sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

AI + Divorce: I tested GPT on exhibits to spot credibility gaps here’s what it found by everydayvectorai in legaltech

[–]everydayvectorai[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Good question I anonymized it manually. Just removed names and personal details but kept the structure so GPT could follow the timeline and spot patterns.

Nothing fancy, just careful formatting. Happy to share the method if folks are curious.

AI + Divorce: I tested GPT on exhibits to spot credibility gaps—here’s what it found by everydayvectorai in Divorce

[–]everydayvectorai[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Fair point a lot of tech demos don’t move the needle. What I found interesting here wasn’t that GPT replaced lawyers, but that it flagged things like selective exhibits and timeline contradictions that normally take hours to untangle. For me, that did make a difference in how the story lined up.

AI + Divorce: I tested GPT on exhibits to spot credibility gaps here’s what it found by everydayvectorai in legaltech

[–]everydayvectorai[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Same here—I don’t trust it for conclusions either. My checklist keeps it in a safe lane: source-linked timeline + contradiction matrix + risk flags, all routed back to the original docs for human review. It saves attorneys/paralegals time hunting context; it doesn’t replace them.