Technical Methods for Evaluating AI Applications for Legal Tasks
Abstract
This chapter examines technical methods for evaluating AI applications in legal contexts, and addresses the need for standards to assess AI system performance in an industry where quality standards for human work remain largely subjective. It identifies three primary evaluation approaches: categorical evaluation using precision, recall, and F1-score metrics; numerical evaluation of continuous predictions; and more complex evaluation methods of open-texture outputs. The chapter demonstrates these methods through case studies, including technology-assisted review in e-discovery, legal research tools with varying accuracy rates and significant hallucination challenges, and access to justice applications like Beagle+ . These applications show how iterative improvements can substantially increase accuracy through enhanced prompting and retrieval-augmented generation. The analysis emphasizes that evaluation must extend beyond technical accuracy to include real-world utility, consumer protections, and security considerations. The chapter concludes that establishing robust evaluation frameworks is essential for responsible AI deployment in legal services, particularly given the legal profession’s current reliance on subjective quality assessments rather than empirical standards.
Read the paper
Related studies
- Knowledge Management Perspective of Generative Artificial Intelligence
- Navigating Generative Artificial Intelligence Promises and Perils for Knowledge and Creative Work
- Characterizing the evolving research on enterprise content management
- Large language models and multimodal foundation models for precision oncology
- From Generative AI to Extended Reality: Multidisciplinary Perspectives on the Challenges, Opportunities, and Future of Educational Computing
- Generative Artificial Intelligence: A New Engine for Advancing Environmental Science and Engineering
Go deeper in Evidence Hub
Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.