-
Report of the 1st Workshop on Generative AI and Law
Authors:
A. Feder Cooper,
Katherine Lee,
James Grimmelmann,
Daphne Ippolito,
Christopher Callison-Burch,
Christopher A. Choquette-Choo,
Niloofar Mireshghallah,
Miles Brundage,
David Mimno,
Madiha Zahrah Choksi,
Jack M. Balkin,
Nicholas Carlini,
Christopher De Sa,
Jonathan Frankle,
Deep Ganguli,
Bryant Gipson,
Andres Guadamuz,
Swee Leng Harris,
Abigail Z. Jacobs,
Elizabeth Joh,
Gautam Kamath,
Mark Lemley,
Cass Matthews,
Christine McLeavey,
Corynne McSherry
, et al. (10 additional authors not shown)
Abstract:
This report presents the takeaways of the inaugural Workshop on Generative AI and Law (GenLaw), held in July 2023. A cross-disciplinary group of practitioners and scholars from computer science and law convened to discuss the technical, doctrinal, and policy challenges presented by law for Generative AI, and by Generative AI for law, with an emphasis on U.S. law in particular. We begin the report…
▽ More
This report presents the takeaways of the inaugural Workshop on Generative AI and Law (GenLaw), held in July 2023. A cross-disciplinary group of practitioners and scholars from computer science and law convened to discuss the technical, doctrinal, and policy challenges presented by law for Generative AI, and by Generative AI for law, with an emphasis on U.S. law in particular. We begin the report with a high-level statement about why Generative AI is both immensely significant and immensely challenging for law. To meet these challenges, we conclude that there is an essential need for 1) a shared knowledge base that provides a common conceptual language for experts across disciplines; 2) clarification of the distinctive technical capabilities of generative-AI systems, as compared and contrasted to other computer and AI systems; 3) a logical taxonomy of the legal issues these systems raise; and, 4) a concrete research agenda to promote collaboration and knowledge-sharing on emerging issues at the intersection of Generative AI and law. In this report, we synthesize the key takeaways from the GenLaw workshop that begin to address these needs. All of the listed authors contributed to the workshop upon which this report is based, but they and their organizations do not necessarily endorse all of the specific claims in this report.
△ Less
Submitted 2 December, 2023; v1 submitted 10 November, 2023;
originally announced November 2023.
-
GPT-4 Technical Report
Authors:
OpenAI,
Josh Achiam,
Steven Adler,
Sandhini Agarwal,
Lama Ahmad,
Ilge Akkaya,
Florencia Leoni Aleman,
Diogo Almeida,
Janko Altenschmidt,
Sam Altman,
Shyamal Anadkat,
Red Avila,
Igor Babuschkin,
Suchir Balaji,
Valerie Balcom,
Paul Baltescu,
Haiming Bao,
Mohammad Bavarian,
Jeff Belgum,
Irwan Bello,
Jake Berdine,
Gabriel Bernadett-Shapiro,
Christopher Berner,
Lenny Bogdonoff,
Oleg Boiko
, et al. (256 additional authors not shown)
Abstract:
We report the development of GPT-4, a large-scale, multimodal model which can accept image and text inputs and produce text outputs. While less capable than humans in many real-world scenarios, GPT-4 exhibits human-level performance on various professional and academic benchmarks, including passing a simulated bar exam with a score around the top 10% of test takers. GPT-4 is a Transformer-based mo…
▽ More
We report the development of GPT-4, a large-scale, multimodal model which can accept image and text inputs and produce text outputs. While less capable than humans in many real-world scenarios, GPT-4 exhibits human-level performance on various professional and academic benchmarks, including passing a simulated bar exam with a score around the top 10% of test takers. GPT-4 is a Transformer-based model pre-trained to predict the next token in a document. The post-training alignment process results in improved performance on measures of factuality and adherence to desired behavior. A core component of this project was developing infrastructure and optimization methods that behave predictably across a wide range of scales. This allowed us to accurately predict some aspects of GPT-4's performance based on models trained with no more than 1/1,000th the compute of GPT-4.
△ Less
Submitted 4 March, 2024; v1 submitted 15 March, 2023;
originally announced March 2023.
-
Robust Speech Recognition via Large-Scale Weak Supervision
Authors:
Alec Radford,
Jong Wook Kim,
Tao Xu,
Greg Brockman,
Christine McLeavey,
Ilya Sutskever
Abstract:
We study the capabilities of speech processing systems trained simply to predict large amounts of transcripts of audio on the internet. When scaled to 680,000 hours of multilingual and multitask supervision, the resulting models generalize well to standard benchmarks and are often competitive with prior fully supervised results but in a zero-shot transfer setting without the need for any fine-tuni…
▽ More
We study the capabilities of speech processing systems trained simply to predict large amounts of transcripts of audio on the internet. When scaled to 680,000 hours of multilingual and multitask supervision, the resulting models generalize well to standard benchmarks and are often competitive with prior fully supervised results but in a zero-shot transfer setting without the need for any fine-tuning. When compared to humans, the models approach their accuracy and robustness. We are releasing models and inference code to serve as a foundation for further work on robust speech processing.
△ Less
Submitted 6 December, 2022;
originally announced December 2022.
-
Efficient Training of Language Models to Fill in the Middle
Authors:
Mohammad Bavarian,
Heewoo Jun,
Nikolas Tezak,
John Schulman,
Christine McLeavey,
Jerry Tworek,
Mark Chen
Abstract:
We show that autoregressive language models can learn to infill text after we apply a straightforward transformation to the dataset, which simply moves a span of text from the middle of a document to its end. While this data augmentation has garnered much interest in recent years, we provide extensive evidence that training models with a large fraction of data transformed in this way does not harm…
▽ More
We show that autoregressive language models can learn to infill text after we apply a straightforward transformation to the dataset, which simply moves a span of text from the middle of a document to its end. While this data augmentation has garnered much interest in recent years, we provide extensive evidence that training models with a large fraction of data transformed in this way does not harm the original left-to-right generative capability, as measured by perplexity and sampling evaluations across a wide range of scales. Given the usefulness, simplicity, and efficiency of training models to fill-in-the-middle (FIM), we suggest that future autoregressive language models be trained with FIM by default. To this end, we run a series of ablations on key hyperparameters, such as the data transformation frequency, the structure of the transformation, and the method of selecting the infill span. We use these ablations to prescribe strong default settings and best practices to train FIM models. We have released our best infilling model trained with best practices in our API, and release our infilling benchmarks to aid future research.
△ Less
Submitted 28 July, 2022;
originally announced July 2022.
