As different versions of artificial intelligence enter our life, owners of important professions will have to compete with them. So far – in the form of non-binding competitions. To test the effectiveness of the LawGeex legal platform, the challenge was challenged to existing law professors from Stanford University, Duke University and South Carolina.
Conditions for all participants were the same: 5 documents – detailed non-disclosure agreements. They had to be analyzed and answered in 30 fundamental, specific legal issues concerning formulations and conditions. The documents were test cases, and for each a standard set of answers was prepared – the task of the competition was to determine the percentage of exact answers received for the allotted time.
The competition took 4 hours, but most of the lawyers-people coped for 90-95 minutes. Their indicator is not bad, an average of 85% of correct answers, and this is taking into account the work on documents alone, without the help of a traditional team. And what about AI? LawGeex gave 95% of the correct answers and spent it … 26 seconds. Unconditional victory.
The professors left the competitions not at all upset, on the contrary, they are now firmly convinced that they will not be losing their jobs in the near future. Firstly, because such AIs still need to be trained before, and for this a man-teacher is needed. Secondly, they do not take decisions, only very quickly and efficiently make their way through the jungle of legal terms. And, thirdly, AI can replace the same team of young lawyers, assistants, and this promises to optimize the work of the law firm and benefit its leadership. But graduates of law schools now do not envy.