Law Professors Prefer AI Over Peer Answers
| coral tripping roast beef | 06/02/26 | | talented nofapping stage | 06/02/26 | | alcoholic circlehead | 06/02/26 | | coral tripping roast beef | 06/02/26 | | low-t private investor | 06/02/26 | | mischievous haunted graveyard | 06/02/26 | | coral tripping roast beef | 06/02/26 | | low-t private investor | 06/02/26 | | Self-centered community account factory reset button | 06/03/26 | | Odious Range | 06/02/26 | | alcoholic circlehead | 06/02/26 | | Self-centered community account factory reset button | 06/03/26 | | slap-happy cream parlor sneaky criminal | 06/02/26 |
Poast new message in this thread
Date: June 2nd, 2026 5:12 PM Author: coral tripping roast beef
https://law.stanford.edu/wp-content/uploads/2026/06/salinas_et_al.pdf
"Professors rated LLMs far higher than their peers (average win rate = 75.33%), with models performing similarly to the best instructor. LLM responses were also rarely flagged as harmful (3.53%, vs 12.06% for professors). Preferences for LLM answers were consistent across evaluators and reflected shared professional standards."
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5870655&forum_id=2…id#49911519) |
Date: June 2nd, 2026 8:07 PM Author: slap-happy cream parlor sneaky criminal
This is a dumb study with a predictable result.
They're essentially taking popular 1L cases taught first year law students, and asking professors and LLMs to explain them.
Predictably, the LLMS did better because they can just summarize the casebooks from the past 40 years in the most concise way.
But let's say we a ran a study, where we compared the explanations in the study guide vs the explanations of professors, and other professors chose the study guide 75% of the time. Would that be meaningful or surprising?
I wouldn't think so...
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5870655&forum_id=2…id#49911897) |
|
|