(A)I Am Not a Lawyer, But...: Engaging Legal Experts towards Responsible LLM Policies for Legal Advice
Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly capable of providing users with advice in a wide range of professional domains, including legal advice. However, relying on LLMs for legal queries raises concerns due to the significant expertise required and the potential real-world consequences of the advice. To explore \textit{when} and \textit{why} LLMs should or should not provide advice to users, we conducted workshops with 20 legal experts using methods inspired by case-based reasoning. The provided realistic queries ("cases") allowed experts to examine granular, situation-specific concerns and overarching technical and legal constraints, producing a concrete set of contextual considerations for LLM developers. By synthesizing the factors that impacted LLM response appropriateness, we present a 4-dimension framework: (1) User attributes and behaviors, (2) Nature of queries, (3) AI capabilities, and (4) Social impacts. We share experts' recommendations for LLM response strategies, which center around helping users identify `right questions to ask' and relevant information rather than providing definitive legal judgments. Our findings reveal novel legal considerations, such as unauthorized practice of law, confidentiality, and liability for inaccurate advice, that have been overlooked in the literature. The case-based deliberation method enabled us to elicit fine-grained, practice-informed insights that surpass those from de-contextualized surveys or speculative principles. These findings underscore the applicability of our method for translating domain-specific professional knowledge and practices into policies that can guide LLM behavior in a more responsible direction.
Code (0)
등록된 구현이 없습니다.
Tasks
EthicsMethods 이 논문이 사용한 방법론
Similar Papers 제목 키워드 기반
Expert Finding in Legal Community Question Answering
Expert finding has been well-studied in community question answering (QA) systems in various domains. However, none of these studies addresses expert finding in the legal domain, where the goal is for citizens to find la…
Community Question AnsweringQuestion AnsweringLawLuo: A Multi-Agent Collaborative Framework for Multi-Round Chinese Legal Consultation
Legal Large Language Models (LLMs) have shown promise in providing legal consultations to non-experts. However, most existing Chinese legal consultation models are based on single-agent systems, which differ from real-wo…
HallucinationRAGReading ComprehensionPrototype-Based Interpretability for Legal Citation Prediction
Deep learning has made significant progress in the past decade, and demonstrates potential to solve problems with extensive social impact. In high-stakes decision making areas such as law, experts often require interpret…
Citation PredictionDecision MakingPredictionLegalBench: A Collaboratively Built Benchmark for Measuring Legal Reasoning in Large Language Models
The advent of large language models (LLMs) and their adoption by the legal community has given rise to the question: what types of legal reasoning can LLMs perform? To enable greater study of this question, we present Le…
Legal ReasoningLicenseGPT: A Fine-tuned Foundation Model for Publicly Available Dataset License Compliance
Dataset license compliance is a critical yet complex aspect of developing commercial AI products, particularly with the increasing use of publicly available datasets. Ambiguities in dataset licenses pose significant lega…