MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4389571075 · doi:10.3233/faia230995

OpenJustice.ai: A Global Open-Source Legal Language Model

2023· book-chapter· en· W4389571075 on OpenAlexaff
Samuel Dahan, Rohan Bhambhoria, David Liang, Xiaodan Zhu

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in artificial intelligence and applications · 2023
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicArtificial Intelligence in Law
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMisinformationTransparency (behavior)Computer scienceNarrativeEconomic JusticePolitical scienceLawInternet privacyComputer securityLinguistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Generalized AI like ChatGPT cannot and should not be used for legal tasks. It presents significant risks for both the legal professions as well as litigants. However, domain-specific AI should not be ruled out. It has the potential for legal research as well as access to justice. In this paper, we call for the development of an open-source and distributed legal AI accessible to the entire legal community. We believe it has the potential to address some of the limitations related to the use of general AI for legal problems and resolving disputes – shortcomings that include legal misinformation or hallucinations, lack of transparency and precision, and inability to offer diverse and multiple narratives.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.481
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.085
GPT teacher head0.382
Teacher spread0.297 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreOther

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in artificial intelligence and applicationsSame topicArtificial Intelligence in LawFrench-language works237,207