Large Language Models (LLMs) have been increasingly used to optimize the analysis and synthesis of legal documents, enabling the automation of tasks such as summarization, classification, and retrieval of legal information. This study aims to conduct a systematic literature review to identify the state of the art in prompt engineering applied to LLMs in the legal context. The results indicate that models such as GPT-4, BERT, Llama 2, and Legal-Pegasus are widely employed in the legal field, and techniques such as Few-shot Learning, Zero-shot Learning, and Chain-of-Thought prompting have proven effective in improving the interpretation of legal texts. However, challenges such as biases in models and hallucinations still hinder their large-scale implementation. It is concluded that, despite the great potential of LLMs for the legal field, there is a need to improve prompt engineering strategies to ensure greater accuracy and reliability in the generated results.

The scarcity of accessible, compliant, and ethically sourced data presents a considerable challenge to the adoption of artificial intelligence (AI) in sensitive fields like healthcare, finance, and biomedical research. Furthermore, access to unrestricted public datasets is increasingly constrained due to rising concerns over privacy, copyright, and competition. Synthetic data has emerged as a promising alternative, and diffusion models -- a cutting-edge generative AI technology -- provide an effective solution for generating high-quality and diverse synthetic data. In this paper, we introduce a novel federated learning framework for training diffusion models on decentralized private datasets. Our framework leverages personalization and the inherent noise in the forward diffusion process to produce high-quality samples while ensuring robust differential privacy guarantees. Our experiments show that our framework outperforms non-collaborative training methods, particularly in settings with high data heterogeneity, and effectively reduces biases and imbalances in synthetic data, resulting in fairer downstream models.

Representational harms are widely recognized among fairness-related harms caused by generative language systems. However, their definitions are commonly under-specified. We present a framework, grounded in speech act theory (Austin, 1962), that conceptualizes representational harms caused by generative language systems as the perlocutionary effects (i.e., real-world impacts) of particular types of illocutionary acts (i.e., system behaviors). Building on this argument and drawing on relevant literature from linguistic anthropology and sociolinguistics, we provide new definitions stereotyping, demeaning, and erasure. We then use our framework to develop a granular taxonomy of illocutionary acts that cause representational harms, going beyond the high-level taxonomies presented in previous work. We also discuss the ways that our framework and taxonomy can support the development of valid measurement instruments. Finally, we demonstrate the utility of our framework and taxonomy via a case study that engages with recent conceptual debates about what constitutes a representational harm and how such harms should be measured.

As language models improve and become capable of performing more complex tasks across modalities, evaluating them automatically becomes increasingly challenging. Developing strong and robust task-specific automatic metrics gets harder, and human-annotated test sets -- which are expensive to create -- saturate more quickly. A compelling alternative is to design reliable strategies to automate the creation of test data and evaluation, but previous attempts either rely on pre-existing data, or focus solely on individual tasks. We present Zero-shot Benchmarking (ZSB), a framework for creating high-quality benchmarks for any task by leveraging language models for both synthetic test data creation and evaluation. ZSB is simple and flexible: it requires only the creation of a prompt for data generation and one for evaluation; it is scalable to tasks and languages where collecting real-world data is costly or impractical; it is model-agnostic, allowing the creation of increasingly challenging benchmarks as models improve. To assess the effectiveness of our framework, we create benchmarks for five text-only tasks and a multi-modal one: general capabilities in four languages (English, Chinese, French, and Korean), translation, and general vision-language capabilities in English. We then rank a broad range of open and closed systems on our benchmarks. ZSB rankings consistently correlate strongly with human rankings, outperforming widely-adopted standard benchmarks. Through ablations, we find that strong benchmarks can be created with open models, and that judge model size and dataset variety are crucial drivers of performance. We release all our benchmarks, and code to reproduce our experiments and to produce new benchmarks.

Despite numerous efforts to mitigate their biases, ML systems continue to harm already-marginalized people. While predominant ML approaches assume bias can be removed and fair models can be created, we show that these are not always possible, nor desirable, goals. We reframe the problem of ML bias by creating models to identify biased language, drawing attention to a dataset's biases rather than trying to remove them. Then, through a workshop, we evaluated the models for a specific use case: workflows of information and heritage professionals. Our findings demonstrate the limitations of ML for identifying bias due to its contextual nature, the way in which approaches to mitigating it can simultaneously privilege and oppress different communities, and its inevitability. We demonstrate the need to expand ML approaches to bias and fairness, providing a mixed-methods approach to investigating the feasibility of removing bias or achieving fairness in a given ML use case.

It examines fair use legal arguments and eight distinct substantive arguments, contending that every legal and substantive argument favoring fair use for GenAI applies equally, if not more so, to humans. Therefore, granting GenAI exceptional privileges in this domain is legally and logically inco nsistent with withholding broad fair use exemptions from individual humans.

The letter asked Lisa Nandy, the secretary of state for culture, media and sport, to summon Meta senior executives to parliament. "There is a longstanding contractual obligation that when third parties make use of an author's work they compensate us," said McDermid when asked why she signed the letter. "Adaptation, translation, photocopying – they all accept the duty to recompense us for making their work possible. "I'm a crime writer – I understand theft when I see it. And by using pirated material, Meta are stealing from us twice over.

Tens of thousands of explicit AI-generated images, including AI-generated child sexual abuse material, were left open and accessible to anyone on the internet, according to new research seen by WIRED. An open database belonging to an AI image-generation firm contained more than 95,000 records, including some prompt data and images of celebrities such as Ariana Grande, the Kardashians, and Beyoncé de-aged to look like children. The exposed database, which was discovered by security researcher Jeremiah Fowler, who shared details of the leak with WIRED, is linked to South Korea–based website GenNomis. The website and its parent company, AI-Nomis, hosted a number of image generation and chatbot tools for people to use. More than 45 GB of data, mostly made up of AI images, was left in the open.

Elon Musk's xAI is facing a potential trademark dispute over the name of its chatbot, Grok. The company's trademark application with the US Patent and Trademark Office has been suspended after the agency argued the name could be confused with that of two other companies, AI chipmaker Groq and software provider Grokstream. Now, a third tech startup called Bizly is claiming it owns the rights to "Grok." This isn't the first time Musk has chosen a name for one of his products that other companies say they trademarked first. Last month, Musk's social media platform settled a lawsuit brought by a marketing firm that claimed it owns exclusive rights to the name X. Bizly and xAI appear to have arrived at the name Grok independently.

This short paper puts forward a vision for a new democratic model enabled by the recent technological advances in agentic AI. It therefore opens with drawing a clear and concise picture of the model, and only later addresses related proposals and research directions, and concerns regarding feasibility and safety. It ends with a note on the timeliness of this idea and on optimism. The model proposed is that of assigning each citizen an AI Agent that would serve as their political delegate, enabling the return to direct democracy. The paper examines this models relation to existing research, its potential setbacks and feasibility and argues for its further development.