Biomedical · Investment · Legal · Publications

Legal Evidence Research

Evidence reviews of empirical studies and court decisions relevant to legal practice.

Not legal advice. These pages summarise published research and court decisions. They do not interpret the rules of any jurisdiction for a specific situation.

Articles

Reliability of AI legal research tools: measured error rates and two court decisions

Research question: What do published evaluations show about how often specific AI legal research tools produce incorrect or unsupported legal information, and how have courts responded when lawyers filed AI-generated fictitious citations?

AI-assisted draft Last verified 2026-10-24 · error rates apply only to the tools and versions tested; two U.S. decisions analysed

How to read these articles

Every article uses the SYCDS Evidence Research Format (ERF): a research question, key findings, an evidence table with a check label on every claim, limitations, counterevidence, decision implications, what would change the assessment, and a dated update history.

Abstract-checked checked against the published abstract or public record only.
Partly verified checked through automated extraction from the full text, or through a secondary report; manual review pending.
Inferred follows from other rows; no direct source.
Overstated a source contradicts part of the claim.
Interpretation a judgment, not a checkable fact.

No article is yet full-text-checked or reviewed by an independent expert. Each article states its own research status.

SYCDS Research · Articles are AI-assisted drafts unless stated otherwise · Not medical, investment or legal advice · Tac Yang