Cited by 11Artificial Intelligence in LawComputational and Text Analysis MethodsTopic Modeling

Language Model Interpretability and Empirical Legal Studies

Livermore, Michael A., Herron, Felix, Rockmore, Daniel N.·2024·Journal of Institutional and Theoretical Economics

Abstract

Large language models (LLMs) now perform extremely well on many natural language processing tasks. Their ability to convert legal texts to data may offer empirical legal studies (ELS) scholars a low-cost alternative to research assistants in many contexts. However, less complex computational language models, such as topic modeling and sentiment analysis, are more interpretable than LLMs. In this paper we highlight these differences by comparing LLMs with less complex models on three ELS-related tasks. Our findings suggest that ELS research will – for the time being – benefit from combining LLMs with other techniques to optimize the strengths of each approach.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1628/jite-2024-0009

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Livermore, M. A., Herron, F., & Rockmore, D. N.
Venue
Journal of Institutional and Theoretical Economics
Publisher
Mohr Siebeck
Published
2024
Volume
180
Issue
2
Pages
244-276
ISSN
  • 0044-2550 (ISSN-L)
  • 0932-4569
OpenAlex
W4400926486
Cited by
11
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 1
FWCI
16.05
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of Institutional and Theoretical Economics JITE (publishedVersion)
  • RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Political Science and International Relations › Artificial Intelligence in Law
  • Social Sciences › General Social Sciences › Computational and Text Analysis Methods
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Topic Modeling
Keywords
large language models, model interpretability, empirical legal research, topic modeling, sentiment analysis, research assistants, legal text analysis

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review