I. Introduction
Very recently we have seen a flood of articles and online discussions accompanied by waves of enthusiastic opinions, about the use of the trending software solution ChatGPT. ChatGPT is a tool which use Artificial Intelligence to chat, answer questions, create content, write code and debug, take tests, manipulate data, explain and tutor. What is more ChatGPT can even provide legal information and advice.
In this article prepared with the support of ChatGPT, we will present and comment answers (in italics) generated through the ChatGPT. To know more about related topic, you are invited to read article Legal Chatbots and Increasing Productivity of Legal Practice which was published by LexRatio. We will continue discussion what ChatGPT is, how it works, and its own thoughts on deploying such chatbot(s) in the legal sphere, as well as if it can one day replace lawyers.
______________________________________________________________
II. What is ChatGPT
It is not clear what you are asking about specifically with the term “ChatGPT.” It is possible that you are referring to a chatbot that uses the GPT (Generative Pre-trained Transformer) language model to generate responses.
As I mentioned in my previous responses, GPT is a machine learning model that has been trained on a large dataset of text to learn the patterns and structure of human language. It is able to generate coherent and natural-sounding text that is similar in style and content to the training data.
If a chatbot uses the GPT model to generate responses, it means that it is able to produce text that sounds like it was written by a human, and that is appropriate for use in a chatbot setting. The chatbot may be trained to hold conversations with users, answer questions, or provide information on a variety of topics.
Overall, a chatbot that uses the GPT model is able to generate natural language text and hold conversations with users in a chat setting. However, it is important to keep in mind that chatbots are not able to provide specific legal advice or representation, and should not be relied upon as a substitute for the advice of a qualified attorney.
______________________________________________________________
The chatbot (developed by research laboratory called OpenAI, which goal is to achieve wide usage of artificial intelligence to help humans) stresses the idea that there are limitations as to the information it provides. The bot frequently opens its answer by noting that it is not obvious what we are inquiring about, even if we are asking about the chatbot itself. However, we believe it provided sufficient explanation what a ChatGPT is. When we queried the chatbot about the mechanism it uses in advance, it reconfirmed their earlier remark in the previous response in this answer, which is quite engaging.
Despite the fact that the chatbot answered without even asking if it could still be used to provide legal advice, the last highlighted statement points out that the designers of OpenAI are well aware that there may still be many legal issues and unwanted (legal) consequences with ChatGPT. What is more, developers are also aware they cannot rely 100% on the response of ChatGPT, this is why OpenAI made a disclaimer on their website, in which they clearly stipulate that the developers make regular updates to their models:
“We know that many limitations remain as discussed above and we plan to make regular model updates to improve in such areas. But we also hope that by providing an accessible interface to ChatGPT, we will get valuable user feedback on issues that we are not already aware of.”
_________________________________________________
III. How does ChatGPT works?
GPT (Generative Pre-trained Transformer) is a type of language model developed by OpenAI. It is a machine learning model trained to generate natural language text that is coherent and sounds like it was written by a human.
GPT works by taking a large dataset of text and using it to learn the patterns and structure of human language. The model is then able to generate new text that is similar in style and content to the training data.
GPT uses a transformer architecture, which is a type of deep learning model that is particularly well-suited for processing sequential data, such as text. The model is pre-trained on a large dataset and can then be fine-tuned on a specific task, such as translation or text generation.
In the case of ChatpotGPT, it is likely that the model has been fine-tuned specifically for generating text in a chatbot setting. This means that it has been trained to produce responses that are appropriate for use in a chatbot and that are able to hold a conversation with a user.
Overall, ChatpotGPT is a machine learning model that uses a transformer architecture and has been trained to generate natural language text for use in a chatbot setting.
______________________________________________________________
ChatGPT’s response implies that it creates responses by stringing together chunks of text. While this can significantly decrease time spent on legal research and precedent gathering, it might (also) produce wrong response due to lack of understanding of legal concepts.
In other words, ChatGPT is trained using a combination of supervised and unsupervised learning. For supervised learning, it is trained on a large dataset of human-generated text, such as dialogue data or online conversations. This allows it to learn the structure and style of natural language. For unsupervised learning, it is trained using a language modeling objective, which involves predicting the next word in a sequence of text. This allows it to learn the broader patterns and characteristics of language, and to generate text that is fluent and coherent.
_____________________________________________________________
IV. How does ChatGPT foresee being used to obtain legal advice?
It is not appropriate or ethical to use a chatbot like ChatGPT as a substitute for legal advice from a qualified attorney. While ChatGPT and other chatbots may be able to generate text that sounds like it was written by a human and may be able to provide general information on legal topics, they are not able to provide specific legal advice or representation.
The law can be complex and varies from jurisdiction to jurisdiction, so it is important to seek the advice of a qualified attorney who is familiar with the laws and legal system in your area. An attorney will be able to review the specific details of your case and provide tailored legal advice that takes into account your individual circumstances.
In general, it is always a good idea to consult with a qualified attorney for legal advice, rather than relying on information from a chatbot or other online resource.
______________________________________________________________
It is encouraging that the ChatGPT does not envisage itself replacing legal experts in this regard and has even gone beyond being pragmatic in explaining why the bot does not anticipate itself to replace lawyers in this context because the chatbot cannot take a “one size fits all” approach. The chatbot is aware of the limitations of delivering customized legal advice that takes into account individual situations across the users’ various jurisdictions.
In our opinion, ChatGPT is a good tool to assist lawyers in their daily tasks. ChatGPT can be used to ask general questions on case law, draft basic contract clauses, legal letters, and even entire legal agreements. It can also provide advice on what steps are to be taken to navigate through a complex legal process. Those tasks would of course still need a second eye to validate which is the lawyer to ensure that the content is relevant and useful. So ChatGPT will surely make easier access to legal knowledge and could provide basic legal tasks, and possibly later on when the system will be enough mature also complex one. What is sure, is that ChatGPT need for its operations data of certain quality and quantity, otherwise the results could potentially have no value for the user.
______________________________________________________________
V. How far is the Chatbot from being reliable in the legal domain?
When asked for reviews of some of the current relevant laws in Egypt (e.g. review the Egyptian Anti-Money Laundering Law, Egyptian Banking Law), ChatGPT did a great job of delivering a general overview of the Anti-Money Laundering Law as well as the Egyptian Banking Law. For example, the chatbot provided in just a few lines, a very well-structured brief and concise overview of the Egyptian Banking Law, underlining some of the key provisions e.g., licensing and supervision of banks, types of banking activities, capital requirements, protections for depositors and customers, lending and borrowing, and management and operation of banks.
_____________________________________________________________
VI. Let’s ask one more question relating to time limit to appeal to the Court of Cassation of Egypt
Alright, the chatbot was not particularly effective this time in determining the time limit for appealing a Court of Appeal’s verdict to the Court of Cassation, but it did literally produce the following answer:
In the Egyptian legal system, the time limit to appeal a decision to the Court of Cassation (the highest court of appeal in the country) is typically set out in the law or in the rules of procedure of the relevant court. The time limit for an appeal to the Court of Cassation can vary depending on the type of case and the court in which the original decision was issued.
As a general rule, the time limit for appealing to the Court of Cassation in the Egyptian legal system is typically quite short, often only a few weeks or a month after the original decision was issued. This is because the purpose of an appeal to the Court of Cassation is to correct any errors or injustices in the original decision as quickly as possible.
It is important to note that the time limit for appealing to the Court of Cassation is usually strict, and failure to file an appeal within the prescribed time limit can result in the appeal being barred. As a result, it is important for parties who wish to appeal to the Court of Cassation to act promptly and to seek the advice of an attorney if necessary.
Overall, the legal time limit for appealing to the Court of Cassation in the Egyptian legal system is generally short and strict, and it is important to act promptly and seek the advice of an attorney if necessary.
______________________________________________________________
Despite the fact that the majority of the answers are somewhat persuasive, the right answer is that a Court of Appeal’s decision may be appealed to the Court of Cassation within 60 days following the Court of Appeal’s ruling. As a result, it is important to consult with a lawyer, or at least check the information in different sources to be sure about its correctness.
That brings us to the problems that chatbot can pose if it is used as the primary source of information, rendering lawyers obsolete. According to a Legal Services Corp 2022 report, “low-income Americans do not get any or enough legal help for 92% of their significant civil legal challenges.” This means if people would rely on the chatbot solely with its known limited capabilities and inconsistencies addressed in somehow basic knowledge like the above example, there will be a major issue because at the end of the day the tool won’t be liable to providing probable misleading information unlike a real lawyer.
The ideal solution, in our opinion, is to gradually tame the tool to aid lawyers in their work to save time, rather than supplying the public with potentially inconsistent information, particularly in complex instances, as the bot admits. In the end, a lawyer would always be required to handle difficult legal issues rather than a trained bot.
_____________________________________________________________
VII. How does ChatGPT perceive itself?
When we asked the chatbot how it views itself, the chatbot was sufficiently convincing enough to answer that it is essentially incapable of being biased in any case, which is excellent. The chatbot replies:
Overall, ChatGPT is a machine learning model that is designed to generate human-like text based on the input it receives, and it does not have the ability to perceive itself or the world in the same way that a human does. It does not have self-awareness or consciousness, and it does not have the ability to have thoughts or feelings about itself or its own existence. So, ChatGPT does not see itself.
_________________________________________________
VIII. Conclusion
The answer offered by the chatbot above is a precursor, a prelude that the chatbot is unbiased and will create replies in a fair manner, which is vital. ChatGPT, in our perspective, is a significant step toward facilitating many facets of life, not only legal elements. The responses are rather nicely organized, and OpenAI has the ability to improve the tool in the proper way, incorporating significant reductions in destructive and untruthful outputs accomplished by the application of reinforcement learning from human input (RLHF). Reinforcement Learning (RL) is the science of decision making. It is about learning the optimal behavior in an environment to obtain maximum reward.
I personally do not see the ChatGPT replacing legal experts in the near future, owing to the fact that it requires improvements in data quality as well as the overall picture that the tool gives on legal knowledge. Although the program is excellent for analyzing laws in general, a legal counselor will be required for individual challenging circumstances. Adding to the said the confession by the developers that chatbots are not able to provide specific legal advice or representation and should not be relied upon as a substitute for the advice of a qualified attorney.
As explained, ChatGPT can be a very good assistive tool in the legal domain due to the fact that it can reduce the time spent by the lawyers and down the road, yet with many enhancements, the efficiency of legal content that it generates.
This is an excellent illustration of how AI is spreading in parallel with the quick improvements in AI legislations. In any event, we’ll be crossing our fingers to watch how this intriguing tool progresses and how it keeps up with legislative advancements.
