Use Prolog to improve LLM's reasoning

1. treetalker ◴[18 Oct 24 04:09 UTC] No.41876268[source]▶

Does anyone know why US attorneys and law firms are not using Prolog-based apps to automate the low-hanging fruit of issue-spotting?

replies(3): >>41877024 #>>41880729 #>>41881952 #

2. shchegrikovich ◴[18 Oct 24 07:10 UTC] No.41877024[source]▶

>>41876268 (TP) #

Or something like Catala language - https://catala-lang.org/? Catala: A Programming Language for the Law - https://arxiv.org/abs/2103.03198

3. sgdfhijfgsdfgds ◴[18 Oct 24 16:10 UTC] No.41880729[source]▶

>>41876268 (TP) #

Because Prolog is difficult, and expressing fuzzy real-world facts and nuances in it is harder.

4. samatman ◴[18 Oct 24 18:08 UTC] No.41881952[source]▶

>>41876268 (TP) #

Law was particularly badly burned by the hype wave of "expert systems" in the 1970s and 80s, many of them coded in Prolog.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Expert_system

The Wiki link is nearly hagiographic in its studied avoidance of the topic of how the field crashed and burned, and the term "expert system" fell into disrepute, but these are things which happened.

Which isn't to say that the legal field can't benefit from software which uses Prolog, in fact, I have a strong hunch that the number of such products currently in use is not zero.

But if you wrote a new one, you would do well to make sure that no senior partners hear the word "Prolog" in the sales pitch.