-
GPT‑5: What the Early Numbers Say
John Bliss, 8/15/2025 The reactions to GPT-5 (released last week) have been deeply polarized. While it claimed the top spot on legal benchmarks and other evals, it generally holds only a narrow lead. As the first whole-number successor to GPT-4 (released more than two years ago), many expected a more revolutionary breakthrough. Some see this
-
From B to A+ in Two Years: Charting the Legal-Reasoning Revolution
John Bliss , 7/9/2025 Last month OpenAI’s Sam Altman boasted that his team had “cracked reasoning.” He was referring to advances in “reasoning models” (like o1, o3, and o3-pro), which excel in step-by-step problem solving. These models are trained with “process-supervised reinforcement learning,” meaning they are rewarded for the quality of each reasoning step rather than
-
Legal AI Forecasts for 2025: Evolution or Revolution?
John Bliss and Johanna Schandera, 1/26/25 A recent survey by the National Law Review asked 67 experts in legal AI for their 2025 predictions. While the journal published the full responses, it offered no analysis or summary. This post is an effort to distill some general patterns in these forecasts. We focus on the roughly
-
The Fuzzy Evidence of Law’s AI Revolution
John Bliss and Johanna Schandera, 11/30/24 Today is ChatGPT’s second birthday—marking two years since its debut brought generative AI into the mainstream and sparked a frenzied race for legal applications. Around its first birthday, a year ago, surveys of the legal profession showed relatively slow adoption (with only 15% of lawyers using generative AI according
-
The Rise of the AI Jedis: Student Innovations in Legal AI Testing
John Bliss, 8/28/24 In the spring semester, I led a seminar at Denver Law titled “AI and the Future of the Legal Profession.” For their final projects, three students conducted experiments evaluating AI’s performance on law school exams, with one project extending into the summer. They drew inspiration from research by legal scholars showing that
-
From Fiction to Fact: Progress on Legal Hallucinations
Johanna Schandera and John Bliss 8/25/2024 The debate over generative AI’s reliability in legal practice has focused on “hallucinations”—instances where an LLM produces text with incorrect legal facts. A study of last year’s general-purpose chatbots found hallucinations in 69 to 88% of legal responses.[1] This seemed an alarming finding, though the study was not examining
-
Subscribe
Subscribed
Already have a WordPress.com account? Log in now.
Empirical Studies of AI Lawyering (e-SAIL) 