LexPilot: Benchmarking Proactive Interaction of Legal LLMs with Laypeople in Chinese Civil Cases
In brief
- LexPilot evaluates proactive interaction of LLMs with non-experts in Chinese civil law consultations.
- Current LLMs underperform by 23.84% in verdict predictions with incomplete consultations.
- The benchmark uses 432 real judgments and 36 common causes of action for testing.
LexPilot, a new benchmark, assesses how large language models interact proactively with non-experts in Chinese civil law consultations. Results show current LLMs struggle to identify dispute points and gather missing details, reducing verdict prediction accuracy by 23.84% on average.
What it changes for you
- LegalLaw firms should test LLMs on LexPilot before deployment to prevent incomplete or erroneous legal advice.
This summary gives you the essentials. The full article, its figures and quotes are on cs.AI updates on arXiv.org.
Read the original articleAI-generated summary of the source, checked by rules. Report an error