斯坦福等高校联合研发的律政界AlphaGo，刚刚战胜了20名顶级律师

JD@UVAUID: 3503603

http://it.sohu.com/20180227/n531684202.shtml



在一场与人工智能比赛解释合同的竞赛中，20名顶尖律师输了。

　　法律AI平台LawGeex与斯坦福大学、杜克大学法学院和南加州大学的法学教授合作进行了一项新的研究，让20名有经验的律师与训练好的法律AI程序相互比赛。




遗憾的是，律师们输掉了比赛

　　人类律师的平均准确率达到了85％，而AI的准确率达到了95％。 另外，AI在26秒内完成了任务，而人类律师平均需要92分钟。值得注意的是，人工智能在这些合同中最高可以达到100％的准确率，而其中人类律师的最高得分仅为97％。简而言之，人类律师完败。

　那么这是否意味着律师这个职业的终结？完全不是。相反，使用AI确实可以帮助律师加快工作速度，以便他们能专注于那些仍需要人脑的任务。

　　“让AI作为一个律师助理对NDA进行初次审查，将为律师腾出宝贵的时间，专注于客户咨询和其他更高价值的工作，”杜克大学法学院临床教授Erika Buell说。

　　这项技术绝不会完全取代律师这个职业，但是律师们可以利用这项技术找到他们要讲的故事中最重要的部分，提高他们工作的效率。

　　“我坚信，法律专业的学生和初级律师需要理解这些人工智能工具和技术，这将有助于他们成为更好的律师，以便未来在法律方面有更好的建树，”Buell说道。 “如果律师们能用这些工具更有效地处理法律问题，那么这类新工具将会非常受欢迎。”

　　这场“对决”的组织者LawGeex将人类与AI双方的详细介绍、评分标准、技术内核写成了一篇详尽的报告。



AI software is more accurate, faster than attorneys when accessing NDAs

http://www.abajournal.com/news/a ... when_accessing_ndas

In a new AI-versus-lawyer matchup, the lawyers were bested when trying to accurately spot issues in non-disclosure agreements.

Tasked with spotting issues in five real NDAs from companies including Cargill and Pacific Gas & Electric Co., the software from LawGeex outperformed the attorneys with an average of 94 percent accuracy, according to their study. The attorneys had an average accuracy rate of 85 percent.

The attorneys assessed all five NDAs in an average of 92 minutes, while the software took only 26 seconds.

“Participating in this experiment really opened my eyes to how ridiculous it is for attorneys to spend their time (as well as their clients’ money) creating or reviewing documents like NDAs which are so fundamentally similar to one another,” Grant Gulovsen, a participating attorney, said in a statement. “Having a tool that could automate this process would free up skilled attorneys to spend their time on higher-level tasks without having to hire paralegal support.”

The competition pitted software from LawGeex, a contract review software company, against 20 U.S.-trained attorneys. The software and the attorneys were asked to issue-spot topics like confidentiality, indemnification and various exclusion clauses.

This event looked to build on previous lawyer-versus-machine competitions.