Component-Level, Event-Centric Approach to Legal Knowledge Graphs
Proposes a component-level, event-centric LRMoo-based model for versioning legal norms, but provides no implementation to verify the claimed exact reconstruction.
Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.