The author suggests four steps to manage AI's hallucinations: letting professionals handle the prompting, training AI models on diverse and well-structured data, limiting AI use to specific and well-defined use cases, and always having a human verify the AI's output. The author concludes by comparing AI to driverless cars, stating that while they can be safer than humans, mistakes are less tolerated. Therefore, it's essential to test AI in safe, controlled environments before deploying it in high-stakes situations.
Key takeaways:
- AI solutions have a tendency to "hallucinate," or produce information that is not in line with reality, which can be problematic in high-stakes environments like the legal field.
- AI-powered legal tech providers must be careful, cautious, and ethical in their deployment of this technology, as reliability and truth are crucial in the legal sphere.
- Four steps to manage AI hallucinations include letting professionals do the prompting, ensuring AI models are trained on diverse and well-structured data, limiting the use of AI to specific and well-defined use cases, and keeping a human in the loop to verify the AI's output.
- While AI has the potential to transform the legal field for the better, it's important to be realistic about the technology's current limitations to avoid mistakes and maintain its credibility.