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.

The issue of distinguishing between the same-source and different-source hypotheses based on various types of traces is a generic problem in forensic science. This problem is often tackled with Bayesian approaches, which are able to provide a likelihood ratio that quantifies the relative strengths of evidence supporting each of the two competing hypotheses. Here, we focus on distance-based approaches, whose robustness and specifically whose capacity to deal with high-dimensional evidence are very different, and need to be evaluated and optimized. A unified framework for direct methods based on estimating the likelihoods of the distance between traces under each of the two competing hypotheses, and indirect methods using logistic regression to discriminate between same-source and different-source distance distributions, is presented. Whilst direct methods are more flexible, indirect methods are more robust and quite natural in machine learning. Moreover, indirect methods also enable the use of a vectorial distance, thus preventing the severe information loss suffered by scalar distance approaches.Direct and indirect methods are compared in terms of sensitivity, specificity and robustness, with and without dimensionality reduction, with and without feature selection, on the example of hand odor profiles, a novel and challenging type of evidence in the field of forensics. Empirical evaluations on a large panel of 534 subjects and their 1690 odor traces show the significant superiority of the indirect methods, especially without dimensionality reduction, be it with or without feature selection.

Recent years have seen growing adoption of AI-based decision-support systems (ADS) in homeless services, yet we know little about stakeholder desires and concerns surrounding their use. In this work, we aim to understand impacted stakeholders' perspectives on a deployed ADS that prioritizes scarce housing resources. We employed AI lifecycle comicboarding, an adapted version of the comicboarding method, to elicit stakeholder feedback and design ideas across various components of an AI system's design. We elicited feedback from county workers who operate the ADS daily, service providers whose work is directly impacted by the ADS, and unhoused individuals in the region. Our participants shared concerns and design suggestions around the AI system's overall objective, specific model design choices, dataset selection, and use in deployment. Our findings demonstrate that stakeholders, even without AI knowledge, can provide specific and critical feedback on an AI system's design and deployment, if empowered to do so.

With the rise of big data, artificial intelligence (AI), and data mining techniques, group analysis has increasingly become a powerful tool in many applications, ranging from policy-making, direct marketing, education, to healthcare. For example, an important analysis strategy is group profiling, which extracts and describes the characteristics of groups of people [40]; it has been commonly used for customized recommendations to overcome sparse and missing personal data [25]. The same strategy is also used for mining social media, educational, and healthcare data to understand the shared characteristics of online communities or student/patient cohorts [15, 51, 100]. While it may help to support public and private services or product creations that are better tailored to different communities, group profiles resulted from mathematical inference are typically not valid for every individual regarded as a member in the group (this is known as non-distributive group profiles) [40]. The shared group characteristics extracted from data can have social ramifications such as stereotyping, stigmatization, or lead to pernicious consequences in decision making because individuals might be judged by group characteristics they do not posses [24, 56, 58].

Jorge Ivan Santos Camacho, 34, is accused of grooming the teen online, driving down to Dallas to pick her up and abducting her to Lexington, where he allegedly sexually assaulted her and kept her locked in a shed where he was living. The North Carolina man accused of trafficking a Texas girl across the country and locking her in a shed may have met her through online video games, early missing person flyers show. Jorge Ivan Santos Camacho is charged with a slew of child sex crimes, including statutory rape and human trafficking, for allegedly taking the girl from her home in Dallas 1,000 miles away, to Lexington, North Carolina, where deputies found her locked in an outbuilding that he was living in, according to court documents. A missing person flyer circulating on March 4 said the girl had last been seen the evening of March 1, leaving her family's apartment wearing a hat with an image from the TV-MA-rated Japanese anime series "Demon Slayer." "She was engaged in gaming, and the family reported a suspicious message in the gaming account," the post reads.

I've written about technology for 25 years and I have never encountered anything as fascinating as ChatGPT. Seeing its responses often gives me a sense of vertigo, like everything is moving too fast. And everything has just got a little bit faster. Last night, OpenAI announced and launched the latest version of the model which underlies ChatGPT, GPT-4. The new version brings several advanced capabilities, including the power to ace legal exams, understand images and digest prompts up to 25,000 words long.

As someone who has built multiple AI-powered businesses in the legal community, I know firsthand the exciting potential of technology to transform the way we practice law. From predictive coding in electronic discovery, to AI-based contract analysis, legal tech has the power to make our jobs easier and more efficient. But with any new technology comes risk, uncertainty and responsibility. It's easy to get caught up in the hype of the latest buzzwords and trends, but when it comes to serving a demanding audience like lawyers and their clients, you better understand that there's a difference between'playtime' and'production.' What do I mean by that?

"Microlegislation" is a term for small pieces of proposed law that cater--sometimes unexpectedly--to narrow interests. Political scientist Amy McKay coined the term. She studied the 564 amendments to the Affordable Care Act ("Obamacare") considered by the Senate Finance Committee in 2009, as well as the positions of 866 lobbying groups and their campaign contributions. She documented instances where lobbyist comments--on health-care research, vaccine services, and other provisions--were translated directly into microlegislation in the form of amendments. And she found that those groups' financial contributions to specific senators on the committee increased the amendments' chances of passing.

Generative AI, i.e., the group of technologies that automatically generate visual or written content based on text prompts, has undergone a leap in complexity and become widely available within just a few years. Such technologies potentially introduce a massive disruption to creative fields. This paper presents the results of a qualitative survey ($N$ = 23) investigating how creative professionals think about generative AI. The results show that the advancement of these AI models prompts important reflections on what defines creativity and how creatives imagine using AI to support their workflows. Based on these reflections, we discuss how we might design \textit{participatory AI} in the domain of creative expertise with the goal of empowering creative professionals in their present and future coexistence with AI.

Persuasion is a key aspect of what it means to be human, and is central to business, politics, and other endeavors. Advancements in artificial intelligence (AI) have produced AI systems that are capable of persuading humans to buy products, watch videos, click on search results, and more. Even systems that are not explicitly designed to persuade may do so in practice. In the future, increasingly anthropomorphic AI systems may form ongoing relationships with users, increasing their persuasive power. This paper investigates the uncertain future of persuasive AI systems. We examine ways that AI could qualitatively alter our relationship to and views regarding persuasion by shifting the balance of persuasive power, allowing personalized persuasion to be deployed at scale, powering misinformation campaigns, and changing the way humans can shape their own discourse. We consider ways AI-driven persuasion could differ from human-driven persuasion. We warn that ubiquitous highlypersuasive AI systems could alter our information environment so significantly so as to contribute to a loss of human control of our own future. In response, we examine several potential responses to AI-driven persuasion: prohibition, identification of AI agents, truthful AI, and legal remedies. We conclude that none of these solutions will be airtight, and that individuals and governments will need to take active steps to guard against the most pernicious effects of persuasive AI.