The CaseCruncher Alpha project, a system for evaluating legal inquiries, turned out to be more accurate in dealing with real claims than the 100 best private lawyers in London. The competition was of an informal nature and was intended to assess the effectiveness of a new tool based on artificial intelligence.

AI and lawyers have set a relatively simple task: on the basis of real data on controversial payments, assess the likelihood of success in filing a claim for a payment insurance system. A total of 775 forecasts were made on each side and the accuracy of the AI was 86.6%, while in people it did not exceed 66.3%. For those who want to order a legal service, this is a weighty and obvious difference.

As a result of the competition, the BBC journalists raised the topic: will AI replace the law offices of junior clerks in the coming years, which are engaged primarily in the processing of statistical information. The answer is no, but I really want to. Machines are guaranteed to outperform people if the formulation of the task includes an "exact answer", but they are not able to independently review the conditions of the task and flexibly think. But after all, most small employees perform extremely boring, routine work and, in addition, very slowly.

CaseCruncher Alpha - the brainchild of three students at Cambridge University, Josef Marushak, Rebecca Agliolo and Ludwig Bull. It is noteworthy that they all study at the Faculty of Law and do not have a profound knowledge of IT. Initially, they designed a chatbot for quick answers to typical questions on suits, but then expanded the algorithm and adapted it to analyze fairly complex cases.