Natural language processing: Difference between revisions

no edit summary
No edit summary
No edit summary
Line 6: Line 6:
*'''[[Chat bots]]''': An online, chat buddy to whom [[Sales]] can basic legal questions, thereby saving [[Sales]] the aggravation of having to talk to the [[legal eagles]], and [[legal]] the utter [[tedium]] of having to answer the exact same question to the exact [[Sales]] person three or four times daily.
*'''[[Chat bots]]''': An online, chat buddy to whom [[Sales]] can basic legal questions, thereby saving [[Sales]] the aggravation of having to talk to the [[legal eagles]], and [[legal]] the utter [[tedium]] of having to answer the exact same question to the exact [[Sales]] person three or four times daily.


Now reading any text involves judgment, interpretation and negotiation of ambiguity — and bringing to the text the reader’s own understanding of the legal background — while legal language is crafted to avoid ambiguity — {{maxim|there are no metaphors in a trust deed}} — there are still infinite ways of expressing the same idea, and if there is one part of the imagination a lawyer loves to stretch, it is inventing burlesque ways of saying simple things. Understand a well-formed English sentence is not just a matter of applying basic rules of language. It is a dynamic process. So expect [[natural language processing]] to be easier said than done.
Now reading any text involves judgment, interpretation and negotiation of ambiguity — and bringing to the text the reader’s own understanding of the legal background — while legal language is crafted to avoid ambiguity — {{maxim|there are no metaphors in a trust deed}} — there are still infinite ways of expressing the same idea, and if there is one part of the imagination a lawyer loves to stretch, it is the part  that invents burlesque ways of saying simple things.  
 
In any case, to understand a well-formed English sentence is not just a matter of applying basic rules of language. It is a dynamic process. So expect [[natural language processing]] to be easier said than done.


And so it proves.
And so it proves.


===Legal agreement review===
===Legal agreement review===
:“''[[AI]] can only follow instructions.The [[meatware]] can make a call that the instructions are stupid.''”
:“''[[AI]] can only follow instructions. The [[meatware]] can make a call that the instructions are stupid.''”


There is a well-known and widely feted [[natural language processing]] application<ref>Which shall remain nameless, though you don’t have to be a total ''nerd'' to know who we have in mind.</ref> which purports to save resources and reduce risk by performing a preliminary review of, say, [[confidentiality agreement]]s against a preconfigured [[playbook]].  
There is a well-known and widely-feted [[natural language processing]] application<ref>Which shall remain nameless, though you don’t have to be a total ''nerd'' to know who we have in mind.</ref> which purports to save resources and reduce risk by performing a preliminary review of, say, [[confidentiality agreement]]s against a preconfigured [[playbook]].  


The idea is [[triage]]. The application scans the agreement and, using its [[natural language processing]], will pick up the policy points, compare them with the [[playbook]] and highlight them so the poor benighted lawyer can quickly deal with the points and respond to the negotiation. The software [[vendor]] proudly points to a comparison of their software against human equivalents in picking up policy points in a sample of agreements. The software got 94% of the points. The [[meatware]] only got 67%. The Software was quicker. And — chuckle — it needed less coffee. Headline: ''dumb machine beats skilled human''.  
The idea is [[triage]]. The application scans the agreement and, using its [[natural language processing]], will pick up the policy points, compare them with the [[playbook]] and highlight them so the poor benighted lawyer can quickly deal with the points and respond to the negotiation. The software [[vendor]] proudly points to a comparison of their software against human equivalents in picking up policy points in a sample of agreements. The software got 94% of the points. The [[meatware]] only got 67%. The Software was quicker. And — chuckle — it needed less coffee. Headline: ''dumb machine beats skilled human''.