Can large language models apply the law?

Abstract This paper asks whether large language models (LLMs) can apply the law. It does not question whether LLMs should apply the law. Instead, it distinguishes between two interpretations of the ‘can’ question. One, can LLMs apply the law like ordinary individuals? Two, can LLMs apply the law in the same manner as judges? The study examines D’Almeida’s theory of law application, divided into inferential and pragmatic law application. It argues that his account of pragmatic law application can be improved as it does not fully consider that law application (and rule-following) is a shared, public practice collectively realized by members of a linguistic community. The study concludes that LLMs cannot apply the law. They cannot apply the law in the inferential sense as they have mere syntactic (not semantic) interaction with the law. They cannot apply the law in the pragmatic sense as pragmatic law application does not depend on a single agent, whether that agent is a judge, an ordinary citizen, or a non-human entity.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
AI & Society
Published
2024-10-28
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00146-024-02105-9
Citations
8
Primary Topic
Natural Language Processing Techniques
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
2.78
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Can large language models apply the law?

Henrique Marcos
8 citations
AI & Society
Natural Language Processing Techniques
2.78
article

Can large language models apply the law?

Henrique Marcos
article en
8 citations

Abstract

Abstract This paper asks whether large language models (LLMs) can apply the law. It does not question whether LLMs should apply the law. Instead, it distinguishes between two interpretations of the ‘can’ question. One, can LLMs apply the law like ordinary individuals? Two, can LLMs apply the law in the same manner as judges? The study examines D’Almeida’s theory of law application, divided into inferential and pragmatic law application. It argues that his account of pragmatic law application can be improved as it does not fully consider that law application (and rule-following) is a shared, public practice collectively realized by members of a linguistic community. The study concludes that LLMs cannot apply the law. They cannot apply the law in the inferential sense as they have mere syntactic (not semantic) interaction with the law. They cannot apply the law in the pragmatic sense as pragmatic law application does not depend on a single agent, whether that agent is a judge, an ordinary citizen, or a non-human entity.

AI & SocietyVol. 40(5)
Maastricht University Medical Centre (NL), Maastricht University (NL), Network for Studies on Pensions, Aging and Retirement (NL)
Openalex Percentile: Top 8%
Natural Language Processing Techniques
2.78
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.