Law Professors Prefer AI Over Peer Answers
| cowardly opaque hell rigor | 06/02/26 | | Insane Pit Mother | 06/02/26 | | sienna excitant lettuce | 06/02/26 | | cowardly opaque hell rigor | 06/02/26 | | big doobsian site half-breed | 06/02/26 | | Geriatric Frisky Address | 06/02/26 | | cowardly opaque hell rigor | 06/02/26 | | big doobsian site half-breed | 06/02/26 | | Sticky athletic conference garrison | 06/03/26 | | ivory partner | 06/02/26 | | sienna excitant lettuce | 06/02/26 | | Sticky athletic conference garrison | 06/03/26 | | violet field | 06/02/26 |
Poast new message in this thread
Date: June 2nd, 2026 5:12 PM Author: cowardly opaque hell rigor
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=2ค1¤7PHPSESSID=188a95202f833e097d78c96d76bac3f6#49911519) |
Date: June 2nd, 2026 8:07 PM Author: violet field
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=2ค1¤7PHPSESSID=188a95202f833e097d78c96d76bac3f6#49911897) |
|
|