Work

Correction to: The digital transformation of jurisprudence: an evaluation of ChatGPT-4’s applicability to solve cases in business law

Year: 2024

Type: erratum

Abstract: In the original article there are several formatting errors in Appendix B. Due to these errors, elements of the output examples of the chatbots appear as subheadings that are indistinguishable from genuine subheadings.The corrected appendix is shown below, displaying only the genuine subheadings in boldface font. Appendix 2: Example Case with prompts and Model outputs PromptSolve the following case of a business law exam in the area of 'Trade Law' in the style of a legal opinion:Wine wholesaler Suffke grants his employee Pfeifer proxy.Suffke agrees with Pfeifer that the latter may not take out loans for Suffke.The granting of proxy is duly entered in the commercial register.During a vacation-related absence of Suffke, a short-term financing gap arises.Pfeifer closes this gap by taking out a loan of EUR 100,000 from Universal Bank.When the repayment of the loan becomes due, Suffke refuses to pay.Rightly so?Academic tone.

Source: Artificial Intelligence and Law

DOI: 10.1007/s10506-024-09417-7

Authors: Sascha Schweitzer, Markus Conrads

Institutions: University of Bayreuth, Reutlingen University

Language: English

Topic: Artificial Intelligence in Law

Subfield: Political Science and International Relations

Field: Social Sciences

Domain: Social Sciences

SDG: Peace, justice, and strong institutions

Open Access status: hybrid

Estimated APC paid: $3,090