The Factuality of Large Language Models in the Legal Domain

This paper investigates the factuality of large language models (LLMs) as knowledge bases in the legal domain, in a realistic usage scenario: we allow for acceptable variations in the answer, and let the model abstain from answering when uncertain. First, we design a dataset of diverse factual questions about case law and legislation. We then use the dataset to evaluate several LLMs under different evaluation methods, including exact, alias, and fuzzy matching. Our results show that the performance improves significantly under the alias and fuzzy matching methods. Further, we explore the impact of abstaining and in-context examples, finding that both strategies enhance precision. Finally, we demonstrate that additional pre-training on legal documents, as seen with SaulLM, further improves factual precision from 63% to 81%.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Published
2024-10-20
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1145/3627673.3679961
Citations
3
Primary Topic
Artificial Intelligence in Law
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
6.69
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

The Factuality of Large Language Models in the Legal Domain

Nils Holzenberger, Thomas Bonald, Rajaa El Hamdani, Fabian M. Suchanek et al.
3 citations
Artificial Intelligence in Law
6.69
article

The Factuality of Large Language Models in the Legal Domain

Nils Holzenberger, Thomas Bonald, Rajaa El Hamdani, Fabian M. Suchanek, Fragkiskos D. Malliaros
article en
3 citations

Abstract

This paper investigates the factuality of large language models (LLMs) as knowledge bases in the legal domain, in a realistic usage scenario: we allow for acceptable variations in the answer, and let the model abstain from answering when uncertain. First, we design a dataset of diverse factual questions about case law and legislation. We then use the dataset to evaluate several LLMs under different evaluation methods, including exact, alias, and fuzzy matching. Our results show that the performance improves significantly under the alias and fuzzy matching methods. Further, we explore the impact of abstaining and in-context examples, finding that both strategies enhance precision. Finally, we demonstrate that additional pre-training on legal documents, as seen with SaulLM, further improves factual precision from 63% to 81%.

Télécom Paris (FR), Université Paris-Saclay (FR), Bouygues (France) (FR), CentraleSupélec (FR)
Peace, Justice and strong institutions
Openalex Percentile: Top 3%
Artificial Intelligence in Law
6.69
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.