4 ms·
Tried Lexis+ AI, and… it’s just not very good yet. Much like ChatGPT, it can only handle recall and summation — and even then, I don’t fully trust it because i
by zmgsabst 3y ago
Tried Lexis+ AI, and… it’s just not very good yet.
Much like ChatGPT, it can only handle recall and summation — and even then, I don’t fully trust it because it often misses key ideas.
And much like ChatGPT, it can’t do anything coherent at length without a lot of help and working around its faults.
And seems entirely unaware of similar sounding words having distinct legal meanings. Which is not good.
- skissane 3y ago> Tried Lexis+ AI, and… it’s just not very good yet. I wonder to what extent that’s due to current inherent limitations of the technology, and to what extent it is due to quality of implementation issues. It is hard to say because (I presume) there is only limited public information on how it is actually implemented. e.g. which LLM is it using? How much fine-tuning has been done? Are they using other potentially helpful techniques such as guided sampling? Or breaking down the task into parts and having multiple agents each specialised to handle one particular part? > Much like ChatGPT When you compare it to ChatGPT, do you mean GPT3.5 or GPT4? I also would guess that certain areas of law (especially criminal law) may be prone to triggering “safeguards” which result in poorer performance than if those safeguards were absent. Arguing that what your client did was legal (even be it ethically unsavoury) is an essential part of a lawyer’s job