Preeti
The Eleventh Circuit’s opinion in Snell v. United Specialty Ins. Co. was a routine insurance coverage dispute, but Judge Kevin Newsom’s concurrence sparked interest in the potential use of large language models (LLMs) in legal interpretation. The case involved whether an insurance company was obligated to defend a plaintiff sued for negligent installation of a ground-level trampoline project. While the court ultimately resolved the appeal without deciding if the project constituted “landscaping,” Judge Newsom explored the use of LLMs to interpret legal texts.
Judge Newsom outlined five primary benefits of using LLMs, including their training on ordinary language inputs, ability to understand context, accessibility, transparency, and advantages over other interpretive methods. He also addressed potential drawbacks, such as LLMs hallucinating, not fully capturing offline speech, susceptibility to manipulation, and concerns about reliance leading to a dystopian future. Despite these drawbacks, Judge Newsom argued that the benefits of using LLMs outweigh the risks.
He concluded with suggestions on maximizing the utility of LLMs, emphasizing the importance of clarifying the objective of the prompt, trying different prompts and models, clarifying the desired output, and considering the temporal dimensions of the request. Judge Newsom’s concurrence provides valuable insights into the potential use of LLMs in legal interpretation and is recommended reading for those interested in this area.
Source link
Source link: https://natlawreview.com/article/11th-circuit-concurrence-makes-modest-proposal-use-ai-powered-large-language-models?amp
GIPHY App Key not set. Please check settings