IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/mpg/wpaper/2024_14.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Professor GPT: Having a large language model write a commentary on freedom of assembly

Author

Listed:
  • Johannes Kruse

    (Max Planck Institute for Research on Collective Goods, Bonn)

  • Christoph Engel

    (Max Planck Institute for Research on Collective Goods, Bonn)

Abstract

In many jurisdictions, academia is at the service of legal practice. Law professors write commentaries that summarize the state of the art of doctrine, chiefly of jurisprudence. In the spirit of a proof of concept, using the guarantee of freedom of assembly in the European Convention on Human Rights, we show that this task can be completely outsourced to large language models. We develop a validation tool that works without costly human coding. The commentary fully written by GPT is on par with its best human written competitor, the Guide provided by the Court itself.

Suggested Citation

  • Johannes Kruse & Christoph Engel, 2024. "Professor GPT: Having a large language model write a commentary on freedom of assembly," Discussion Paper Series of the Max Planck Institute for Research on Collective Goods 2024_14, Max Planck Institute for Research on Collective Goods, revised Feb 2025.
    • Handle: RePEc:mpg:wpaper:2024_14
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.coll.mpg.de/pdf_dat/2024_14online.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Daniel Ellsberg, 1961. "Risk, Ambiguity, and the Savage Axioms," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 75(4), pages 643-669.
    2. Segal, Jeffrey A. & Cover, Albert D., 1989. "Ideological Values and the Votes of U.S. Supreme Court Justices," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 83(2), pages 557-565, June.
    3. Michael A. Livermore & Felix Herron & Daniel N. Rockmore, 2024. "Language Model Interpretability and Empirical Legal Studies," Journal of Institutional and Theoretical Economics (JITE), Mohr Siebeck, Tübingen, vol. 180(2), pages 244-276.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Rhys Bidder & Ian Dew-Becker, 2016. "Long-Run Risk Is the Worst-Case Scenario," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 106(9), pages 2494-2527, September.
    2. Anne Lavigne, 2006. "Gouvernance et investissement des fonds de pension privés aux Etats-Unis," Working Papers halshs-00081401, HAL.
    3. Christina Leuker & Thorsten Pachur & Ralph Hertwig & Timothy J. Pleskac, 2019. "Do people exploit risk–reward structures to simplify information processing in risky choice?," Journal of the Economic Science Association, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 5(1), pages 76-94, August.
    4. Anne Corcos & François Pannequin & Sacha Bourgeois-Gironde, 2012. "Aversions to Trust," Recherches économiques de Louvain, De Boeck Université, vol. 78(3), pages 115-134.
    5. Simon Levin & Anastasios Xepapadeas, 2021. "On the Coevolution of Economic and Ecological Systems," Annual Review of Resource Economics, Annual Reviews, vol. 13(1), pages 355-377, October.
    6. Simona Fabrizi & Steffen Lippert & Addison Pan & Matthew Ryan, 2022. "A theory of unanimous jury voting with an ambiguous likelihood," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 93(3), pages 399-425, October.
    7. Itzhak Gilboa & Andrew Postlewaite & Larry Samuelson & David Schmeidler, 2019. "What are axiomatizations good for?," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 86(3), pages 339-359, May.
    8. Kiyohiko G. Nishimura & Hiroyuki Ozaki, 2001. "Search under the Knightian Uncertainty," CIRJE F-Series CIRJE-F-112, CIRJE, Faculty of Economics, University of Tokyo.
    9. Liu, Hui-hui & Song, Yao-yao & Liu, Xiao-xiao & Yang, Guo-liang, 2020. "Aggregating the DEA prospect cross-efficiency with an application to state key laboratories in China," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 71(C).
    10. Chateauneuf, Alain & Eichberger, Jurgen & Grant, Simon, 2007. "Choice under uncertainty with the best and worst in mind: Neo-additive capacities," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 137(1), pages 538-567, November.
    11. James K. Hammitt, 2020. "Valuing mortality risk in the time of COVID-19," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 61(2), pages 129-154, October.
    12. Lex Borghans & Angela Lee Duckworth & James J. Heckman & Bas ter Weel, 2008. "The Economics and Psychology of Personality Traits," Journal of Human Resources, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 43(4).
    13. André Lapied & Thomas Rongiconi, 2013. "Ambiguity as a Source of Temptation: Modeling Unstable Beliefs," Working Papers halshs-00797631, HAL.
    14. Federica Ceron & Vassili Vergopoulos, 2020. "Recursive objective and subjective multiple priors," Post-Print halshs-02900497, HAL.
    15. Chorvat, Terrence, 2006. "Taxing utility," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 35(1), pages 1-16, February.
    16. Attanasi, Giuseppe Marco & Montesano, Aldo, 2010. "The Price for Information about Probabilities and its Relation with Capacities," TSE Working Papers 10-193, Toulouse School of Economics (TSE).
    17. Vassili Vergopoulos, 2014. "A Behavioral Definition of States of the World," Documents de travail du Centre d'Economie de la Sorbonne 14047, Université Panthéon-Sorbonne (Paris 1), Centre d'Economie de la Sorbonne.
    18. López-Guzmán, Silvia & Sautua, Santiago I., 2024. "Effects of a fearful emotional state on financial decisions in the presence of prior outcome information," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 101(C).
    19. Ghirardato, Paolo & Marinacci, Massimo, 2002. "Ambiguity Made Precise: A Comparative Foundation," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 102(2), pages 251-289, February.
    20. Wang, Ning & Zhang, Yumo, 2024. "Robust asset-liability management games for n players under multivariate stochastic covariance models," Insurance: Mathematics and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 117(C), pages 67-98.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    commentary; automation; large language model; validation; benchmark; freedom of assembly; European Convention on Human Rights;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • C45 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Econometric and Statistical Methods: Special Topics - - - Neural Networks and Related Topics
    • C63 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Mathematical Methods; Programming Models; Mathematical and Simulation Modeling - - - Computational Techniques
    • C88 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Data Collection and Data Estimation Methodology; Computer Programs - - - Other Computer Software
    • K38 - Law and Economics - - Other Substantive Areas of Law - - - Human Rights Law; Gender Law; Animal Rights Law
    • K41 - Law and Economics - - Legal Procedure, the Legal System, and Illegal Behavior - - - Litigation Process

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:mpg:wpaper:2024_14. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Marc Martin (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/mppggde.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.