Pith. sign in

REVIEW 5 cited by

A Short Survey of Viewing Large Language Models in Legal Aspect

Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.

SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event

T0 review · schema-true

One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.

pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp

arxiv 2303.09136 v1 pith:7PC4LS6Z submitted 2023-03-16 cs.CL

classification cs.CL
keywords legalllmsfieldintegrationlanguagemodelschallengesdiscuss
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal
0 comments
read the original abstract

Large language models (LLMs) have transformed many fields, including natural language processing, computer vision, and reinforcement learning. These models have also made a significant impact in the field of law, where they are being increasingly utilized to automate various legal tasks, such as legal judgement prediction, legal document analysis, and legal document writing. However, the integration of LLMs into the legal field has also raised several legal problems, including privacy concerns, bias, and explainability. In this survey, we explore the integration of LLMs into the field of law. We discuss the various applications of LLMs in legal tasks, examine the legal challenges that arise from their use, and explore the data resources that can be used to specialize LLMs in the legal domain. Finally, we discuss several promising directions and conclude this paper. By doing so, we hope to provide an overview of the current state of LLMs in law and highlight the potential benefits and challenges of their integration.

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 5 Pith papers

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. Testing for LLM response differences: the case of a composite null consisting of semantically irrelevant query perturbations

    math.ST 2025-09 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    A new hypothesis test for binary LLM responses treats semantically equivalent query perturbations as an unknown null set and gives asymptotic validity and consistency guarantees under a uniformity assumption.

  2. Using Large Language Models for Legal Decision-Making in Austrian Value-Added Tax Law: An Experimental Study

    cs.CL 2025-07 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    RAG-enhanced LLMs slightly outperform fine-tuned LLMs on Austrian/EU VAT questions, but not significantly, and neither approach is ready for full automation.

  3. Abstract Counterfactuals for Language Model Agents

    cs.LG 2025-06 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    Counterfactuals for LM agents computed over a high-level abstraction of the action, instead of its tokens, preserve the observed action's meaning across counterfactual contexts far more often than token-level counterfactuals.

  4. When Large Language Models Meet Law: Dual-Lens Taxonomy, Technical Advances, and Ethical Governance

    cs.CL 2025-07 conditional novelty 4.0 of 10

    A literature review that classifies LLM-for-law research using a dual-lens taxonomy of Toulmin argumentation components and legal practitioner roles.

  5. Charting the Future of Scholarly Knowledge with AI: A Community Perspective

    cs.DL 2025-08 unverdicted novelty 2.0 of 10

    A community perspective on how AI can support scholarly knowledge extraction, organization, and communication, with a proposed classification and ethical considerations.

Pith tools