The performance of GPT-4 on the Uniform Bar Exam (UBE) has been a subject of significant interest and debate, but there is no specific information available about GPT-4.5's performance. However, understanding GPT-4's performance can provide insights into how future versions like GPT-4.5 might be perceived in legal settings.
GPT-4's Performance on the UBE
GPT-4 was initially reported to have achieved a score near the 90th percentile on the UBE, which generated considerable excitement about its potential in legal contexts[5][7]. However, subsequent analyses have raised doubts about this claim, suggesting that the performance was overestimated. For instance, when compared to repeat test-takers, GPT-4's score seemed impressive, but when evaluated against all test-takers or first-time examinees, its performance was significantly lower, estimated around the 69th percentile overall and about the 48th percentile on essays[1][2][4].
Implications for Credibility in Legal Settings
1. Methodological Concerns: The discrepancies in reported performance highlight methodological challenges in evaluating AI models like GPT-4. These concerns can impact how future versions are perceived, as they may also face similar challenges in demonstrating consistent performance across different test populations.
2. Comparison to Human Performance: GPT-4's ability to pass the bar exam, particularly excelling in multiple-choice sections like the Multistate Bar Examination (MBE), suggests potential for AI in legal tasks requiring factual recall and analysis[5]. However, its weaker performance on essay sections indicates limitations in more nuanced legal reasoning and writing, which are critical skills for legal professionals.
3. Potential Applications: Despite these limitations, AI models like GPT-4 and potentially GPT-4.5 could still be valuable in legal settings for tasks such as document review, research assistance, and drafting routine legal documents. Their ability to process large volumes of information quickly and accurately can support legal professionals, though they are unlikely to replace human judgment and complex legal reasoning.
4. Ethical and Regulatory Considerations: As AI becomes more integrated into legal work, there will be increasing scrutiny of its reliability and ethical implications. Ensuring that AI tools are transparent, fair, and do not exacerbate existing biases will be crucial for maintaining credibility in legal contexts.
In summary, while GPT-4's performance on the UBE has been debated, it highlights both the potential and limitations of AI in legal settings. Future versions like GPT-4.5 will need to address these challenges to enhance credibility and utility in legal applications.
Citations:
[1] https://law-ai.org/re-evaluating-gpt-4s-bar-exam-performance/
[2] https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=4441311
[3] https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10884900/
[4] https://ethicalailawinstitute.org/blog/gpt-4-and-the-bar-exam-a-closer-look-at-the-hype-and-reality/
[5] https://www.abajournal.com/web/article/latest-version-of-chatgpt-aces-the-bar-exam-with-score-in-90th-percentile
[6] https://www.researchgate.net/publication/379435142_Re-evaluating_GPT-4's_bar_exam_performance
[7] https://openai.com/index/gpt-4-research/
[8] https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10894685/